Urbana-Champaign Independent Media Center: newswire/9417

Gavin Newsome is a controversial figure in San Francisco politics. He authored a measure called "Care not Cash" aimed to revise the monthly cash payments the homeless are entitled in favor of services. Some, like the activist group, "Gay Shame" are adamant opponents of the policy (which was passed by San Francisco voters in November 2002) and Gavin Newsom. Gay Shame wishes to protray Gavin Newsom as a fascist engaged in class warfare. I responded with factual information which was removed. I tried again today and as I write this, the messages which I have copied below are being DELETED!!!

Re:gts
by ? Sunday February 09, 2003 at 03:00 PM

Ive seen that posted all over this site, what are you talking about. And who are you? that looks like a paid ad for Newsom. Is it? I cant seem to find it on Google when I look and its too long for you to have typed from scratch...

Newsom's PR money goes a long way which is why he will probably get elected.

Sticking your head in the sand
by gts Sunday February 09, 2003 at 03:04 PM

If you have seen it in its hidden form. It has never been allowed to see the light of day.

Think its an ad? Just go to the links. Yep, even the Taxi Drivers union of the AFL supported Gavin Newsom. Truth hurts, doesn't it?

It's magic
by rioter Sunday February 09, 2003 at 03:07 PM

See what I mean? Presto -- it's gone!

non sequitor
by one of the editors Sunday February 09, 2003 at 03:09 PM

>that looks like a paid ad for Newsom. Is it?

This refers to a comment that was removed because it looked like like a paid ad for Newsom. It wasn't. It was yet another underhanded attempt to hijack SF-IMC's time, money and energy. No, we wont let you do that.

?
by ? Sunday February 09, 2003 at 03:12 PM

How do you know that wasnt an ad by one of Newson's consultant goons?

The links and quotes are real but it would take quite awhile for someone to compile those endorsements in that form...

A question you will refuse to answer
by T Rex Sunday February 09, 2003 at 03:14 PM

How are Gavin Newom's 2002 endorsements by these groups a hijacking of indymedia UNLESS INDYMEDIA IS AGAINST THESE GROUPS?!?!:

San Francisco Women's Political Committee - http://www.sfwpc.org/End2002.htm

AsianWeek - http://www.asianweek.com/2002_10_18/feature_sfcandidates.html

The San Francisco Late Night Coalition - http://www.sflnc.com/index/readthis/news/november2002/61.html

Rescue Muni - http://www.rescuemuni.org/pr_2002supes.html

United Taxicab Workers - http://www.arromog.com/utw/archive/fa02/article08.htm

Earth Island Journal - http://www.earthisland.org/eijournal/dept.cfm?

"one of Newson's consultant goons? "
by one of the editors Sunday February 09, 2003 at 03:14 PM

We don't care who it's by. You can't advertise Newsom here. We wont let you.

DELETED
by ernie Sunday February 09, 2003 at 03:15 PM

The post was DELETED not hidden!!!!

Go ahead and look at the hidden posts:
http://sf.indymedia.org/news/?display=f

THIS IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF INDYMEDIA

I first brought this to the attention of the San Francisco and various global IMC editors email forums. Unfortunately all but the SF editors rejected the email as being from a non-member. After reading the following messages from a SF editor, I can't help but feel that the Indymedia principles are a farce. Why even bother having them?

On Friday, Feb 7, 2003, at 12:16 US/Pacific, kiburich@netscape.net wrote:

Three times today I posted the following information, without any editorial comment of my own (see below). Each time the post was DELETED - not hidden. I then tried posting this to two other threads (not related to Gavin Newsom) and they too were promptly deleted. Obviously this constitutes an act of politcal censorship as there can be no other reason to find this information "offensive."

What is going on? Did the principles change?

If someone at the San Francisco offices is acting single-handedly to undermine Indymedia, I would like this person to be removed from all editorial responsibilities immediately.

rebel yellow

Gays Bashed by Gavin Newsom's Cops
http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2003/02/1571034_comment.php#1571348

Re: [general] Why do you practice political censorship?
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2003 16:44 EST
From: mark burdett
To: kiburich@netscape.net
Cc: general-discussion@indymedia.org

Thanks for writing Indymedia. Your posts have not been deleted. You can find them at http://sf.indymedia.org/news/?author=rebel+yellow&comments=yes&display=f

--mark B./sfimc volunteer

On Friday, Feb 7, 2003, at 14:59 US/Pacific, kiburich@netscape.net wrote:

What status is "display=f" if it isn't hidden or deleted? What was the thinking behind the decision to remove my post from the thread as it is normally viewed (why does anyone need to do a special search to find this post)? Lastly, are you from the San Francisco office?

rebel yellow

PS When I tried the link you sent, this was all that would show:
Warning: Can't connect to MySQL server on 'blackcat.linefeed.org' (60) in /u2/sfimc/sf-active/shared/classes/db_class.inc on line 38

Re: [general] Why do you practice political censorship?
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2003 23:42 EST
From: mark burdett
To: kiburich@netscape.net

please try again soon, the database was unexpectedly down for a few hours.
Thanks,

--mark B./sfimc

On Friday, Feb 8, 2003, at 10:53 US/Pacific, kiburich@netscape.net wrote:

Re: [general] Why do you practice political censorship?

Do you really believe that publishing the names of the organizations that backed Gavin Newsom's 2002 campaign to be offensive? What is so horrible about the San Francisco Women's Political Committee, AsianWeek, The San Francisco Late Night Coalition, Rescue Muni, United Taxicab Workers (Communications Workers of America--AFL-CIO), and the Earth Island Institute?

I still don't understand why my post deserves to be hidden. By what provision of the Indymedia principles do you justify this action?

rebel yellow

Still no reply -- so what horrible offensive information is contained in this controversial message that requires breaking the principles of Indymedia to censor it?

MY POST ----------------------------------------

San Franciscans who endorsed Gavin Newsom in 2002
by rebel yellow

Some of the people who endorsed Gavin Newsom

San Francisco Women's Political Committee Endorsements 2002
Board Of Supervisors District 2 - Gavin Newsom
The SFWPC was created to ensure the full participation of women in politics. SFWPC evaluates candidates according to their stance on the following seven issues: 1) ERA and CEDAW, 2) absolute reproductive freedom, 3) elimination of violence against women, 4) appointment and election of women, 5) pay equity/comparable worth, 6) quality dependant care, 7) eradication of all forms of discrimination
http://www.sfwpc.org/End2002.htm

AsianWeek Endorsements 2002
San Francisco Supervisor, District 2 - Gavin Newsom
Newsom has always been a moderate voice on the board, and a supporter of small business. He was involved in tough issues like MUNI reform and customer service in 1998 and this year’s Care Not Cash campaign to help the homeless situation. AsianWeek is the national English-language newsweekly for the rapidly growing Asian Pacific American community. Our mission is threefold. First, we seek to chronicle the Asian Pacific American experience. Second, we provide a national forum on issues important to Asian Pacific Americans. Lastly, we seek to involve Asian Pacific Americans in the American democratic experiment.
http://www.asianweek.com/2002_10_18/feature_sfcandidates.html

The San Francisco Late Night Coalition Endorsements
Board Of Supervisors District 2 - Gavin Newsom
The SFLNC was formed in the summer of 1999 to counter continuing pressure on nightclubs and late-night venues in San Francisco. We formed as a registered California Political Action Committee, committed to shifting the tides for nightlife, and to protecting, preserving and promoting San Francisco's world-famous nightlife. Our membership is made up of anyone who has an interest in the future late-night entertainment in San Francisco. We are djs, record producers, music and retail store owners and employees, visual artists, groovers, clubbers and ravers, clubs and venue owners and employees, and rockers and musicians.
http://www.sflnc.com/index/readthis/news/november2002/61.html

Rescue Muni Endorses Candidates For Supervisor
Gavin Newsom (District 2 incumbent - endorsed early)
Rescue Muni is a transit riders’ organization for customers of Muni. It was founded in 1996 by Muni riders seeking to improve the system’s reliability, service, and safety, and currently has about 400 members. The organization conducts an annual riders’ survey and serves as a citizens’ watchdog group for Muni. Rescue Muni co-sponsored November 1999’s Proposition E for Muni reform after circulating its own charter amendment earlier that year and participating in City Hall negotiations. Rescue Muni is an independent, nonpartisan group run entirely by volunteers and supported solely by its members’ dues.
http://www.rescuemuni.org/pr_2002supes.html

UTW has made the following endorsements:
Board of Supervisors District 2 (Marina/Pacific Heights): Gavin Newsom
United Taxicab Workers was begun in 1987 by four cab drivers m. The Amazing Array of Issues that Will Not Go Awayting in a Mission District cafe. Since then, we have grown to include hundreds of drivers drawn from all of San Francisco's major cab garages, and many smaller companies as well.

UTW is affiliated with Communications Workers of America (AFL-CIO). Through CWA, we offer members a number of benefits, such as a group health plan, dental plan and credit union membership. But the main reason for joining is to be part of an organization devoted to the cause of drivers' rights.
http://www.earthisland.org/eijournal/dept.cfm?departmentCatID=3&journalID=43

Comments

Re: What Worth Are The Indymedia Principles?
by paul (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 09 Feb 2003 Modified: 10:35:10 PM
Cry me river. Why don't you take some of the time you've spent spamming this message all over Indymedia and various Indymedia e-mail accounts and lista and instead get involved with the SF-IMC collective? It's easy to sit at your keyboard and yell "censorship." Why not try to meet people face to face and understand SF-IMC's posting policy? Or, even better, why not work with them to change it if you think it's wrong? Free Speech is not absolute. For speech to be useful we have to listen as well as talk. Nevermind that fact that by and large nobody here gives a shit about you're whining.

Re: What Worth Are The Indymedia Principles?
by rebel yellow kiburich (nospam) netscape.com (unverified)	Current rating: 0 09 Feb 2003
The first thing I tried to do after the initial incident was join the San Francisco Indymedia editorial list group. I wrote in a nuetral tone that I had a message hidden and didn't understand the reasoning behind it. I then asked to join the list so that I could learn what goes on in the decision making process. I thought that was a very reasonable request -- they didn't. They didn't even bother to reply back. That's when I decided that the San Francisco folks weren't really interested in the Indymedia principles and pleaded my case elsewhere. But it seems like your group isn't that different either. In all seriousness, maybe Indymedia should just remove the link to the principles since they don't mean anything.

Re: What Worth Are The Indymedia Principles?
by rebel yellow kiburich (nospam) netscape.com (unverified)	Current rating: 0 09 Feb 2003
The first thing I tried to do after the initial incident was join the San Francisco Indymedia editorial list group. I wrote in a nuetral tone that I had a message hidden and didn't understand the reasoning behind it. I then asked to join the list so that I could learn what goes on in the decision making process. I thought that was a very reasonable request -- they didn't. They didn't even bother to reply back. That's when I decided that the San Francisco folks weren't really interested in the Indymedia principles and pleaded my case elsewhere. But it seems like your group isn't that different either. In all seriousness, maybe Indymedia should just remove the link to the principles since they don't mean anything.

You're Missing The Point, Rebel
by ML (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 10 Feb 2003 Modified: 12:51:52 AM
Your take on this situation seems to assume that Indymedia operates as a hierarchical organization, which is a mistaken notion. All IMCs operate autonomously. Slagging SF IMC, deserved or not, all over the network is simply irritating a bunch of people who do not have the power to do anything about your complaint. The reality is that you must somehow engage SF IMC if you want anything to change. Their editorial collective holds the power to look into this and do something about it, but it may already be clear to you how they feel, if you want to leave it at that. Spamming the rest of IMC with your case probably won't help with it there either. As for the Indymedia Principles, each IMC interprets them in their own way. Saying that IMC should quit claiming to live up to these principles is an attack on the integrity of thousands of IMC volunteers who do not know about your case (at least prior to this) nor can they do anything about it, if they are not part of SF IMC. So once again, you are making more enemies than friends by how you're going about this. From what I know about SF IMC, they are no friends of Newsom's, for what they probably feel are good reasons. I doubt if a similar situation existed here that we would do what you claim SF IMC has done with your articles disagreeing with their position. But there are lots of things that we would do differently if our place was changed with SF IMC. That is what autonomy is all about.

Re: What Worth Are The Indymedia Principles?
by rebel yellow kiburich (nospam) netscape.com (unverified)	Current rating: 0 10 Feb 2003
Yes I have done what you suggested and I believe I have exhausted all avenues of communication with the San Francisco gorpu. Sadly, this here is one of the few remaing alternatives short of legal actions. Since you seem to be open-minded about things, do you think the San Francisco group is placing their tax exempt status in jeopardy (I'm not looking for a professional legal opinion, just your point of view) rebel yellow "Permissable Lobbying by 501(c)(3)s by Sanford Morton In general, no 501(c)(3) tax exempt public charity may engage in lobbying as a substantial part of its total activities. SUCH LOBBYING IS PROSCRIBED EVEN IF IT DIRECTLY RELATES TO THE BASIC TAX EXEMPT PURPOSE OF THE ORGANIZATION. The PENALTIES for engaging in substantial lobbying include loss of tax exempt status, a surtax of 5% of the organization's lobbying expenditures, and a SIMILAR TAX ON EACH OF THE ORGANIZATION'S KEY EMPLOYEES WHO KNOWINGLY AUTHORIZED THE EXCESSIVE LOBBYING. (lobbying is) Any activity by the organization designed to influence the outcome of legislation, at any political level. THIS SHOULD BE CONSTRUED BROADLY. It includes direct contact with legislators and political officials, as well as PUBLIC INFORMATION CAMPAIGNS TO INFLUENCE THE OPINIONS OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC, insofar as this may affect legislation. Specifically exempt, however, are activities related to public education IF THEY ARE NONPARTISAN, OBJECTIVE, AND FAIRLY CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE POINTS OF VIEW. Also, responses to a legislative request for expert or viewpoint testimony from the organization are not lobbying. Finally, for purposes of the expenditure test (see below), communications with legislators on legislation which will directly affect the existence, nature, powers, or tax exempt status of the organization itself is also not considered to be lobbying." http://www.nonprofits.org/npofaq/11/08.html

No Relationship Re 501c3
by ML (No verified email address)	Current rating: 0 10 Feb 2003 Modified: 04:40:04 PM
rebel, Although we act as a fiscal agent for many IMC projects (all of which must conform to the pecularities of our 501c3 status, which is the recipient's contractural duty to us and not something that affects our 501c3 status), as far as I know SF IMC is not one of our current projects. UC IMC is only one source of funding for the many different IMCs and their projects throughout the IMC network. If you have enough money to pursue legal action over your dispute, you would probably be well-advised to spend that money on setting up your own website. SF IMC is probably like most IMCs, with very little if anything in the way of financial resources. I'm not an attorney, so I'm not giving you legal advice, but it doesn't seem to me that you have much of a case. Publishers are within their rights to choose what they decide to publish (and this applies to Indymedia, as it does to any other publisher) so I doubt that any such suit would go very far. And I can't help but notice that the tone of this whole conversation is starting to take on the thrust that you are far more interested in punishing SF IMC for their opinions, rather than correcting any wrong you perceived that they have done to you. How is that any different than what you accuse them of?

Re: What Worth Are The Indymedia Principles?
by rebel yellow kiburich (nospam) netscape.com (unverified)	Current rating: 0 10 Feb 2003 Modified: 05:27:23 PM
What I have wanted since the beginning was to not silence the political views of those who endorsed Gavin Newsom in the 2002 election -- receptive to voices other than "Gay Shame". It was only after a member of the San Francisco group decided to hide behind the 501c3 status that I formally requested the following: 1) issue a public apology fully disclosing the wrongful acts of all involved San Francisco Indymedia members 2) change the status of previously hidden messages and blacklisted individuals 3) premantently revoke the editorial rights of the individual(s) who authorized these acts I am not seeking any compensation nor am I seeking to prevent "Gay Shame" from voicing their views. I have no interest in anyone else at the San Francisco group other than those directly responsible for actions which I believe are in violation of the 501c3 status and the Indymedia principles. I do appreciate your willingness to listen and your respectful candor. Sadly, I feel that you have been the most forthright Indymedia volunteer I have yet talked to. rebel yellow

Re: What Worth Are The Indymedia Principles?
by rebel yellow kiburich (nospam) netscape.com (unverified)	Current rating: -1 10 Feb 2003 Modified: 05:27:33 PM
What I have wanted since the beginning was to not silence the political views of those who endorsed Gavin Newsom in the 2002 election -- receptive to voices other than "Gay Shame". It was only after a member of the San Francisco group decided to hide behind the 501c3 status that I formally requested the following: 1) issue a public apology fully disclosing the wrongful acts of all involved San Francisco Indymedia members 2) change the status of previously hidden messages and blacklisted individuals 3) premantently revoke the editorial rights of the individual(s) who authorized these acts I am not seeking any compensation nor am I seeking to prevent "Gay Shame" from voicing their views. I have no interest in anyone else at the San Francisco group other than those directly responsible for actions which I believe are in violation of the 501c3 status and the Indymedia principles. I do appreciate your willingness to listen and your respectful candor. Sadly, I feel that you have been the most forthright Indymedia volunteer I have yet talked to. rebel yellow