Nashville News Blog

What do you think, Bruce?

Freddie, I am surprised at your comment considering your position as a progressive leader in this community.

Are you seriously condoning this? Are you saying the post has value and is contributing positively to the political discourse in this town?

What are you saying? Should the headline come down or not?

What's the problem?

Freddie, I see your point, but the post is just ridiculous. Of course he's doing it purposely to ignite this ongoing debate. He's certainly giggling behind his I-Mac. But, still. What if someone, say Bill Hobbs, had made the same post?

Why do I care whether the headline stays or goes? Let people pass judgment on Kleinheider. He's accountable; not the headline. At the very least, he's generated discussion. I'm trying to figure out specifically what the nature of the broader offense is (as opposed to what offense might be taken by Powell or Turner). Is it the use of a racially charged term? Is it that he applied to real-world individuals? I guess I'm trying to figure out if I should be thinking of this as equivalent to Kleinheider saying, "Steven Turner Is a Punk-ass [Inflammatory N-word]"? Because that wasn't my first reaction.

If Bill Hobbs had made the post, I'm sure there'd be similar outrage, but Hobbs is a historic race-baiter with specific political aims. Kleinheider strikes me as more of a button-presser than an agenda-driven racist.

Regarding suggestions that the headline be changed at the behest of ACK's editors or SouthComm corporate overlords: Maybe, but a news organization should be very cautious and deliberate about revisionism in published work. In print, an item that is so offensive as to be unacceptable would draw a subsequent clarification, apology, or correction, but the original item as published lives on as archived history. In the digital era it is all too easy to eradicate that history. If Post Politics is a part of the NP.com/CP news product, which is how I think it should be regarded, then simply deleting offensive content without a trace that it once existed isn't sufficient or acceptable. A change should include a statement of correction within or near the item stating clearly what change was made and why. News organizations should not use the convenience of digital revision as an excuse or opportunity to rewrite or erase the past (even when "the past" is just a few hours ago).

And yes, the irony that I'm writing here on the blog of a paper owned by SouthComm, publisher of Post Politics and employer of Kleinheider, does not escape me. Nashville, meet consolidated media. Consolidated media, say hello to Nashville.

I was told on Twitter that if I ReTweeted Bruce Barry's post I'd get a GoogleWave account.

Henry, I'd love to see the official list of things that aren't open to debate.

No one that knows him thinks ACK a racist, but that headline is inappropriate. Take it down and let's move on.

I for one did a double take when I first saw the "blackface" comment. I mean, come on. Just search YouTube for old blackface performances. They are some of the most racist and stereotypical things I've ever seen. They were meant to RIDICULE black people. I'm sorry, but that word didn't add ANYTHING to his post and didn't even convey a constructive point. It should be changed. It would fit better on Michelle Malkin's site.

Maybe he's just fishing for more readers.

Kleiny, how I love ya, how I love ya, my dear old Kleiny...

Remember this article -

By Henry Walker

OCTOBER 6, 1997: "Henry, I've got to fire you." Nashville Scene editor Bruce Dobie got straight to the point. "I can't have a media critic who lies to the press."

He was right, on both points. I had lied, repeatedly, to reporters from The Tennessean, the Banner, The Commercial Appeal, and The Tennessee Journal, all of whom had called to ask if I'd been present at the much-discussed Scene staff party where state Sen. Steve Cohen either did or didn't join reporters in puffing on a joint.

Two weeks ago, Scene reporter Liz Murray Garrigan wrote that Cohen is "so comfortable among journalists that he has been known to step out on the porch and smoke a joint with a group of them at a private party." She didn't say which party. Asked to explain, Cohen allegedly replied, "It's a generational thing. I don't do it very often."

The pot-smoking charge made statewide news. Cohen denied it, saying he hadn't had a joint since 1974. He admitted he'd been to a Scene party, however, where other people were passing marijuana. He said he didn't smoke it and that his remarks to Garrigan were misinterpreted.

Two days after Garrigan's story appeared, my phone started ringing. "I don't know anything about that specific incident," I told Banner reporter Jeff Woods, "but if I had been at a party like the one Cohen describes..., I certainly wouldn't have written about it." I told other journalists the same thing.

But I was at the party, and Dobie and some staffers knew it. My editor found himself in a dilemma.

"If it comes out that you lied to the press and I didn't do anything about it, it would damage the Scene," Dobie explained. "I'd have to fire myself." Instead, he fired me.

I love the separation the Scene folks are trying to claim from the CP/Post folks. They all work out of the same newsroom now - and for the same venture capitalist.

All of this begs the question: Who exactly is the editor at the City Paper/Nashville Post? Who is in charge over there? Does Kleinheider even have an editor anymore?

Ridley's name is at the top of the Scene masthead? Where does the buck stop at the City Paper/Nashville Post end of the news spectrum?

Kleinheider messed up. His post was completely inappropriate as were his initial responses.

Most blog posts are not edited. We trust our writers to post content that is appropriate. Most of the time they do that, but in this case Kleinheider did not. If this had been a news story for the Post or the Citypaper or the Scene it would have been edited and that headline never would have been made public. When the Post editor, Geert De Lombaerde (to answer the question asked above), learned of the post and responses he instructed Kleinheider to stop pouring fuel on the fire with his responses. By that time many people had already responded appropriately to the post and the decision was made to let Kleinheider see how people responded to his offensive post. Much of the early discussion on Pith was actually an interesting discussion about racial attitudes. Maybe it was a mistake in judgment to leave the headline up, but we rarely change content once it is posted unless there is a factual mistake.

We asked Kleinheider to write a thoughtful apology rather than an off the cuff response. At some point Friday it will be posted on Post Politics. It was his post and I thought the response should come from him. However, in light of some of the comments here tonight I had to write my own response as well.

One of my first thoughts when I read some of these comments was that those without sin should cast the first stone.
Most of us have benefited from or participated in institutional racism in our lives. I mean really Henry, how diverse were your classes at Yale and Harvard in the 70's? Did you really compete against the best and brightest African American students for your slot? And Matt, how many full time black journalists worked for you when you were managing editor of the Scene?

With the caveat that all of us white southerners have some degree of guilt for benefitting from structural discrimination, the notion that SouthComm is run by a bunch of racists is simply ludicrous. First of all, I have operating responsibility for the company. The investors are not involved in editorial decisions in any direct manner. So the charges leveled at them are just not related to the reality of how this organization functions.
I think the fact that Bruce called Kleinheider out on this blog is an example of our commitment to independent voices. We do give bloggers with very diverse opinions a platform to engage our readers. Sometimes our owners and managers agree with them, but much of the time we don’t. After all, since they don’t agree with each other how could they be speaking on behalf of the worldview of our shareholders or management?

If you want to call me a racist for allowing this headline to remain, then I would suggest that you are making a broad judgment based on a narrow slice of information. While much of this discussion was taking place here tonight I was at Pearl Cohn watching my son play football for his very integrated public middle school. I’m pretty comfortable that any complete look at my career on the council will reflect that among white council members, no one had a better record of advocating for programs to improve the lives of African American (and other minority) members of this community. Even my loss to Howard indicated that I wasn’t willing to use race to mobilize voters opposed to a black Vice Mayor in order to win a race. I think my public and private life demonstrates serious commitments to racial justice over a long time frame.

Maybe we should have changed the headline when it came to our attention. I didn’t actually see the post until it had been up for almost four hours. By that time, it seemed to me that the readers had pretty quickly corrected Kleinheider and that a serious discussion about race was beginning to happen. I think discussion is a good thing. Kleinheider went about creating it in an inappropriate way, but race is obviously still an important topic for us to discuss in this community. SouthComm will continue write about race in this city because it is too important an issue to be swept under the rug. I regret that this incident will likely bias how some of you view our future more serious reporting on the topic. I assure you that as we approach the subject in the future we will do it in a more respectful manner.

Wait a minute, Chris Ferrell, are you seriously claiming that those who have benefited from white privilege ought not call out racism when they see it? That's exactly backwards. Having white privilege means (unless one thinks it's OK, of course) that one has an obligation to point out and criticize instances of racism. Otherwise one is acquiescing.

Thank you all for making manifest that often hidden truth, that institutionalized racism is real (and white privilege is usually invisible to those who benefit from it). Unearthing these facts and keeping our eyes, mouths, and hearts open to both the acknowledgment of inequity and the possibility of amendment is our best hope for creating a just society.

Thank Goodness!

The Great White Fathers - Massa Ferrell and Massa Briley - have come down from the Boulevard to settle all of us uppity dissenters down.

They have blessed this abominable excuse for journalism from Klanheider by saying it was ultimately good because it stirred "debate" on race. Really. So, if someone burned a cross in front of the Metro Courthouse during a Council meeting, would that also stir debate? Probably.

Let's just tell a few plain honest truths, shall we.

For years - and I do mean years - Chris Ferrell presided over the Scene as publisher. And during those years, membership in Belle Meade Country Club was grounds for public execution via the ink and pen of the Scene staff for any public figure that belonged to said BMCC.

Gus Puryear, a federal court judge nominee, was excoriated in the pages of this newspaper for his membership at BMCC. But now, Ferrell is saying the OWNERS of Southcomm and his own personal financial BENEFACTORS are not fair game for their BMCC memberships in the context of Klanheider's racist post?

What remarkable rationalization. Why, that sounds like the pliable ethics of a politician! Aren't newspapers suppose to cover politicians, not be run by them?

Let's also not forget the role of David Briley's family in the Ugliest Little Nashville Secret Everyone Likes To Forget.

Why do we have Metro Government in Nashville? Not even Memphis has Metro government. Why Nashville? It's simple: Metro Government was created by Briley's grandfather and others IN PART to keep Nashville municipal government from being taken over and run by elected black politicians. It was to keep Nashville from going the way of Atlanta and Memphis, which is exactly what would have happened without Metro government. So, for David Briley to even stick his nose into this discussion is laughable.

Yet, Briley is really representative of the not-so-closeted racism the pervades Nashville's allegedly PROGRESSIVE community like a cancer.

What is the cause celeb presently for Nashville progressives? May Town Center. What has every single Southcomm Publication totally ignored this week and every week since it began? The raw, public outrage by the black community in North Nashville over White Progressives standing in the way of a project that would bring jobs to their end of town.

What is actually the single biggest problem facing Nashville? It's school system. What is the big debate their? Rezoning and blacks' disregard for the current plan. Where are Nashville White Progressives - Briley and Ferrell included - on that topic? In the White Progressive camp with the New Urban Gentrification Mob.

This blog purports to cover media, among other things. Has it covered the screaming. 72 point war time headlines of the Tennessee Tribune backing May Town Center? Nope. Why? It was kind of hard to miss...if you actually KNOW any black people in town.

It is too bad there are no more independent media voices in Nashville to call out this horse shit excuse for a media company. In lieu of Desperately Seeking the News, here are some pesky Pullesque questions for the SouthComm Hive Mind:

1. Who is the publisher of the Nashville Southcomm publication hub?

2. Why is the CEO of the company responding to this public criticism rather than the Post Editor or the aforementioned publisher?

2. Who is the editor of The City Paper? What is their involvement with Klanheider's blog?

3. Are blog posts at Pith edited by an editor before they are taken live?

4. Are blog posts by Kleinheider edited before they are taken live?

5. What is either newspaper's editorial position on the proposed Metro school rezoning plan?

6. What is either newspaper's editorial position on the North Nashville community's concerns over May Town Center?

7. What is the policy for writers penning commentary about public policy matters when their spouses are elected officials?

8. How many members of the Southcomm board and/or ownership are members of BMCC or similar organizations in town that exclude members based on race?

Chris:

No, I don't make a habit of reading Kleinheider's blog (or many other blogs for that matter). But you make a choice. You can "slow down the process" a little by having an editor quickly review blog posts for red flags like the blackface headline. This might mean that the stuff he writes overnight has to wait until 8:30 a.m. to get posted. The alternative is to keep the system you have and take a big black eye when he or some other blogger embarrasses your organization.

If I were running this cost-benefit analysis, I'd have to seriously wonder whether this one black eye did more damage than the time you saved in not having someone screen his posts. At the very least you could have an editor do a text search of the document for phrases like "Barack the Magic Negro."

Kleinheider, rarely do we get to witness fuck-up perfection such as yours. Congratulations. You have qualified yourself to be publicly stripped, dipped in shit and flogged. The 'Penis DeMilo' site down on Music Row might be a good spot for the ceremony.

I have a couple of questions: If he had said something like "Barack Obama in white-face" would that still have qualified him for the dipping and flogging. Also, when FDR said of Churchill, "why, he's pink all over," was that racist?

Thank you Anonymous. You've cleared that right up for me.

It's nearly noon and no new post today on this blog? How about a Morning Roundup? Well, I guess it's too late for that. Maybe a pointless crime blotter-type post that's someone's specialty. Just something.

David Letterman had sex and was extorted. Sarah Palin's book cover was released. No Olympics for Chi-town, which means of course that Obama has no power and is a total loser (right, Beck, Limbaugh, and Fox News?).

There's low-hanging fruit today, Pith. It's noon and you're way late.

Exercise over.
Wagons successfully circled.
White MSM declares issue closed.

Are you back on the payroll there, Henry? Are none of the questions being asked of Mr. Ferrell relevant?

He dinged Matt Pulle for not having worked with many people of color at the Scene. Did Mr. Ferrell attempt to HIRE any people of color when he was publisher of the Scene then? How about now?

What is the racial makeup of Southcomm's staff?

Oh, sorry, White Henry declared the discussion closed. My bad, dog.

Dear "Me": Sorry you didn't like the tone of my advice (and, upon rereading, it does come off as much too pontifical) but, I'm curious, do you disagree with the substance?

Thanks for answering the question Southcomm management would not about their minority staffing. It seems all of the self-congratulatory back patting for "showing transparency" in their editing process - or lack thereof - was premature.

So, despite all of the defense by Briley/Barry/Walker et al of Ferrell and his funders, in fact, Ferrell at VVM and now Southcomm has no record of diversity hiring.

Sure, its not a racist company. Let's see, first Ferrell lectures us that those who benefit from institutional racism cannot call out racism when they see it. Nice. Now lily white staffing revelations. Belle Meade Country Club ties. I'm starting to worry more about Southcomm itself than I am about AC Kleinheider.

Consider me an ex-reader. I thought the Scene was in town to stand AGAINST this kind of ugly crap.

Brian, even I think your blog is creepy. You really need to get you some. Find a nice woman--or guy we don't care--and have a little fun. There's more to life than hating Barack Obama. Like sex. Just try it sometime. I promise you won't feel so uptight and angry.

Just don't sleep with anyone you work with. That's really lame.

Brian, in slight, very slight defense of Ferrell, he just retook hold of the Scene, so he wasn't involved in any decisions about how to impugn the Tea partiers.

I won't however, defend his "I'm right on race. I could have made race an issue in my political run, but I didn't." stance.

Really? We're handing out extra-credit for doing the bare minimum to be a decent member of society now? I don't shit myself in public; I await my Nobel.

Fear of a Black Editor, answer me this. Every step of the way, the May Town Center people lied. They lied in their zoning application about the types and extents of the studies they'd done. They lied about how many bridges they'd need. They had TSU lie for them in their "phone survey"/marketing campaign.

Why would neighborhoods in North Nashville believe that May Town Center would bring jobs to anyone further east than TSU, if that far? Even looking at a map and knowing where the bridges would have to go, you'd have to think that the neighborhoods west of Briley would be a much more logical workforce.

Why, when they've proven themselves to stretch the truth over and over does anyone trust them when they say "This will bring you jobs."?

I honestly don't get that.

Well, it depends on what you call North Nashville, now, doesn't it? If we're calling everything north of Charlotte, west and south of the river over to TSU North Nashville, then no I don't. If we're talking everything north of Charlotte that has either the Clarksville Pike Kroger or the 8th Avenue Kroger as its closest Kroger? Then howdy, neighbor.

As for ignoring this story, please. I've been writing about this story since this spring(and I was late to the game compared to other folks). I've been writing about what is not actually that complicated a zoning issue since that long. And I've been asking for that long whether TSU was going to get screwed out of its promised land in the end. Just enter 'bells bend' in the search engine on this blog, for starters.

This is just my opinion, but if you're wondering why people aren't covering this particular turn in the story, it's because it seems like it's too late. Do y'all have some indication that you can get the zoning issue reheard? Because nothing I've heard indicates that that's even a remote possibility.

So it seems really weird, from the outside, that North Nashville groups are angry now. Is there a plan to get a new zoning hearing? Some overlooked rule or law that would allow that to happen?

Otherwise, yes, groups in North Nashville support May Town Center. That's been a reported-on part of the story all along. That the community still supports MTC and is really pissed clear into October isn't news unless you also have figured out how to get the issue reheard.

It is neither imperialist or wrong to point out racist imagery, even if done in good fun. The Scene is aware of the problems of racism in Nashville. The Blackface itself by whites reduces us to one critical feature: our black skin.

Whether it is the original white "Amos and Andy" or white fraternity/sorority girls and boys in Blackface, it is always about mocking black skin and presenting stereotypical black behavior and dehumanizing our race.

Even in the early days of blackface minstrelsy, those who practiced it did not see themselves as promoting pernicious racial stereotypes and hatred. No one then or now who uses blackface will say , "I intend to dehumanize black people." Everyone has an excuse or an alternative explanation of what it means

From the frat boys to the Spanish Formula One fans mocking black driver Lewis Hamilton to the soccer fans who threw bananas on a soccer field in Europe just for fun, they all make attempts to excuse the behavior by saying they were
personally not racist and they never meant to hurt anyone. The most common response is, they don't understand the reaction.

But they do. Blackface is always designed as comedy, to shock, to mock and to get a few laughs. For a Jackson tribute, one can see the prisoners from a jail in the Philippines dancing to Michael Jackson's "Thriller." Their moving homage didn't need blackface. Jackson's music and dancing were what moved, motivated and captivated them, not his skin color and hair texture.

So whether it's racist caricatures on Mexican stamps or Australian doctors, or politics in Nashville, the signs and symbols of demeaning black people are universal. They transcend continents, cultures and genres. At the same time, so are the denials. The people who traffic in them always have the same set of denials.

Most Nashville Blacks have always supported the Nashville Scene over the other newspapers and given much respect for its journalist but now we are deeply affended by this situation.

Thought someone could use this? It is from Nashville Is Read the last sentence carefully. I found this piece to be quite incoherent and flip flop. It supports freedom for the editors to publish things that its own readers find offensive,hurtful or even deframing but then in the last sentence-either he made a huge typo or is it just me!? I think the world has gone MAD!

More caterwauling over online comment trolls and comment policy

Thursday, November 5th, 2009
(via Kleinheider) Frank Carlson at MetroPulse raises an issue that seems to unnecessarily worry online content editors to no end. What do you do about comments from morons, fools and bigots? Around the city, and indeed the nation at large, many are beginning to wonder aloud why newspapers are allowing their sites, under their brands and alongside their advertisements, to serve as platforms for misinformation, abuse, and bigotry. Even the most insipid comments beg the question, What value do these remarks provide to the community? And how do they fit within a newspaper’s role? This isn’t rocket science. Online content creators and editors should draw the line in online comment policy simply and brightly at not allowing the following in comments: • libel • slander • use of profanity • engaging in any other illegal activity (soliciting for sex, false impersonation, linking to child porn, IP spoofing, offering to sell alcohol to minors, revealing private information about private persons, etc.) Editors have to stop caterwauling over this issue, keep the rules simple, and toughen up. When an editor’s voicemail or email blows up over the hurt feelings of readers or commenters, editors have to stop pretending the concern somehow represents a majority of intelligent readers. There will always be all kinds of reactions to well written and well produced content. Content and resulting comments might also hurt people’s feelings and cause arguments. So what. Get over it. Stop being the water cooler police. Reading all of the “on one hand and then on the other hand” crap from editors trying to figure out online comment policy is like watching my mother try to figure out Facebook. Comments are a reflection of a community’s thoughts, values and beliefs, including comments that are perfectly legal but foolish. It shouldn’t be a surprise to editors that readers now have an equal voice online, nor should they be surprised when that collective voice is moronic. If anything, editors should be happy readers can tell the difference at all! The free market place of ideas works brilliantly as long as editors get out of the way of a community’s conversation. Healthy online community’s exist where editors allow the community itself to place its own value on comments. Smart readers know when someone is being a moron, a fool or a bigot, and smart readers don’t like editors making that decision for them or denying them the ability to engage or persuade their community to become better. Deleting and censoring comments to coddle weak-minded or handfuls of offended readers hurts a community more than it helps. Smart editors give smart readers a reason to respond to morons, fools and bigots by giving morons all the rope they need to be themselves (as long as they don’t engage in libel, slander, use profanity or engage in illegal activity). The moment editors declare morons, fools and bigots no longer a valuable part of a community’s conversation is the moment editors begin running off intelligent readers and slowly reduce their online community to a clique of fragile minds. Posted in Ideas, News, Print, Web, Wonky | 1 Comment »

I think you must put a video to your write-up as a way to make it a lot more exciting. Even though I liked your writing style