Julio says, "Re. Michael's (Yates) serious personal criticism of Robert 
(Naiman):
'[Robert] couldn't even grasp why he shouldn't write for Huffington Post when
the Writers' Union was urging a boycott. He brought all of his sophistry to bear
on this when he was criticized for it by saying that lots of labor people were
still writing.'

I think this is a serious charge.  I was mildly aware of criticisms
against the Huffington Post for not compensating its contributors, but
I didn't know they amounted to any formal boycott.  On this regard, my
honest question is: How did the Writers' Union validate its choice of
tactics?  How did they involve the writers already contributing to the
Huffington Post in the discussion?  Or other, potential contributors?
I have to admit that, after receiving a nice invitation at some point,
I was myself tempted to blog for the Huff Post.  I declined, but it
wasn't in protest or anything of the sort.  If I had known that there
was an active boycott against the Huff Post, I could have at least
said that I did it in solidarity with the other writers.  However, if
the choice of tactics was not duly validated collectively, then I
don't think it is fair to attack Robert on these grounds.  My two
cents."

I wrote about this 
here:http://cheapmotelsandahotplate.org/2011/07/15/scabbing-for-the-huffington-post/
 My case may or may not
be good enough for Julio, but I did make a case.

Also, in terms of Ms. Huffington, she is to me a truly odious person and I 
wouldn't write for Huffington Post even for pay. But she and the paper should 
certainly pay the writers. Here is a sketch of Huffington, including her 
treatment of writers. Not a pretty picture. 
http://shameproject.com/profile/arianna-huffington/ 

I might add that if a contractor is building with nonunion labor and the 
construction unions throw up an informational picketline, I am not going on 
that site, not to talk to anyone, to do business, or anything else. It matters 
not a bit to me that the nonunion workers on the project haven't been consulted 
by the unions. Newman would say by analogy with what he did say about writing 
for the Huffington Post that, well, Robert Reich was seen going onto the site, 
so this makes it OK for him to do it. Not everyone agrees you see, so you are 
free to do what you please. That is to say, unless something is unanimous, no 
principles can ever be involved in such matters. But as the quote in my essay 
on this shows, it isn't true that the writers weren't consulted or involved. 
Just the two cents of a thumsucking far leftist.                                
          
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to