Categories
News News Blog

After Being Excluded From Media List, Local Journalist Sues City, Mayor

Wendi Thomas

The editor of local news organization MLK50: Justice Through Journalism is suing the city of Memphis for refusing to include her on its media advisory lists.

The complaint was filed in federal court Wednesday by attorneys for the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the press on behalf of Wendi Thomas, editor, publisher, and founder of MLK50.

The lawsuit alleges that the city, along with Memphis Mayor Jim Strickland, and chief communications officer Ursula Madden, violated the U.S. and Tennessee constitutions by repeatedly denying Thomas’s requests to add her email address to the media advisory list.

Paul McAdoo, Tennessee’s staff attorney for the Reporter’s Committee Local Legal Initiative, said “it is flat unconstitutional for the city to disrupt and interfere with Ms. Thomas’ ability to gather and report news because it doesn’t like the content of her reporting.”

After multiple attempts to get the city and its officials to stop its retaliatory exclusion of Ms. Thomas from the media list, she has been left with no choice but to ask a federal district court to enforce her rights under the First Amendment and Tennessee Constitution. The administration has said it strives to be the most transparent and communicative in the city’s history, yet retaliation against Ms. Thomas and MLK50 for past coverage of the city is unlawful and ultimately shuts out the Memphis community relying on them for information.”

[pullquote-1]

According to the complaint, Thomas sent seven emails between May 2019 and January 2020 to the city asking to be included on the list, but was not added.

The lawsuit is asking the court to require the city to add Thomas to its media list immediately, publish explicit standards for including reporters and news organizations on its media list, and to provide notice to any reporter prior to removing them from the list, giving them an opportunity to contest it.

[pdf-1]


“No politician likes being the subject of critical coverage, but that comes with elected office, and I would be abdicating my role as a journalist if I failed to hold local government, including the city of Memphis accountable,” said Thomas. “I am disappointed that it’s come to this since the fix is so simple: Just treat me and MLK50 like you treat other journalists and news outlets.The time and energy I’ve spent trying to get the city to respect my First Amendment right, I could have spent reporting on and for residents struggling to make ends meet and other marginalized groups.”

This comes after McAdoo sent a letter to U.S. District Court Judge Jon McCalla last week, alleging that by refusing to add MLK50 to its media contact list, the city is violating the 1978 Kendrick Consent Decree. The letter argued that the city’s treatment of MLK50 is “inconsistent with the city’s obligations under the Kendrick Consent Decree.”

The consent decree instructs the city not to “disrupt, discredit, interfere with, or otherwise harass any person exercising First Amendment rights.”

Categories
Fly On The Wall Blog Opinion

News Makers 3: Media Talk with Wendi Thomas of MLK50 and Storyboard’s Mark Fleischer

This post is supplemental to the Memphis Flyer cover package Going to Pieces about the state of print journalism in Memphis. This, and other posts featuring additional commentary by Wendi Thomas of MLK50, Jacinthia Jones of Chalkbeat.org, Eric Barnes of The Daily Memphian, and Mark Fleischer of StoryBoard Memphis were created to include voices and ideas that didn’t make it into the main story.

Wendi Thomas

Every day I wake up and discover I’m not on the wrong side of Wendi Thomas’  Twitter feed, is a good day.  I kid, but  when I typed that I’m pretty sure I heard a faint chorus of voices from Memphis’ political and business communities saying “Amen.” And that’s a good thing. Whether she’s dragging area media because newsroom diversity (and its lack), determines content and perspective, or calling out bosses who won’t pay a living wage, Thomas is one of Memphis’ most critical journalists — castigatory, elucidative, and vital.

In spite of her long history as a columnist and editor for The Commercial Appeal, I didn’t sit down with Thomas to talk about struggling dailies or the print journalism business. We didn’t get too deep into discussing the reporters she’s cultivated and work she’s published online as founder of the digital “Justice Through Journalism” forum, MLK50, either. I asked Thomas to help me develop a working definition of “information justice,” a topic I’ll come back to in future posts. But some of our conversation did overlap with the Memphis Flyer cover story, Going to Pieces, so I’m sharing some lightly edited excerpts that complement both Jacinthia Jones’s vision for mass partnership and Madeline Faber’s thoughts about transparency and engagement.

Like Jones and Faber, Thomas thinks outside the traditional newspaper bundle. She shared some common sense ideas for distributing less commodified, hyper-local news directly with those the news most likely affects.

Memphis Flyer: I want to talk about information justice but I’m not completely sure I know what I mean by that.

Wendi Thomas: I think information justice starts with “just us” — and who the “us” is. The media doesn’t provide everybody with the information they need to live better lives, or make better decisions about things that are critical — housing, shelter, you know… I read a story about FedEx expansion plans. There’s new tech for getting boxes on planes but not a word about how this might affect employment. When you’re writing with an eye toward justice, these are the kinds of questions you’d ask. So that story wasn’t written for people who work in the hub, or even worried that they might have to ever work in the hub.


I try to imagine a media environment where the information people —low income people in particular — need to make better choices is accessible without too much expense or hassle. And I wonder who profits from the current media environment, where you have to make an effort to get information.

WT: I’ve never found out much about it, but you’ve probably seen a quote I tweet: “If you want to solve any problem in America, don’t study who suffers from it, study who profits.” That’s a huge gap missing in journalism as a whole. There are exceptions, like reporting about expensive calls from the jail. That story was out one week. The next week we weren’t going to make juveniles pay to call their parents anymore. Period, full stop. Public policy can be changed quickly in ways that affect vulnerable people. But somebody has to systematically examine industries, and government organizations, to find where those places are.

I don’t know anything about that quote’s provenance, but I’ve seen you share that and thought it was absolutely right.

WT: I was at a people-powered publishing conference where they were talking about, instead of trying to put our middle class selves in the shoes of a person in poverty, they should be involved in every step of the process. In my 25 years in journalism, this is something I’ve only done sporadically. We tend to think, you know, you report the story
– you go out and talk to the people, you write the story, you do the follow-up. But what if we completely dismantled that process? What if people are involved at every step, and you report on your reporting, in maybe less formal ways. Maybe it’s not 8 paragraphs or 400 words. Maybe it’s using Facebook Live or posting in a group. We talk about growing audience. Part of growing our audience is involving people in the process, and not always deciding what’s best.

You see that kind of transparency sometimes. I’m thinking of the Washington Post’s investigation of the Trump Foundation, which involved posting notebooks, and keeping the process front and center. That changed things a little. But the level of engagement you’re describing is still rare, I think.

WT: It’s not built into our process. Your editor’s going to ask you, “Do you have art?” “Do you have diverse sources?” They’re not going to ask you, “How many times you engaged the people most affected by this?”

Let’s talk for a minute about how people get information, which obviously isn’t always the same as “news.” People weren’t always coming to the newspaper bundle for news. There are entertainment listings, housing and help wanted ads. Now people with public service information partner to multiply resources. Like if you’re doing a voter registration drive, you might piggyback with a health services opportunity, and engage people in barber shops and other third spaces. Can newsrooms learn from that?

WT: The library may be a more economically diverse third space. If we’re rethinking how we distribute information, there’s this system where you can send direct mail. Political candidates do it all the time, but I’ve never seen a journalist use it. So, say you’re writing something about 38126, which I think is the poorest zip code. So what if you used direct mail to distribute stories or solicit information in 38126? Or, you know, use the inserts you get in your MLGW bill? What if there was something in that? Or billboards? I have seen the Commercial Appeal do a little bit of that. Smaller outlets probably think they can’t afford billboards. But what if a non-profit found a way to underwrite [it] and every week maybe they worked with a different [news] outlet?

For justice-forward reports you can follow MLK50 — now part of ProPublica’s Local Reporting Network here.
————————————————————————————————-

Mark Fleischer says he’s heartened by the changes he’s seen at The Commercial Appeal since they hired new staff. But when Fleischer’s monthly newspaper Storyboard Memphis was in the works, Memphis’ daily was, “getting worse by the day.”

Fleischer, a California transplant now living in Midtown, describes himself as an urban studies enthusiast and “news junkie.”

“I started talking to people and realizing how many other stories need to be told,” he says. “And people have no means to tell them.” That’s when Fleischer, who’d already been blogging about Memphis, got an idea to start a digital magazine. That idea evolved into Storyboard Memphis, a monthly  broadsheet-style newspaper with original historical and urban-themed reporting, supplemented with news articles from many of Memphis’s digital-only news organizations like Chalkbeat and High Ground News.

Memphis Flyer: An online magazine sounds great, but how does it work? It’s tough putting even quality content behind a paywall if it’s not unique or if similar content is available somewhere else free.

Mark Fleischer: I didn’t see a digital magazine taking off. A couple of guys we all know in publishing said, “You should think about print.”… It took a year for me to convince myself that was doable… For-profit seemed the most straightforward way to go. I don’t want to be chasing non-profit money all the time.

You’ve solved at least part of the newsroom riddle by aggregating content from several of Memphis’s digital-only content providers, which is great for a lot of reasons. You get content, they get a sampler platter where they’re included in one nicely curated space with all these other information providers you’d have to track down individually online. Also, the digital divide — there are a lot more people who aren’t online than most people think.

Mark Fleischer: I remember thinking, if I can just convince High Ground to partner with me, and I can be their print medium. Then I’ve really got something.

The kind of deep dives into neighborhoods High Ground does seems like it really lends itself to the urbanist-focused work you’re doing.

Mark Fleischer: Yes. And I talked to Tom Jones at Smart City — same thing.

Another good fit.

Mark Fleischer: I realized, the more I talked about this, the more I realized there was an appetite for print. Maybe more like a hunger.

And there’s already all this content out there…

Mark Fleischer: It’s out there. But it’s out there in digital format. When I came up with Storyboard, I originally thought about telling a stories through all media: audio, podcast, video, photography, art. All that. Well, there’s no reason I can’t do that in print. Not audio and video, obviously, but we can certainly use the medium and get as close to that as possible… High Ground isn’t going to print any time soon. It’s just not in their model. Tom Jones can’t go to print, he doesn’t have enough content. But together we do have enough content. It’s like showing all the work being done by High Ground and Smart City and all these other niche publications.

Storyboard also features original reporting by Fleischer, fiction, poetry, puzzles, and children’s pages. Distribution is free but not forced. It’s available in coffee shops and other public places around Memphis.

This is the last supplemental post to the Memphis

Eric Barnes

 Flyer cover story Going to Pieces. For readers interested in a more in depth conversation with Daily Memphian executive editor, Eric Barnes, he and I spoke at length shortly after the digital daily’s 2018 launch.  Our more recent conversation, was brief and to the point, so there wasn’t really enough leftover content to make a stand-alone post.

Categories
Cover Feature News

Going to Pieces

“We don’t have the backup we used to have, and the agencies know it,” Jacinthia Jones says, assessing the tough reality of independent journalism in the 21st century. During her 20 years working for The Commercial Appeal, Jones watched the paper’s education beat shrink from a team of a four full-time journalists to a single writer with additional editorial responsibilities — a change that’s definitely contrary to public interest in a community where education concerns run high.

Today, Jones is the Memphis bureau chief for Chalkbeat.org, a digital nonprofit newsroom focusing on education policy, with an eye toward correcting the coverage gap wrought by modern newspaper economies. Chalkbeat’s commitment to sharing free education-related content in partnership with relevant media organizations places Jones at the bleeding edge of conversations about Memphis’ print journalism future.

Jacinthia Jones

“When I worked for The Commercial Appeal, if you requested information and somebody told you ‘no,’ we’d call in the lawyers,” Jones says, reflecting on the daily paper’s financial resources and its historic role in forcing transparency and institutional oversight. “If you look at a lot of the court cases, The Commercial Appeal was filing the suit. Now these agencies are calling our bluff,” she says. “What are you going to do?”

Gather round the campfire, friends, and I’ll spin a tale of suspense, brimming with drama, comedy, and carnage. Information economies are anything but dull, and the ongoing demise of local and regional newspapers affects you personally and everybody you know, whether you’re a serial subscriber or only care about coupons and crossword puzzles. It’s a story about digital triumphalism and unintended consequences disrupting everything from how the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention tracks the spread of infectious diseases to consumer education and government oversight.

Local and community newspapers are a vanishing species. Among the survivors, many, like The Commercial Appeal, have become so diminished by layoffs, consolidation, and circulation loss (not to mention the steady shedding of tangible assets and influence), a spooky-sounding term has been coined to describe them: “ghost papers.”

Many articles have valorized print journalism and warned about the important things communities will lose if local papers go dark. This isn’t that kind of story. This is more like Game of Thrones, with Gannett, the CA‘s corporate parent, squaring off against MNG Enterprises (aka Alden Global Capital), a hedge-fund-backed media group formerly known as Digital First.

“If Alden gets Gannett, I think it will be a disaster for The Commercial Appeal,” says Eric Barnes. As the publisher of Memphis’ digital startup The Daily Memphian, Barnes wants to be clear: “That would not be a good thing for Memphis.

“Their track record is clear,” Barnes says of Alden’s infamous path to double-digit profitability. “People are so used to cuts, they may not be fully processing the level of cuts this could mean.”

Eric Barnes

Although its initial purchase offer was rejected and characterized by Gannett as “not credible,” Alden Global Capital/MNG/Digital First, is a minority shareholder and can stack Gannett’s board with Alden-friendly directors. That means the company might change its business philosophy, even if it never changes hands. So, if the takeover stalls or fails, it’s not impossible that the surviving CA could still be reduced to a West Tennessee edition of The Tennessean. It could also just as easily vanish like an apparition and never be heard from again.

And if it disappears, what then? Is the not-for-profit Daily Memphian positioned to replace the city’s historic paper of record? What’s the role played by community newsletters? Or social media? What about all the other news/lifestyle publications like the Memphis Flyer, StoryBoard, the Memphis Business Journal, Memphis Parent, La Prensa, or The Best Times? What about smaller, digital-only newsrooms like the neighborhood-focused High Ground News and the justice-oriented MLK50? Are Memphians equipped to sift through the clutter, internet noise, and propaganda to access the range of information and basic utility daily newspapers still bundle in print and online? Can other local news sources fill the void? That’s the big question.

About the Carnage …

The media-consuming public craves blood, so here it is: During the period between 2008 and 2017, newspapers shed nearly half their editorial workforce, according to data from Pew Research. During roughly the same period, one in five newspapers shut down nationwide.

The Expanding News Desert comprehensive report put out by the University of North Carolina’s Center for Innovation and Sustainability in Local Journalism in 2018, pegged the number of U.S. newspapers closed since 2004 at just under 1,800. The negative trend continues uninterrupted due to media consolidation, and the one-two-punch of changing technology and reader habits. But hedge funds also fundamentally changed the nature of newspaper ownership when they bought in during the Great Recession, circa 2008. During that period, advertising revenues and the price of newspaper companies bottomed out, transforming the market from a predictable “buy/hold” environment into a five-year flipper’s game.

The UNC report shows more than half the country’s newspapers changed hands in the last 15 years: “Many have been sold two or more times.” The Commercial Appeal, for example, a Scripps-Howard product since 1936, was merged with Journal Communications in 2015, then, just a few months later in early 2016, Journal Communications was obtained by Gannett. In January, 2019, Gannett received an unsolicited acquisition proposal from MNG/Digital First Media, the newspaper company owned by Alden Global Capital.

Self-inflicted Wounds

You’ve probably read stories about the newspaper industry’s decades-long struggle to staunch its slow readership bleed-out. Most of these stories focus on technological change or popular ideological narratives, and every one of them is misleading. Without a doubt, the most drastic newspaper consumer loss of the past 20 years was self-inflicted.

In 2008, for the purpose of reducing costs related to wages, ink, gasoline, and newsprint, The Commercial Appeal curtailed its delivery in Arkansas, Mississippi, and outlying parts of West Tennessee. This change fit a national pattern, as major city dailies ended rural home delivery. This deliberate shedding of the newspaper’s most expensive customers heralded a new emphasis on digital distribution while killing readership that was never resurrected online. The change hedged calculated consumer loss against variable cost savings and the promise of virtually free digital distribution. The change aimed to save money but also made it harder to cover costs associated with newsrooms and the creation of original news content.

Ending rural and regional home delivery also contributed to the nationwide rise of what are now being called “news deserts,” a dynamic that worsened with corporate acquisition and subsequent shuttering of hometown and family newspapers in places where 40 to 60 percent of the population may not have broadband or wi-fi access. News deserts are most common in Southern states, according to the UNC report, and less likely to affect younger, whiter, and more affluent communities.  

Profit-minded investment companies with no historic ties to publishing or local media markets have been more inclined to sell or shutter underperforming acquisitions than previous ownership groups. Which brings our story back to Alden/MNG/Digital First’s bid to acquire Gannett’s papers. Ironically, The Commercial Appeal — in spite of being turned out of its landmark Union Avenue offices, and frequently embarrassed by insensitive, out-of-town editing — is producing some of its most relevant, energized work in years.

Nostalgia for a mythic golden age of journalism makes it fun to believe that relevant work pays the bills. It doesn’t. And it’s not hard to understand why critical evaluations of the newspaper business and its confusing impact on content, quality, and meaning can be experienced as an attack on weary editors and reporters doing the best they can with fewer resources and less material support.

Simply put: News reporting that changes policy at Juvenile Court or shows us how TVA may have endangered Memphis’ water supply or that equips readers to make better choices as citizens and consumers doesn’t create subscription or advertising revenue. Investigative reports and in-depth explanatory journalism may be the result of hours of interviewing, weeks of research, and months or years of institutional knowledge and beat coverage. The first draft of history is always expensive to make. But none of this is especially interesting to advertisers or general-interest readers.

“We’re used to writing an article and thinking all these people are reading because we had all this circulation,” Jones says, recalling her time at the CA. “Now, with digital metrics, we know that’s not always true,” she says, illustrating an important point: The most important newspaper reporting isn’t always the best-read or most desirable for web traffic or circulation. It’s always been subsidized by softer content in a diverse bundle of professionally edited and curated information. This unpleasant fact makes the prospect of starting a fully digital, general-interest daily especially daunting — in an environment where only one in four digital news startups make it.

A New Hope

The Daily Memphian doesn’t yet share its number of paid subscribers, but the publication says monthly page-views clock around 1,400,000, and every morning the paper sends a news digest to 23,000 email accounts. Stories about University of Memphis basketball coach Penny Hardaway do very well. Stories about government and public affairs sometimes do, and sometimes don’t.

“Paid subscribers broke through the first year’s projections in a couple of months,” Barnes says. But he worries The Daily Memphian‘s big rollout may have set expectations too high. “We didn’t cover something on the first weekend, and got a ton of criticism,” he says. “People really thought we were going to cover everything right away, top-to-bottom, 24/7.”

Looking for an experience like the traditional print newspaper bundle, readers have asked for obituaries, comics, puzzles, and national and regional news that may be available elsewhere, but hasn’t been a regular part of the DM‘s mix.

Barnes responded to his first round of criticism by adding five reporters to pick up night and weekend work. He plans to eventually include AP news and additional soft content.

The riddle of the digital news Sphinx goes something like this: “How can an online startup produce enough original content across a broad enough range of consumer interests to build a big enough subscriber base to support a newsroom able to produce original content across a broad range of consumer interests?” Repeat that enough, and you’ll start to see the economic dilemma in an information environment where it’s tough to put content behind a paywall if comparable goods are available free, elsewhere.

Newspaper stories and digital posts are what economists call “experience goods.” You can’t know if a story will be interesting or useful unless you read it, so news organizations rely on columnists and star-reporters to give consumers and potential consumers some idea of what to expect before they buy. As a startup, The Daily Memphian had no brand recognition, so it hired marquee names from The Commercial Appeal: sportswriters Geoff Calkins and Chris Herrington, and food guru Jennifer Biggs. Barnes thinks bringing these known commodities onto a team rounded out with younger but experienced reporters is one of his fledgling newsroom’s big success stories.

“They already knew Memphis,” he says of his team. “There was no learning curve.” Additionally, The Daily Memphian distributes content acquired via partnerships with education policy newsroom Chalkbeat.org and the University of Memphis’ Institute for Public Service Reporting.

By now, at least some of you are probably asking, “Who cares about newspapers?” It’s taken as an article of faith the traditional models are dying, right? But remember Jacinthia Jones’ opening comments about how the agencies know when you’ve got “no backup.” Now figure in a related piece of collateral damage: Between 2005 and 2010, while so many newspapers were biting the dust, the number of Freedom of Information Act requests being filed by government watchdogs dropped by half. This data was reported by James T. Hamilton, the Hearst Professor of Communication at Stanford, in his latest book, Democracy’s Detectives: The Economics of Investigative Journalism.
Hamilton answered questions for this story, and the data reviewed in Democracy’s Detectives and his earlier economic critique, All the News That’s Fit to Sell, inform much of this article. Hamilton’s work shows how trends like the ones outlined in this story, “point to a lower chance” of accountability stories being told by professional news organizations about local institutions.

“If the costs of discovering and telling stories drops radically, then it may be the case that subscriptions at the local level would support a smaller newsroom that would survive online,” Hamilton wrote in an email exchange, offering a ray of hope about the viability of local newsrooms. “If a nonprofit or local online service generates other goods, such as events that are ticketed or sponsored, that could also generate income,” he said, allowing that use of artificial intelligence may eventually make story discovery and assembly cheap enough that, “local subscription or nonprofit [models] might support a local bundle.”

Savages at the Gate

In late February, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer sent a sternly worded letter to Alden Global Capital, expressing concern about what could happen if the hedge fund acquired Gannett newspapers. He’d already weighed in on the Senate floor, noting that Gannett was a troubled example of newspaper consolidation, plagued by layoffs and delocalization.

Schumer’s worries were at least a little ironic, considering what Memphis stands to lose if there’s a takeover. Hedge fund-backed owners like MNG/Digital First depend on deep layoffs and cost-cutting, including the outsourcing of back office, sales, and certain editorial duties to central hubs, far removed from the places where news is gathered and where the paper is circulated and primarily read. They sell a newspaper’s real estate holdings and other tangible assets, squeezing all the assets for cash. As the UNC report shows, there’s always been a willingness to sell poorly performing properties or to close them entirely, “not so much to inform the public or hold officialdom to account, but to supply cash to use elsewhere.”

In other words, so much of the worst that might happen has happened already. And yet, to borrow from Bloomberg.com columnist Joe Nocera, when MNG/Digital First moves in, the layoffs aren’t just painful, “They’re savage.”

Epilogue

All newspaper news appears to be bad news. The trends are terrible. The outlook is grim. And yet, most of the people engaged in the act of gathering, organizing, delivering, and paying for the news seem determined, if not optimistic about finding a way forward. Barnes is hopeful he’s found the right business model to go paperless. Jones is excited about using text-based news delivery to close the digital divide. MLK50, a justice-oriented not-for-profit led by former Commercial Appeal columnist Wendi Thomas, expanded its capacity by joining the local reporting network for ProPublica, a national, not-for-profit digital newsroom.

Karanja Ajanaku says he has “some awareness” of what’s happening in the newspaper industry, but the executive editor of the Tri-State Defender takes a unique perspective. “We’re in growth mode,” he says, describing a plan to move the historically black newspaper’s online content behind a paywall. Diverse representation in Memphis newsrooms has sometimes been called out as problematic, and in a majority-black community he thinks the Defender has been underperforming its potential to serve everybody. “But we have to be able to do a deeper dive into the community, and to do that we’ve got to have reporters,” he says, returning to a more familiar theme. “We’ve got to have journalists. We’ve got to have editors — local people telling local stories. So we’re asking the community to help us help them, and we think they will respond to that.”

Excerpts from conversations with Jacinthia Jones of Chalkbeat, Eric Barnes of The Daily Memphian, Karanja Ajanaku of the Tri-State Defender, Wendi Thomas of MLK 50, and Mark Fleischer of StoryBoard: Memphis will be made available online at Memphisflyer.com. Commercial Appeal Executive Editor Mark Russell did not respond to requests for comment for this story.

Categories
News News Blog

Local Journalist Sues For Access to Crime Commission Records

Wendi Thomas

A local journalist, joined by a national news outlet, filed a lawsuit Wednesday against the Memphis and Shelby County Crime Commission (MSCC), contending that its records should be open to the public.

The suit was filed in Shelby County Chancery Court by Wendi Thomas, founder of MLK50: Justice Through Journalism, along with leaders from The Marshall Project, a New York-based nonprofit news organization.

According to the petitioners, the MSCC denied multiple records requests, including requests for the details surrounding a $6.1 million police retention grant the commission announced in October.

Thomas and the other petitioners also requested information including how the commission operates, what its policies are, and details of its interactions with the Memphis Police Department and others.

The suits says, in part, that because the MSCC is “the functional equivalent of a government agency, it’s records are, therefore, public records subject to the access requirements of the Public Records Act.”

Local Journalist Sues For Access to Crime Commission Records

However, the crime commission maintains that it does not have to adhere to the Tennessee Public Records Act and that its records are not public.

In one response to Thomas’ request for records, MSCC president Bill Gibbons responded: “As we have stated in response to precious similar requests, the Memphis and Shelby County Crime Commission is a 501(c)(3) private nonprofit entity and is not subject to the Tennessee Public Records Act.”

Additionally, the suit argues that because one-third of the MSCC’s current leadership, including Gibbons, is employed by a public entity, the commission itself is a public body.

The petitioners are asking the court to order MSCC to appear before the court within 10 days to make its case.

Additionally, Thomas and The Marshall Project staff are asking that the documents previously requested are released immediately, their attorneys fees be covered, and that the court finds that the MSCC “willfully refused to grant access to public records.”

Chairman of the MSCC board of dircetors Ben Adams said in a statement Thursday that the commission is not subject to the public records act: “The Crime Commission is a non-profit corporation funded privately and with no governmental authority. It is not subject to the public records act.”

This story has been updated with a statement from the MSCC.

Categories
Fly On The Wall Blog Opinion

Local 24 Quietly Deletes Controversial Tweet

WATN, Local 24, had an interesting way of framing news about Cyntoia Brown’s commuted life sentence.

Brown, the teenage sex trafficking victim who killed a john when she was 16, was granted executive clemency Monday, January 7th.

Here’s WATN’s original tweet on the story:

Local 24 quietly deleted the tweet Tuesday, after it started receiving negative attention. The account has made no official mention of the deletion, nor has anybody accounted for the unfortunate framing of a tragic and complicated story.

Commissioner Tami Sawyer cuts to the heart of things:

Local 24 Quietly Deletes Controversial Tweet

Over the past week, MLK50 founder Wendi Thomas has been taking local broadcast stations to task for the huge role they play in linking African-Americans and criminality. She’s been particularly vocal about the number of black faces linked to crime that show up in local social media feeds whether the news is local or not.

Local 24 Quietly Deletes Controversial Tweet (2)

Local 24 Quietly Deletes Controversial Tweet (3)

If you want to know just how disproportionately crime is reported in the Memphis market, the Memphis Flyer does an occasional survey.

This isn’t a condition unique to Memphis and since, at a national scale, local TV news stations reach more viewers than all the top cable stations combined, it’s fair to say that regional broadcasters across America play a huge role in shaping urban narratives related to race and crime. Local 24’s tweet is just the latest example, and an especially egregious one. 

By deleting the tweet, someone has acknowledged its inappropriateness or, at least, the potential for controversy. But deletions like this require some accompanying public statement. For example, when WMC distanced itself from a deleted tweet reading: “Nashville is still trash,”  a subsequent tweet explained the deleted post didn’t represent the station’s “values or views.”

Whether there’s an accounting or not, here’s something to think about. Negligent and incendiary headlines and the over-association of black and brown faces with violent crime isn’t new, and neither is criticism pointing it out. The people responsible for organizing and distributing the news in 2019 know exactly what they are doing. They do it anyway. 

Categories
Politics Politics Beat Blog

Shade in Shelby County: A Guest Viewpoint

In a discussion over the weekend among the candidates for Shelby County Mayor, candidate David Lenoir was asked to respond to charges that his campaign had darkened an image of his opponent, Lee Harris, in a recent mailer. Lenoir denied that there had been any doctoring of the image and cast the blame for the topic onto Wendi Thomas, the Memphis journalist who most recently ran the MLK50: Justice in Journalism project. Specifically, Lenoir said, “This … was all cooked up by Wendi Thomas and you know how divisive she can be.” This response was wrong on so many levels, I feel a need to throw some shade on Lenoir (pun intended).

Daniel Kiel

First, blaming a critical media is like blaming the doctor who delivers an unwanted diagnosis. It is rooted in denial of facts, or at least of the way things might be interpreted. Second, though media-bashing seems to be a wise political strategy these days, Lenoir did not actually bash the media — he targeted a single member of the media, one who is black and female and whose work regularly points out racial discrimination and disparity in our community. Several white journalists had pointed out the racial overtones of the Lenoir mailer before Thomas, yet the fault was solely laid at Thomas’s feet.

One reason other non-Thomas journalists have pointed out the racial overtones of the mailer is that the racial overtones of the mailer are kind of difficult to miss. I received one of these mailers, which feature a shadowy Harris seemingly juggling $100 bills amidst claims that he will not be a responsible steward of the county’s money, and immediately shook my head. (Disclosure: I’m white) That it traffics in stereotypes, seeking to elicit a response in the viewer rooted in beliefs about trustworthiness of African Americans, is difficult to deny. It could even be read to trigger fear that some sort of rapper is running for mayor to make it rain in the club of Shelby County after raising taxes to do so. That these stereotyping suggestions appear at all is troublesome, but that they appear next to a darkened image is egregious, in my opinion. Not surprising given the local and national history with race-baiting and dog-whistling in campaigns, but still egregious.

To deny that the mailer could be understood in this way has several effects. It denies to those who are offended the dignity of deciding for themselves what is offensive. It is as if Lenoir is suggesting that people not be allowed to trust their own feelings — again, feelings that are being felt by white and black Shelby Countians alike, though likely not in equal measure — and instead, trust that he meant no harm. It also displays either a high level of ignorance or disingenuousness about race in our community. Either Lenoir is truly surprised that the mailer might be offensive, in which case he is showing himself as woefully out of touch with the experience of the majority of Shelby County residents. Or he knows, even hopes, it could be understood this way, consciously or unconsciously, and will lead voters into the safety he is offering. To me, the scapegoating of Thomas, a favorite target of local whites in power, suggests that the latter explanation is in play.

Lenoir could have blamed the media, broadly, for misunderstanding him, but he chose to cite one black journalist. He also could have feigned surprise at the reaction, acknowledged error, claimed ignorance, apologized, maybe even committed to not sending any more copies of the mailer out. That may have helped the issue go away, but maybe that is not the goal. Perhaps the goal is to give some subset of voters the sense that his opponent is not Lee Harris, but is actually Wendi Thomas.

Of Thomas, Lenoir says, “we all know how divisive she can be.” Who is the “we” in that sentence? My guess: white people, specifically white people uncomfortable with criticism from the black community. That Thomas’s work is “divisive” is hard to dispute — it divides opinions because it unapologetically touches on the racial, gender, and socioeconomic divides in our community. Thomas did not create those divides, again, any more than a doctor creates symptoms. The divisions Lenoir ought to be concerned about are the attitudes, structures, and practices that give Thomas and others focused on local inequity so much to write about.

Of course, Lenoir is not literally running against Wendi Thomas, the person. Rather, he is running against ideas some might associate with her. It is instructive to consider what a campaign against those ideas might look like. Over the years, Thomas has repeatedly raised complex and often damning questions about the distribution and use of power in our community. These questions are often inconvenient to those in power, but they serve a crucial purpose of accountability. It is as though Thomas is sitting on the community’s shoulder, reminding us of things we ought to have been considering all along — things like diversity in media and in economic development, the crippling barriers generated by poverty, racial and gender discrimination faced regularly by individuals in all walks of life and across levels of income. Think of hers as a voice of conscience, critical and persistent, but rooted in the desire to make things better.

A symbolic campaign against “Wendi Thomas” is a campaign against criticism and a campaign against change from a status quo that benefits Shelby County residents unevenly. It is a campaign against learning from mistakes, against acknowledging the feelings of others, against critical self-examination, against acknowledging the possibility that the community might look different — and less flattering — from a different perspective, all things that we could use more of. And, of course, it is a campaign against a black voice for black empowerment, a black voice that dares to question the current dispensation. And to be clear, Thomas has never been critical solely of white leaders; her voice can be inconvenient for anyone in power. It is just that political, and particularly economic, power continues to be disproportionately wielded by whites in Shelby County.

The shading of an image of an African American opponent in a county mayoral race reflects poor judgment or callous disregard of others’ feelings. An individual standing for election as the county’s executive should expect questions on the topic and either defend the decision or acknowledge a mistake. Instead, Lenoir opted to pass the blame on to a Shelby County citizen who has been willing to sit on the shoulders of our community and make noise. Our community could use more such citizens.

Daniel Kiel is a Professor of Law at the University of Memphis, a recipient of the University’s Martin Luther King Human Rights Award and a widely published author, especially on the subject of race relations.

Categories
Politics Politics Beat Blog

Grading the NAACP’s Mayoral Debate

JB

Moderator Ajanaku (l) and debaters Harris and Lenoir at Civil Rights Museum

So how did Tuesday night’s debate between candidates for Shelby County mayor go? The answer is: Well enough for both Trustee David Lenoir, the Republican nominee, and state Senator Lee Harris, the Democratic nominee, to claim victory for themselves. Others may have seen it one way or the other, depending on their partisanship. And it was theoretically possible to call it a draw.

In the Beginning: The debate kicked off, as is customary, with brief opening statements. Harris went first, maintaining, as he has before, that “poverty” is the biggest issue of the campaign, elaborating that county government had achieved “not enough progress fast enough.” Given that this was an NAACP-sponsored debate, in the National Civil Rights Museum, Harris’ contention was well attuned to his audience — much more so than when he named poverty and “segregation” as predominant issues in his June 13th debate with Lenoir before a predominantly white, middle-class group of Kiwanians.

Lenoir wasted no time dealing with the elephant in the room, which was the fact, obvious to attendees, that the originally scheduled moderator, veteran journalist Wendi Thomas, had been replaced by the Tri-State Defender editor Karanja Ajanaku. It was well known that Lenoir had originally balked at taking part if Thomas participated, on account of what he said (though he did not specifically identify) were Thomas’ “biased public statements” on social media.

The NAACP then planned to have the debate with only Harris in attendance, before Thomas offered to step aside. Lenoir then changed his mind again and agreed to participate. He spun the situation by congratulating the NAACP and the other sponsors for being willing to make the change. Some subdued murmuring in the audience suggested the explanation was not a crowd-pleaser.

Aside from its underscoring what had been a Lenoir power play, the basic fact of this opening exchange was that it defined who was home and who was having to play an away game. Advantage Harris.

Definition of Aims: Early on, without stirring much reaction one way or another, Lenoir espoused his usual goals of “great schools, great jobs, and safe streets,” hailing the prospect of “growing the economy and building a bigger pot” for the sake of “women and minorities” and boasting his actions as Trustee in making large deposits at the black-owned Tri-State Bank.

JB

State Senator Lee Harris

Harris responded that “we’ve got to be watchful of the language,” that “growth is important,” but “sometimes at the expense of the folks at the bottom.” In other words, said Harris, “growth still means that we will continue with inequality. Those at the top get wealthier, and those at the bottom get a little bit of wealth.”

Both got to make their essential points, with Harris earning a bit of extra applause — both for the faintly incendiary nature of his allegation and in appreciation of its hint of originality. Lenoir would get a chance later on to expound on his “courage” and his purported successes in building up the county treasury for public purposes.

Education: Both candidates stood four-square for improvements in education, with Harris noting that he had endorsements from teachers’ groups and Stand for Children.
Lenoir got to repeat his plan for “an educational liaison” official and received some healthy applause for his plan to allocate capital construction carefully.

Clout in Nashville and Past Public Service: Lenoir boasted his connections in Nashville and his experience as an administrator and made a point of saying that he had “finished every term I was elected to.” That was a not-so-veiled shot at the upwardly mobile Harris, who, critics charge, is always sighting new jobs other than the one he has been elected to.

Harris quickly responded: “I served for three years on the Memphis City Council, and I ran for the state Senate because I was not satisfied with the incumbent [Ophelia Ford], and nobody else would run against her….God bless her heart; she was not doing a good job at that time, and I ran against her because it needed to be done. I’m serving my fourth and final year in the state Senate, and I’m giving up my seat so that new talent can come through door.”

So far, so good, and then Harris delivered the clencher to resounding applause that even forced an admiring smile from Lenoir: “And the problem is not that our politicians do not stay long enough. It is that they stay too long!” Several voices in the crowd mouthed those last two words along with him. Lenoir made an effort to recoup by once again stressing his experience as an administrator vis-a-vis an opponent who had “never run an operation.”

Crime: Harris drew an interesting parallel between the prospect of improved transportation as lever to create opportunities and dampen the prospect of crime. In his turn, Lenoir went for the gold, repeating a charge that had worked for him three times in their earlier Kiwanis debate, and had gone un-rebutted then by Harris. “My opponent is soft on violent crimes. He voted against a bill in Nashville that would toughen the sentencing for criminals with guns.” Further: “He wrote legislation that would reverse Representative Lois DeBerry’s drugs-around-our-schools bill.”

Harris replied, “It’s easy to criticize my record of leadership because I have a record of leadership. I have been on the forefront … on every issue we have talked about so far, for the last seven years.” He described himself as being in favor of criminal justice reform and made an effort to characterize the bill that Lenoir had spoken of as being aimed at non-violent offenders who happened to have guns. More important, said Harris, were “the rapists, the murderers — and let’s stop giving these domestic abusers slaps on the wrists.”

It wasn’t perfect, but it was far more effective than had been Harris’ choosing to ignore the charge at the earlier debate. Lenoir would return to the “soft-on-violent-crime” theme and made a point of having the endorsements of the Deputy Sheriffs Association and the Memphis Police Association’s, “because they understand my position on crime, and they understand my opponent’s position, as well.”

Both made the case for the joint city/county Office of ReEntry for ex-offenders, but Lenoir charged that Harris, on the council, had voted against funding a Second Chance program that had similar aims. Both made much of their past cooperation with DeAndre Brown, whose “Lifeline to Success” program had eased ex-felons back into the mainstream of society.

Both candidates also made a point of questioning the credibility of the federal immigration agency I.C.E., Harris going a step further and suggesting the the county’s Public Defender should consider defending undocumented immigrants.

Redirects: Lenoir, in general, had kept pace with Harris in matters that obviously resonated with the audience in the Civil Rights Museum. He stumbled somewhat when, in speaking of the bridge shutdown protest two years ago, he suggested that emergency vehicles had been unable on that occasion to use the blocked span across the Mississippi. That drew shouts of denial from the audience, the one and only time there was heckling of sorts during the debate.

County Trustee David Lenoir

But Lenoir was able to use another question about a notable public controversy to redress a charge that has lingered against him since his appearance with two other Republicans in a GOP primary debate back in April. He and they — County Commissioner Terry Roland and Juvenile court clerk Joy Touliatos — had been asked about the city’s action in arranging the takedown of Confederate statues from parks downtown and the state legislature’s resultant punitive action in withdrawing a $250,000 grant for Memphis’ bicentennial celebrations next year.

Back then, all three Republican candidates had been dubious about the exact manner of the city’s manner of removing the statues (by selling the parks to a non-profit and then providing equipment and personnel to remove the statues from the parks at the non-profit’s request).

Roland, who had spoken first, seemed undisturbed by the state’s punitive attitude. “Until people quit thumbing their nose at Nashville, there’s nothing we an do,” he said, alleging that the city had acted “like a thief in the night.” Touliatos, too, had been accepting of the state’s reaction: “The statues were handled inappropriately…. If you’re going to go against state law, there are going to be repercussions.”

Lenoir, who had spoken second then, just after Roland, addressed the matter this way: ““First of all, I believe in limited government and local control. So in terms of decision-making, it should happen at the local level. I would agree with my colleague [Roland] with the way, specifically on the statues, with the way it occurred, late at night on a Friday night [it was actually a Wednesday night], under the cloak of darkness, it no doubt sent the wrong message — not only to many that lived in Shelby County but also in Nashville. But in terms of how to mitigate that, I believe that things ought to happen on a local level. In many ways we need less of Nashville in Shelby County business. That would be my response on that.”

The Trustee’s statement in April had been somewhat shaded against what the city had done, but technically he had not endorsed the state’s adverse reaction, and just as technically (and, to be sure, modestly) he had gone on record as favoring local prerogatives.

Hence, Lenoir was more or less within his rights to say, on Tuesday night at the Civil Rights Museum, “I’m happy to tackle this one, because local control, local decisions, the decision needs to be made at a local level. It was made at a local level. It was passed unanimously by the City Council. It was a decision that was made, and I’m glad I can clear the record, ‘cause there’s folks out there — it’s politics; I get it; I understand — but you will not find me on the record as saying that I thought it was a state issue. All the lies that are going on out there are just that — they’re lies. It’s a local decision, local control as far as the removal of those statues, and I think that’s the way it should have happened.”

That answer somewhat overstated Lenoir’s position back in April, but it was not inconsistent with it, and Lenoir probably gained from the opportunity to address the matter again, in much the way that Harris had gained from the chance to deal again with Lenoir’s charge about his alleged opposition to an anti-crime control vote in Nashville.

Categories
News News Blog

Wendi Thomas Chosen for Harvard Journalism Fellowship

Wendi Thomas

Memphis Flyer columnist Wendi C. Thomas will be spending the next 10 months as a fellow with the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University.

Thomas joins 22 other U.S.-based and international journalists for the highly selective fellowship. She is the Louis Stark Nieman Fellow. The fellowship honors the memory of the New York Times reporter who was a pioneer in the field of labor reporting.

While at Harvard, Thomas plans to study economic justice and public policy and how to deepen the public conversation about the intersection of the two.

Her career spans 22 years and four newsrooms, including The Commercial Appeal, where she was the metro columnist and assistant managing editor for 11 years. Previously, she was an editor at The Charlotte Observer, a reporter and editor at The Tennessean in Nashville and a reporter at The Indianapolis Star. She is a graduate of Butler University.

The purpose of the Nieman Foundation is to educate leaders in journalism and elevate the standards of the profession through special programs that convene scholars and experts in all fields.

Since 1938, more than 1,400 journalists from 93 countries have been awarded Nieman Fellowships.

Categories
Letter From The Editor Opinion

Captain Underpants and Other Scary Stuff

Professor Poopypants must be stopped! And so must the Bionic Booger Boy and the Potty People. They are all characters in the Captain Underpants series of children’s books, written by Dav Pilkey, and they are among the most “challenged” books in America in the past few years — meaning individuals or groups are trying to get them banned from libraries. In fact, according to the American Library Association (ALA), Pilkey has been the most-challenged author in the country since 2012.

Pilkey’s books are literally potty humor, the type of stuff that gets boffo laffs from the elementary-school set. But some people don’t think their children should be exposed to it, and they’d like to make that decision for other parents, as well.

According to ALA statistics, 429 challenges have been made against various books in U.S. libraries since the beginning of 2013. Of those, 111 were in Texas, which probably doesn’t surprise anyone. In response, each September, the ALA designates a “Banned Books Week” to bring awareness of the problem to the public.

So, happy Banned Books Week, folks.

And it’s not just children’s books that get challenged. Other titles that routinely draw objections include The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian, Looking for Alaska, The Hunger Games, The Things They Carried, and The Color Purple. Grounds for challenging these books include racist content, offensive language, sexual content, homosexuality, drug- and alcohol-related content, anti-religious content, and cultural insensitivity.

Sometimes, if enough pressure is brought to bear, books get banned, even really good books. Imagine, for example, not being able to read For Whom the Bell Tolls, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, The Catcher in the Rye, The Great Gatsby, or I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings. All of those books (and many more) have been removed from an American library somewhere, because they offended someone, somehow.

But that’s the thing: Writing — good and bad — will always offend somebody. One person’s core truth is another’s big lie. The written word can trigger people’s deepest fears, causing them to react with anger or to attempt to devalue the messenger. We live in a hair-trigger, ADD world, where assessing an incident in the news, or another’s point of view, is often reduced to quick snark or name-calling. The internet has bred battalions of anonymous keyboard kommandos, eager to defend and promote their world-view and disparage those with whom they disagree.

Sifting the wheat from the chaff can be tough work. Just ask Captain Underpants.

* * *

And speaking of opinions … I’m pleased to announce that former CA editor and metro columnist Wendi C. Thomas will be writing a column for the Flyer on alternate weeks, beginning in this issue on page 10.

Categories
Letters To The Editor Opinion

What They Said …

About Bruce VanWyngarden’s article, “The Origin Story” …

This year marks the 25th anniversary of the Memphis Flyer. Congratulations. However, I have to say, as a founding staff member of the Dixie Flyer, that I highly resent editor Bruce VanWyngarden’s reference to our publication as “a hippie paper that was published in Memphis for a time in the 1970s.”

It wasn’t a “hippie” paper, the inference being that it was an inferior product put together by a bunch of pot-smoking losers. In addition to myself as music editor, executive editor Sara Van Horn, and art director Eddie Tucker, we had many other talented people working very hard to produce a paper of which the community could be proud. And none of us got paid a dime. Contributors included Joe Mulherin, John Fergus Ryan, David Less, Phyllis Tickle, Gordon Osing, and many other fine writers, as well as photographers Ebet Roberts, Richard Sidman, Elbert Greer, and other talented people.

I would venture to say that a lot of our features and commentaries were much superior to anything the current Flyer had in its infancy. “Hippie paper” indeed. The truth is that the Flyer put big bucks behind our idea and, 25 years later, they are doing quite well. A little respect for the Dixie Flyer, Bruce. We blazed the trail in the 1970s and your organization turned it into an eight-lane expressway.

Gordon Alexander

Greg Cravens

About the article, “25 Who Shaped Memphis” …

I can’t believe you left out Adrian Rogers, given the religious and political effect that Bellevue Baptist Church has had and continues to have on many Memphians — religious, nonreligious, straight, gay, etc.

Brunetto Latini

Bellevue Baptist is emblematic of why I and so many others have disdain for the suburbanite mob. They hit that sweet spot between ignorance and righteous indignation.

MidtownOnly

You left out Jesus.

CL Mullins

About Chris Davis’ post, “Commercial Appeal Metro Columnist Wendi Thomas Has Been Reassigned” …

Perhaps we can now have a more balanced approach to race relations in the CA. The divisiveness that was Wendi’s M.O. was particularly unsettling to this northern transplant.

Smitty1961

Since when is pointing out the obvious being “divisive”? Oh, that’s right, when you want to pretend that we are in a post-racial world, got it! Oy.

LeftWingCracker

There is much prejudice in the hardcore white commenters in the CA, and it is hard to go against that tide. She will probably go and make an impact somewhere else within the next couple of years. What I can say with certainty is that she always treated me with respect and she helped me in my time of need. Wendi has helped Memphis in many ways and I hope one day she will be more appreciated in the community than she has been.

TruthBeTold

Every kid will be named “Trevon” in Wendi’s articles.

HomerSimpson

Is this only being posted to attract the CA comment trolls?

Nobody

About a visit to Memphis …

My wife and I, with our daughter and son-in-law, visited Memphis to celebrate my 70th birthday with a visit to Graceland, as I have always been a big fan of Elvis. While we were there, we decided to go to the BBQ fest. Having never seen it or even heard about it before, we didn’t know what to expect, but what a surprise! The contestants made us feel really welcome and even gave us T-shirts to remember them (along with a few beers and food). So, we would like to say a very big thank you to all the friends we made in Memphis that day. We truly have never met more friendly people.

Jack, Cindy, Mandy and Choo