Beric'ht Talossan: Issue 21, January 25th 2015/XXXVI

[C. Carlüs Xheraltescù]

Last week's cartoon got away with just overtly implying Miestra was a terrorist, but I think fell short of actual libel. It didn't stop it from being particularly repulsive though.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

I guess I can kind of see that, although I think it's a reference to Dame Miestra's "threat" to stuff the cartoons down the throats of the cartoonists if she discovers who they are - and I think it was just as tongue-in-cheek and insincere as her words were. I don't think it's libelous, although it's hard to really know. There's only been one libel suit against the press, and it's been pending for a long time now as we wait on the presiding Magistrate.

[C. Carlüs Xheraltescù]

I think it's a peculiar world in which it's possible to be tongue-in-cheek about an act of terror that happened not so long ago.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

And that's a fair criticism to make, certainly, but being in arguable bad taste is not the same as being libelous - not by a long shot.

I want to make clear, even as I say that though, that I strongly support all of my contributors. Even though I might personally not enjoy everything published in the paper, I honestly don't think that Beric'ht Talossan could have succeeded or could continue to succeed in a situation where I was policing acceptable opinions. Most past efforts at journalism have either run into swift trouble as they try to keep creating content at a steady level (usually relying on one person's superhuman productivity until that person burns out) or have been very irregular efforts. The Talossan Observer, Oraclâ, The Péngöpäts Times, GLÜM, Qator Itrins, Talossan News Project, The Progressive Press, Stil da Vida, ¡Brendan!, Mormoglhen, KATV, Radio Free Talossa, RT Radio, Støtanneu, and Talossan National News... some of these have been truly amazing efforts, and their best pieces have shocked me with the high quality and remarkable insight. But it's really, really hard to keep something like that going. The reason that Beric'ht Talossan has not only kept going, but kept growing, is because we focus on bringing in talented and reliable people and giving them a platform to "do Talossa." And that means prioritizing - not policing.

C'mon: we just put out our twentieth issue, and our first podcast, and we've never missed a deadline. Beric'ht Talossan is the only place to listen to the national language, the only place to see editorial cartoons of any kind, the only place to see regular high-quality reporting, the only active Talossan Twitter presence... I mean, the list goes on. I am incredibly proud, and the only reason I'm so happy to pat us on the back like this is that I know just how little of it has to do with me. Instead, it has to do with the amazing nation of Talossa and all of the citizens who are talented and fun enough to want to contribute. I am really privileged to be a part of the paper.

My hope, in fact, is that right now there's some Talossan who's never tried a collage or drawing before, and they will be spurred to start cartooning for us with their own perspective, answering the ideas they see with their own opinions. If you're out there - give it a try! Beric'ht Talossan will be here, ready to publish you!

[C. Carlüs Xheraltescù]

And you'll note that I never in fact said it was libellous - just that it was a repulsive comparison to be making.

Beric'ht has done exceptionally well, but I'm inclined to agree with people calling for us to have more competition in the media sector, which is why I've offered my services to El Tamlalt Talossan (or ETT for short). I've agreed to act as owner of the news corporation and provide it with some leadership and direction, even if I don't have the time to edit it or contribute directly myself. A free market requires fair competition, and I'd like to see a news corporation that's just a little bit less biased, and a little less concerned with personal attacks competing with what's currently on offer.

Look, we even have a website!

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

Hey, that's great! I firmly agree that more media competition is a good thing, so please let me know if there's any way I can help. You're way ahead of where Beric'ht was at this stage... when we started out, we focused on getting the paper written and published, and didn't even have a website for a long time. Yours looks fantastic!

[C. Carlüs Xheraltescù]

Thank you, Alex. I might be in touch regarding some of the obstacles you may have faced when starting off - incorporation etc, that kind of thing.

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

The "terrorist" jibe in this issue, added to the "Muslim" jibe from last week, really seems to add up to a theme, and that theme is "subtly but clearly throw the worst personal abuse we can at Miestrâ".

It's increasingly plain that Sir Alex is Mildew himself. I was loath to come to that conclusion because it seemed paranoid. But here are two additional bits of information: a) the way he stormed out of his guest speech to the ZRT convention when I made a "mildew" joke; b) Alex himself can't tell the difference between a Sufi and an orthodox Muslim, as he revealed in a Witt thread a while ago. Thus, all Sir Alex's fine statements above are just window-dressing. The purpose of the anonymity of ESM is, and let's emphasise this:

so Sir Alexandreu Davinescu can throw the nastiest personal (not political) abuse he can at Miestrâ Schivâ, and yet keep his squeaky-clean polite public image.


Anonymity is in a noble cause when one is afraid of persecution for free speech. It is just shitty bullying when it's a front for one man to carry out a personal crusade while pleading innocence. If I'm wrong, and AD is not ESM, that just means there are two Talossans who personally despise me and are too, and I will use the vernacular here, chickenshit to say it to my (virtual) face.

I'd like to add that I would agree that those cartoons aren't libelous. They would have to damage my reputation in a lying way to do that, which would mean someone apart from AD and his hard-core RUMP buddies would have to take what they say seriously, which I could not find evidence for which would convince a judge.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

You're wrong on a couple of fronts, Dame Miestra.

In the first place, I don't personally despise you. I don't even dislike you. On the contrary, I am fond of you. That's why I have repeatedly tried to make overtures of friendship, such as often inviting you to be a contributor to Beric'ht Talossan so you can air your own views - an offer that still stands, and I hope you'll take up someday! - as well as thinking to make a speech to you and your party about avoiding partisan nastiness and turning a new page. It's true I did change my mind when confronted with evidence that such a speech probably would actually be counterproductive, since I was being heckled even before writing anything, but I'm not sure that speaks to my character. You have said before that you're sure I dislike you, but I really, really don't. You can be a bit frustrating at times, and very paranoid, but I have worked to minimize circumstances where that might cause problems, and it's a trait more than made up for by your intelligence, erudition, and other interesting traits. You do seem to hate me, but that's just sad, and doesn't affect my feelings.

In the second place, I am very aware of the difference between Sufism and other sects of Islam. There's actually a sizable Sufi community very near me (it's called the Abode). I buy my vegetables from their CSA, and my wife and I are volunteers to work on the trails on their mountain property's hiking area. I admit that I'm a bit ignorant of much of the theology involved, but I do have some familiarity with Sufism at this point. And, obviously, I bear neither Sufis nor Muslims in general any ill-will, because that would be dumb.

In the third place, while I generally never comment on the identity of the pseudonymous cartoonists (and I will work to protect their anonymity), I can assure you that you are wrong and that I am not Eric S. Mildew. I decided not to give that speech because it seemed like I was going to be mocked if I did, and while I wanted to reach out and make a positive gesture, it seemed like it might have been a bad idea.

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

Well, if you categorically deny you write the ESM cartoons yourself... I'll have to accept your word and return to my original theory, that it's Trotxâ. (Possibly Mick Preston, though that would really upset and disappoint me.)

[D. N. Vercáriâ]

I wonder what's the point of anonymous cartoons in a society that advocates free speech. There'll always be the red herring of guessing the cartoonist's identity and their intentions, and a taste of sniping for the mere benefit of causing trouble instead of offering some kind of criticism, or creative lightheartedness at best.

Beric'ht is (successfully) trying to offer quality journalism every fortnight, but as cartoons are like headlines and regular cartoonists the hallmark of a paper or magazine, some of (S:reu?) "Mildew's" cartoons are thwarting the good work of the writing staff.

[Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H.]

Jan 27, 2015 19:26:52 GMT -6 Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN said:

Well, if you categorically deny you write the ESM cartoons yourself... I'll have to accept your word and return to my original theory, that it's Trotxâ. (Possibly Mick Preston, though that would really upset and disappoint me.)

Well, you can also reject that it's me, since I don't draw that well...

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

The English is also far too fluent to be you, mon gars.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

Jan 28, 2015 3:22:38 GMT -6 D. N. Vercáriâ said:

I wonder what's the point of anonymous cartoons in a society that advocates free speech. There'll always be the red herring of guessing the cartoonist's identity and their intentions, and a taste of sniping for the mere benefit of causing trouble instead of offering some kind of criticism, or creative lightheartedness at best.

Beric'ht is (successfully) trying to offer quality journalism every fortnight, but as cartoons are like headlines and regular cartoonists the hallmark of a paper or magazine, some of (S:reu?) "Mildew's" cartoons are thwarting the good work of the writing staff.

There are several reasons why I don't exercise very much editorial control, and further why we accept anonymous submissions. Let me just quote what I said before about the historic importance and specific reasons for anonymous contributions:

Beric'ht Talossan exists to report on the news and events of modern Talossa for today's readers and for posterity, to promote Talossan culture's growth within our borders and to the wider world, and to provide a platform for the free and fearless exchange of ideas. Our commitment to this mission has helped us grow from a small knot of three contributors to our current staff of fifteen extraordinarily talented individuals from all across the political spectrum, united by their desire to have fun reporting the news and spreading the culture and promoting their ideas. The dedication and skill of our team at the paper (and podcast) is truly humbling, and I believe it has only been possible because of some of our rules.

Anonymous contributions are accepted because otherwise threats and intimidation might make it impossible for the cartoonists to continue their work, especially when their opinions are unpopular or controversial. I could elaborate, but I will instead point to the famous words of Justice Stevens of the United States Supreme Court, who put it well in "MCINTYRE v. OHIO ELECTIONS COMMISSION" when he said:

Great works of literature have frequently been produced by authors writing under assumed names. Despite readers' curiosity and the public's interest in identifying the creator of a work of art, an author generally is free to decide whether or not to disclose his or her true identity. The decision in favor of anonymity may be motivated by fear of economic or official retaliation, by concern about social ostracism, or merely by a desire to preserve as much of one's privacy as possible. Whatever the motivation may be, at least in the field of literary endeavor, the interest in having anonymous works enter the marketplace of ideas unquestionably outweighs any public interest in requiring disclosure as a condition of entry. Accordingly, an author's decision to remain anonymous, like other decisions concerning omissions or additions to the content of a publication, is an aspect of the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment. ... On occasion, quite apart from any threat of persecution, an advocate may believe her ideas will be more persuasive if her readers are unaware of her identity. Anonymity thereby provides a way for a writer who may be personally unpopular to ensure that readers will not prejudge her message simply because they do not like its proponent.

In the Western world, there is a very long tradition of publishing controversial ideas under a pen name, to protect one's reputation from association with one's ideas, or one's ideas from association with one's reputation. Candide was published under the nom de plume "Monsieur le docteur Ralph," while The Federalist Papers were published by "Publius." Political cartoons began as almost exclusively anonymous, and continued that way through most of their history, perhaps because they can be so powerful and so inflammatory.

I have personally gotten an anonymous threat for publishing the paper ("You will regret corrupting so many people"), and I have many times seen how someone can become a designated target for expressing an unpopular opinion, so I feel very sure that the paper's policy is the right thing to do. Posterity supports it, as well as good sense, and we need a place to air unpopular ideas without fear of retribution.

After carefully considering your arguments, and after referring around the Web for the ethics of publishing pseudonymous work (very different than anonymous sourcing, incidentally) including the opinion of the Society of Professional Journalists, I conclude that it is better for the paper and better for the country if Beric'ht Talossan maintains its policy of accepting regularly submitted pseudonymous work, barring only libelous or unpublishable material.

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

I think a vital point which has thus far been missed is that your contention that you do not know who "Mildew" is lacks any credibility, considering how small this country is, and how much of a tiny subset among those are people who are such close, even fanatical, partisans of a pro-RUMP anti-Republican politics. Even if it isn't you, you know who it is. Hell, even I know who it is, to within 5 individuals.

Anonymity is ridiculous in a community whose active members number in the low dozens.