So the Monadnock Ledger-Transcript emailed with us (and flamed out in a Twitter flame war). The next step was to turn in the other direction and email the League of Women Voters’ Peterborough organizer:
On May 3, 2019, at 11:52 AM, Skip <Skip@granitegrok.com> wrote:
Dear Ms Coon,
I am in receipt of your email missive concerning the Candidates Night that your organization is holding for Peterboro and immediately saw some restrictions:
Dear Candidate,
With less than a week to go before our “Meet the Candidates” Candidate Forum in co-sponsorship with the Monadnock Ledger-Transcript, we would like to let you know how the evening’s event will be structured.
Date: May 6, 2019
Time: 7-9 pm. CANDIDATES PLEASE ARRIVE: 6:40 pm.
Place: Bass Hall at The Monadnock Center for History and Culture, 19 Grove Street
The League of Women Voters is a non-partisan political organization dedicated to informing the voting public. One of our voter service activities is hosting candidate forums in order to allow the public to meet the candidates and hear their views on a variety of topics. The PeterboroughPlus unit hosted last year’s Peterborough Candidate Forum (also moderated by Liz Tentarelli, President of LWVNH) as well as Candidate Forums for House of Representatives and State Senate races. We have a proven track record for fair, informative, non-partisan Candidate Forums.
PLEASE READ CAREFULLY THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION ABOUT EVENT PROTOCOL
<snip>
• No filming or videotaping allowed. The Ledger-Transcript will cover the event and they are permitted to take photographs.
<snip>
GraniteGrok is the (depending on the week) either the fourth or fifth largest online media presence here in NH (as measured by Google’s Alexa website rating service) putting us behind only the Union Leader, Fosters, Seacoast Online, and we and the Concord Monitor keep swapping places. We have been active in NH since 2006.
Why is the only media outlet that is “allowed” entrance to the even the Ledger-Transcript (whom I have contacted)? Why are other press organizations not allowed to attend? If any of the above-mentioned media outlets were to come to the event, would you be turning them away at the door as well?
We are looking forward to hearing the reasoning behind this.
Yes, GraniteGrok.com are a partisan site blogging from the Right of Center, especially in our opinion pieces. We do, however, have a solid reputation that when we go to events such as your that we put up the entire video of events as part of our “citizen journalism” efforts and we keep our opinions out of such coverage – it is up to the readership to decide for themselves. Thus, under the protection of the First Amendment rights granted to a free press, we should be allowed to cover your event just like any other media outlet.
Already we have heard from several of the candidates now declining to participate as we have opined on these kinds of restrictions – they are fearful that without recording backups, they will be misquoted or quoted out of context; the news is getting out.
– Skip
Co-founder and owner
GraniteGrok.com
Hmm, shoulda proofed that email a bit better than I did.
Again, any group that represents itself as a political organization as “non-partisan” isn’t telling the truth. If you are playing in the political arena, you ARE partisan. Any attempt to disguise it, be it the No Labels group, the Solutions group, or any other name one might choose but who takes part in political policies or processes is, by definition, partisan. GraniteGrok is no different but we ARE honest in where we stand (like our leanings are any big secret, Right?).
Funny, however, in that while the Monadnock L-T decided on a back and forth, Ms. Coon didn’t want to debate any of the merits / points of my email. Instead:
From: “Kate2coon” <kate2coon@gmail.com>
To: “Skip” <Skip@granitegrok.com>
Cc: “Liz Tentarelli” <lwv@kenliz.net>; “Meghan Pierce” <mpierce@ledgertranscript.com>
Sent: 5/3/2019 4:43:43 PM
Subject: Re: LWV / PeterboroughPlus Candidates night – Free Press restrictionsDear Skip,
Thank you for your inquiry. I am forwarding it to Liz Tentarelli, president of the LWVNH, for her consideration.
We will get back to you.
Sincerely,
Kate Coon
Okey-dokey, then. I would have thought that the local person would have the authority to make decisions on their own events but hey, each org to their own. But in their defense, an answer came back – positively. Emphasis mine but the jist of the entirety is that the original restrictions applied to reporting / recording / videoing no longer exist.
From: “kate coon” <kate2coon@gmail.com>
To: <redacted>
Sent: 5/3/2019 9:49:54 PM
Subject: Fwd: candidate forum protocolsDear Candidates and other interested parties:Thank you for the concerns some of you raised vis a vis the protocols and practices for Monday’s (May 6) Peterborough Candidate Forum. As promised, I consulted with Liz Tentarelli, President of LWVNH and our moderator for the Forum. She brought to bear on these issues her characteristic thoughtfulness, knowledge of the law and fairness. Although it is late in the evening, and in the week, I did want to get this email out to you still well in advance of the Forum. I hope this is helpful, and I look forward to our all doing our part in “making democracy work” in Peterborough at our Candidate Forum. We look forward to your participation.
Sincerely,
Kate Coon
Chair, PeterboroughPlus Unit, LWVNH———- Forwarded message ———
From: Liz Tentarelli
Date: Fri, May 3, 2019 at 5:33 PM
Subject: candidate forum protocols
To: Kate2coon <kate2coon@gmail.com>Hi Kate,
I understand that some of the candidates and the media have asked you about the procedures for candidate forums that League of Women Voters follow, so I will attempt to explain them. Feel free to forward this to the candidates and the media.
The League at the national and state levels has long had a tradition of asking that candidates not record or tape the forums with the intention of using excerpts as part of their campaigns. Comments taken out of context can easily be misunderstood. “No using just the juicy parts” is the way I’ve explained it in the past. Our intention is to give those in attendance or those viewing the forum via local cable access or YouTube live the full picture–the questions and answers in their entirety so that voters can assess the candidates fairly. Therefore we ask that any taping or recording of a forum for broadcast be aired in its entirety.
I interject here: the original email only said pictures and not until the end of the Monadnock Ledger-Transcript Twitter flame war was “livestreaming” mentioned.
I don’t know whether Peterborough has a local TV or radio station that would broadcast the entire forum. If so, we would ask that they air the whole forum, even if they must do it in half-hour segments over a period of several days. When the League did national level debates, they were bound by FCC regulations of giving equal time to all participants and never having just one candidate on the stage (called an “empty chair debate”). Ever since we expect that any taping for broadcast follow the same guidelines: show the whole thing so that voters can make up their own minds, and invite all the candidates for the office as determined by criteria set up in advance.
We’ve been doing this for years – letting readers decide for themselves. Other than a couple of “humor” related times, the only time we did a much shorter excerpt was when Bill Binnie who said that “the separation of church and State like it says in our Constitution” in front of the Rochester 9-12 Senatorial debate several election cycles ago (and I still put up the much longer video for complete context). This we will have no problem with AND if I can get a reasonable signal, we’ll be livestreaming it as well.
But here’s the important part:
The law, however, is very clear that at a public event–whether it’s a legislative hearing or a candidates forum–the public has the right to record. League acknowledges that. We request that there not be a camera right in a candidate’s face nor that there be a bank of microphones. For the candidates in the local forums we do, this is intimidating. We also ask that the candidates agree not to use excerpted pieces in their campaigns, such as Facebook posts of their opponents’ awkward moments. When we ask candidates not to record the event, it removes the temptation to do that. But it is not possible for us to enforce a “no recording” edict, as the law allows the public and the press to do that.
I also understand that someone has questioned a time limit on answers to questions. With multiple candidates on the stage, obviously the time limit is intended to be fair to all answering and to keep the audience engaged. The moderator has the discretion to extend the time limit or to allow a second round of answers if the question is a complex one that might require further explanation. I have moderated many forums in the past 20 years, and I have on occasion said that everyone could have another minute (after the initial answers) to address other points that candidates raised in their answers. We don’t do this often as it gets both confusing and boring, but occasionally the moderator makes that decision. We have also asked for very short answers to some questions too, just to vary the pace and keep up the interest.
Local forums are always interesting, and League’s goal is to make them informative and fair so that voters leave with more information than
when they arrived. I hope this helps explain why League of Women Voters has these protocols.Liz Tentarelli, president, League of Women Voters NH
In keeping with our “Thank them when they’re right and spank’em when they’re wrong” – we say “THANK YOU” for knowing and adhering to The Law and Constitutional norms. I’m also glad to see that the timing for the candidates may also be relaxed a bit as well. Two sentences for an into just isn’t going to “make an intro” and if a question is asked, sound bites can’t adequately address what can be a complex or historical type of answer (if something needs context as either a recap or for newbies).
So, GraniteGrok will be going with camera equipment – it shall be interesting.
More in a bit…
