[Lnc-business] Publishing links to candidate articles with some platform deviations

Caryn Ann Harlos caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
Tue Mar 27 22:55:20 EDT 2018


This  is how we have done it successfully.  And the disclaimer can be done
very politely and professionally that will not embarrass the candidate.  I
would hope that candidates would make that disclaimer themselves.  Just as
an activist I always clearly say when I deviate from an LP position or when
it is unsettled (most notable example being abortion).

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 6:58 PM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
wrote:

>    Well, I'm clearly outnumbered, and it's situation-dependent, but as a
>    general matter, I think I'd rather not do it than use a disclaimer (but
>    I favor running things without the disclaimer, and if we can't do that,
>    then just not running it - and, given our current system, I'm happy
>    leaving that decision to the APRC and staff).  There are probably
>    circumstances where I'm fine with the disclaimer, and circumstances
>    where I'm less fine.
>
>    Joshua A. Katz
>    On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 7:08 PM, <[1]erin.adams at lp.org> wrote:
>
>      I am comfortable with this
>
>    On 2018-03-27 18:55, Elizabeth Van Horn wrote:
>
>      I favor this method. As it allows for highlighting a candidate,
>      while
>      simultaneously alerting readers that the LP platform differs
>      somewhat.
>      ---
>      Elizabeth Van Horn
>      LNC Region 3 (IN, MI, OH, KY)
>      Secretary Libertarian Party of Madison Co, Indiana
>      Chair-LP Social Media Process Review Committee
>      Vice-Chair Libertarian Pragmatist Caucus
>      [2]http://www.lpcaucus.org/
>      On 2018-03-27 15:14, Whitney Bilyeu wrote:
>
>      What if we just ask staff to include in the blog post a disclaimer
>      of
>         sorts with any such link....acknowledging that there may be
>      specific
>         opinions held by the candidate that are not 100% our own...?
>         Whitney
>         On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 1:36 PM, Wes Benedict
>      <[1][3]wes.benedict at lp.org>
>         wrote:
>           Dear LNC:
>           I'm bringing this to your attention now, because it has not
>      been an
>           issue for several months, but likely will come up again soon
>      given
>           that we have lots of candidates and will be writing lots of
>      blog
>           entries about candidates this year.
>           Staff works to publish articles that comply with the LNC Bylaws
>      and
>           Policy Manual. The Advertising Publications and Review
>      Committee is
>           tasked with ensuring publications comply.
>           I'd like to point out that I think Staff and the APRC have had
>      a
>           pretty good working relationship for at least 3 years and
>      perhaps
>           even longer than that if I think about it. So, this is not
>      meant as
>           a complaint in general about the APRC, Staff, or the overall
>           procedures. Most things are fine in that area, in my opinion. I
>      just
>           want to focus on one issue.
>           Nevertheless, it should come as no surprise that various
>      members of
>           the APRC and various staff don't always agree with each other
>      on
>           what constitutes a violation.
>           A particular area of uncertainty has been articles with
>      coverage of
>           candidates where the articles include some positions that
>      violate
>           platform.
>           I'll use public schools as a hypothetical, and the article
>      below
>           from the imaginary "Alexandria Beach Times."
>           ====start article====
>           [Sentence 1] John Doe, Libertarian candidate for Congress, says
>      he
>           wants to cut taxes, cut spending, end the war on drugs, and
>      bring
>           our troops home from overseas.
>           [Sentence 2] When asked about public education, John Doe says
>      "I'd
>           like to use some of the savings from those cuts to increase
>      spending
>           on public schools."
>           ====end article====
>           I think most of the APRC and Staff would feel it's okay to
>      write a
>           blog and to quote Sentence 1 of the article above. Most of the
>      APRC
>           and Staff would probably feel it's NOT okay to quote Sentence
>      2.
>           The area of likely disagreement is whether or not we could
>      include a
>           link to the source article in our blog entry.
>           If there was an article where 50% or more of the content about
>      the
>           Libertarian candidate had platform violations, probably most of
>      us
>           wouldn't want to publicize it.
>           There can be a great article about one of our candidates where
>      90%
>           of the coverage is positive, but if 10% of the article includes
>      a
>           platform violation, we maybe should not link to it, or maybe we
>           should.
>           I used public school spending as an example above, but all
>      kinds of
>           things have come up in the past, such as opposing legalization
>      of
>           hard drugs (or letting the states decide on that), the Fair
>      Tax,
>           welfare, some regulations, and so on.
>           I would like direction from the LNC on whether or not it is
>      okay to
>           publish things like blogs that links with some positions that
>      might
>           violate the platform.
>           Based on feedback, I might float a suggest amendment to the
>      Policy
>           Manual for you all to consider at the upcoming LNC meeting.
>           I can work comfortabl[4]y with whichever direction the LNC
>      might go on
>           this particular issue, but I think it's an important enough
>      issue
>           that has come up quite a bit in the past, that it should be
>           considered by the LNC.
>           If the LNC prefers to leave the decision up to the APRC, that
>      is
>           another option I'm comfortable with. In fact, I think that's
>      the
>           status quo right now, however, given recent changes in the
>      APRC, I
>           could not tell you how they'd rule on the above issue.
>           Thanks,
>           --
>           Wes Benedict, Executive Director
>           Libertarian National Committee, Inc.
>           [2]1444 Duke St., Alexandria, VA 22314
>           [3][5](202) 333-0008 ext. 232, [4][6]wes.benedict at lp.org
>           [5][7]facebook.com/libertarians @LPNational
>           Join the Libertarian Party at: [6][8]http://lp.org/membership
>      References
>         1. mailto:[9]wes.benedict at lp.org
>         2.
>      [10]https://maps.google.com/?q=1444+Duke+St.,+Alexandria,+VA+223
>      14&entry=gmail&source=g
>         3. tel:[11](202) 333-0008 ext. 232
>         4. mailto:[12]wes.benedict at lp.org
>         5. [13]http://facebook.com/libertarians
>         6. [14]http://lp.org/membership
>
> References
>
>    1. mailto:erin.adams at lp.org
>    2. http://www.lpcaucus.org/
>    3. mailto:wes.benedict at lp.org
>    4. https://maps.google.com/?q=y+with+whichever+direction+the+
> LNC+&entry=gmail&source=g
>    5. tel:(202) 333-0008 ext. 232
>    6. mailto:wes.benedict at lp.org
>    7. http://facebook.com/libertarians
>    8. http://lp.org/membership
>    9. mailto:wes.benedict at lp.org
>   10. https://maps.google.com/?q=1444+Duke+St
>   11. tel:(202) 333-0008 ext. 232
>   12. mailto:wes.benedict at lp.org
>   13. http://facebook.com/libertarians
>   14. http://lp.org/membership
>



-- 
-- 
*In Liberty,*
*Caryn Ann Harlos*
Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona,
Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
<http://www.lpcolorado.org/>
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee

A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
*We defend your rights*
*And oppose the use of force*
*Taxation is theft*
-------------- next part --------------
   This  is how we have done it successfully.  And the disclaimer can be
   done very politely and professionally that will not embarrass the
   candidate.  I would hope that candidates would make that disclaimer
   themselves.  Just as an activist I always clearly say when I deviate
   from an LP position or when it is unsettled (most notable example being
   abortion).

   On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 6:58 PM, Joshua Katz
   <[1]planning4liberty at gmail.com> wrote:

        Well, I'm clearly outnumbered, and it's situation-dependent, but
     as a
        general matter, I think I'd rather not do it than use a
     disclaimer (but
        I favor running things without the disclaimer, and if we can't do
     that,
        then just not running it - and, given our current system, I'm
     happy
        leaving that decision to the APRC and staff).  There are probably
        circumstances where I'm fine with the disclaimer, and
     circumstances
        where I'm less fine.
        Joshua A. Katz
        On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 7:08 PM, <[1][2]erin.adams at lp.org> wrote:
          I am comfortable with this
        On 2018-03-27 18:55, Elizabeth Van Horn wrote:
          I favor this method. As it allows for highlighting a candidate,
          while
          simultaneously alerting readers that the LP platform differs
          somewhat.
          ---
          Elizabeth Van Horn
          LNC Region 3 (IN, MI, OH, KY)
          Secretary Libertarian Party of Madison Co, Indiana
          Chair-LP Social Media Process Review Committee
          Vice-Chair Libertarian Pragmatist Caucus
          [2][3]http://www.lpcaucus.org/
          On 2018-03-27 15:14, Whitney Bilyeu wrote:
          What if we just ask staff to include in the blog post a
     disclaimer
          of
             sorts with any such link....acknowledging that there may be
          specific
             opinions held by the candidate that are not 100% our own...?
             Whitney
             On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 1:36 PM, Wes Benedict
          <[1][3][4]wes.benedict at lp.org>

           wrote:
             Dear LNC:
             I'm bringing this to your attention now, because it has not
        been an
             issue for several months, but likely will come up again soon
        given
             that we have lots of candidates and will be writing lots of
        blog
             entries about candidates this year.
             Staff works to publish articles that comply with the LNC
   Bylaws
        and
             Policy Manual. The Advertising Publications and Review
        Committee is
             tasked with ensuring publications comply.
             I'd like to point out that I think Staff and the APRC have
   had
        a
             pretty good working relationship for at least 3 years and
        perhaps
             even longer than that if I think about it. So, this is not
        meant as
             a complaint in general about the APRC, Staff, or the overall
             procedures. Most things are fine in that area, in my opinion.
   I
        just
             want to focus on one issue.
             Nevertheless, it should come as no surprise that various
        members of
             the APRC and various staff don't always agree with each other
        on
             what constitutes a violation.
             A particular area of uncertainty has been articles with
        coverage of
             candidates where the articles include some positions that
        violate
             platform.
             I'll use public schools as a hypothetical, and the article
        below
             from the imaginary "Alexandria Beach Times."
             ====start article====
             [Sentence 1] John Doe, Libertarian candidate for Congress,
   says
        he
             wants to cut taxes, cut spending, end the war on drugs, and
        bring
             our troops home from overseas.
             [Sentence 2] When asked about public education, John Doe says
        "I'd
             like to use some of the savings from those cuts to increase
        spending
             on public schools."
             ====end article====
             I think most of the APRC and Staff would feel it's okay to
        write a
             blog and to quote Sentence 1 of the article above. Most of
   the
        APRC
             and Staff would probably feel it's NOT okay to quote Sentence
        2.
             The area of likely disagreement is whether or not we could
        include a
             link to the source article in our blog entry.
             If there was an article where 50% or more of the content
   about
        the
             Libertarian candidate had platform violations, probably most
   of
        us
             wouldn't want to publicize it.
             There can be a great article about one of our candidates
   where
        90%
             of the coverage is positive, but if 10% of the article
   includes
        a
             platform violation, we maybe should not link to it, or maybe
   we
             should.
             I used public school spending as an example above, but all
        kinds of
             things have come up in the past, such as opposing
   legalization
        of
             hard drugs (or letting the states decide on that), the Fair
        Tax,
             welfare, some regulations, and so on.
             I would like direction from the LNC on whether or not it is
        okay to
             publish things like blogs that links with some positions that
        might
             violate the platform.
             Based on feedback, I might float a suggest amendment to the
        Policy
             Manual for you all to consider at the upcoming LNC meeting.

               I can work comfortabl[4]y with whichever direction the LNC
          might go on
               this particular issue, but I think it's an important
     enough
          issue
               that has come up quite a bit in the past, that it should
     be
               considered by the LNC.
               If the LNC prefers to leave the decision up to the APRC,
     that
          is
               another option I'm comfortable with. In fact, I think
     that's
          the
               status quo right now, however, given recent changes in the
          APRC, I
               could not tell you how they'd rule on the above issue.
               Thanks,
               --
               Wes Benedict, Executive Director
               Libertarian National Committee, Inc.
               [2]1444 Duke St., Alexandria, VA 22314
               [3][5][5](202) 333-0008 ext. 232,
     [4][6][6]wes.benedict at lp.org
               [5][7][7]facebook.com/libertarians @LPNational
               Join the Libertarian Party at:
     [6][8][8]http://lp.org/membership
          References
             1. mailto:[9][9]wes.benedict at lp.org
             2.
          [10][10]https://maps.google.com/?q=1444+Duke+St.,+Alexandria,+
     VA+223
          14&entry=gmail&source=g
             3. tel:[11][11](202) 333-0008 ext. 232
             4. mailto:[12][12]wes.benedict at lp.org
             5. [13][13]http://facebook.com/libertarians
             6. [14][14]http://lp.org/membership
     References
        1. mailto:[15]erin.adams at lp.org
        2. [16]http://www.lpcaucus.org/
        3. mailto:[17]wes.benedict at lp.org
        4. [18]https://maps.google.com/?q=y+with+whichever+direction+the+
     LNC+&entry=gmail&source=g
        5. tel:[19](202) 333-0008 ext. 232
        6. mailto:[20]wes.benedict at lp.org
        7. [21]http://facebook.com/libertarians
        8. [22]http://lp.org/membership
        9. mailto:[23]wes.benedict at lp.org
       10. [24]https://maps.google.com/?q=1444+Duke+St
       11. tel:[25](202) 333-0008 ext. 232
       12. mailto:[26]wes.benedict at lp.org
       13. [27]http://facebook.com/libertarians
       14. [28]http://lp.org/membership

   --
   --
   In Liberty,
   Caryn Ann Harlos
   Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
   Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington)
   - [29]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org
   Communications Director, [30]Libertarian Party of Colorado
   Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
   A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
   We defend your rights
   And oppose the use of force
   Taxation is theft

References

   1. mailto:planning4liberty at gmail.com
   2. mailto:erin.adams at lp.org
   3. http://www.lpcaucus.org/
   4. mailto:wes.benedict at lp.org
   5. tel:(202) 333-0008 ext. 232
   6. mailto:wes.benedict at lp.org
   7. http://facebook.com/libertarians
   8. http://lp.org/membership
   9. mailto:wes.benedict at lp.org
  10. https://maps.google.com/?q=1444+Duke+St
  11. tel:(202) 333-0008 ext. 232
  12. mailto:wes.benedict at lp.org
  13. http://facebook.com/libertarians
  14. http://lp.org/membership
  15. mailto:erin.adams at lp.org
  16. http://www.lpcaucus.org/
  17. mailto:wes.benedict at lp.org
  18. https://maps.google.com/?q=y+with+whichever+direction+the+LNC+&entry=gmail&source=g
  19. tel:(202) 333-0008 ext. 232
  20. mailto:wes.benedict at lp.org
  21. http://facebook.com/libertarians
  22. http://lp.org/membership
  23. mailto:wes.benedict at lp.org
  24. https://maps.google.com/?q=1444+Duke+St
  25. tel:(202) 333-0008 ext. 232
  26. mailto:wes.benedict at lp.org
  27. http://facebook.com/libertarians
  28. http://lp.org/membership
  29. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  30. http://www.lpcolorado.org/


More information about the Lnc-business mailing list