Best Movies of the Season

I'm still waiting for Clint Eastwood's Million Dollar Baby, but until then: I've enjoyed watching Jamie Foxx in Ray (a better performance than a movie, but a pretty good movie); Paul Giamatti in Sideways (he was even better in American Spectator, but there's a priceless moment in Sideways -- a Paul-and-Bart-Giamatti real-father-and-son moment -- when Paul's character is sneaking money out of his mom's dresser); and Cloris Leachman, who all but steals Spanglish. Kate Winslet doesn't have a lot to do in Finding Neverland, but seeing that film reminded me of her fabulous work in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.

I have a few days left to see what's worth seeing, and I like to see the good stuff when it's in the theater. What have I missed?

Don't Let It Happen Here

Rick Santorum's ghost-written plea for including "intelligent design" in the public schools is creationism masquerading as "academic freedom." The Senator's message is prompted by the outcry over the decision by the school board in Dover, PA to incorporate creationism (currently abbreviated "ID" but only for convenience) into the high school biology curriculum.

So-called "intelligent design" isn't science, and there's no room for it in classrooms that purport to offer science education. Don't take my word for it; read the wonderful and thoughtful blog, The Panda's Thumb. If the debate over ID comes to Pittsburgh, the blog is a terrific resource for responding to ID claims.

P-G Wish List for Pittsburgh

From Friday's Post-Gazette: the arts and culture critics make wish lists for Pittsburgh.

Dave Wannstedt Must Go

The fact that incoming Pitt football coach Dave Wannstedt wouldn't take the job unless every one of his assistants gets $100,000 per year doesn't embarrass me, as a Pitt employee. No, I'm embarrassed by the fact that the University apparently gave in to Wannstedt's demand. Not only does every assistant get at least $100,000, but the offensive and defensive coordinators get $250,000 to $300,000 apiece.

No doubt Pitt's custodial and clerical staffs are delighted by the University's generosity.

And one word to Pitt athletes: Union! If there's that much money floating around Oakland, then you all should get a bigger cut.

No Fun League Hits Stillers Fans

The P-G reports this morning on NFL henchmen tracking down and seizing "counterfeit" Big Ben Roethlisberger merchandise. This sounds like run-of-the-mill legal stuff, but it's not. The idea that sports teams have the "exclusive" legal right to sell team merchandise is a pretty new one in the trademark world, and it's controversial enough that a case involving a man who wanted to sell "unauthorized" scarves, etc. to supporters of the Arsenal Football Club (part of the English Premier Division) went all the way to the European Court of Justice last year. The ECJ more or less ruled for the team (more or less because the ECJ doesn't work quite the way the U.S. Supreme Court works), but when the case was returned later to the English courts, the judge there did somersaults to rule against the team -- because in terms of traditional trademark law, the team has no case.

U.S. law is just different enough that no one is likely to step in and object to the NFL's tactics. But there is a problem, and the problem is that the "NFL" and "National Football League" trademarks (technically, they are "service marks") refer to football. (The original Trademark Office registration for "National Football League" describes the services covered as "promoting the interests of member football clubs, scheduling games, and promoting interest in football.") I can't start a football league and call it "National Football League"; I have to get the NFL's permission.

Shirts, hats, scarves, etc. are, traditionally, a different matter. McDonald's is a trademark for hamburgers because it tells you what quality to expect (McDonald's quality) when you drive through the Golden Arches. NFL is a trademark for football because it tells you what quality to expect when you go to Heinz Field or listen to Bill, Myron, and Tunch. Traditionally, the NFL hasn't been in the business of selling shirts. Shirts, etc. are ancillary to the game. They're part of being a supporter of the team, not a part of running a team. Look at it this way: When you buy a Big Ben jersey, do you buy it thinking, "I got a great jersey because I know it came from those trustworthy NFL factories"? I doubt it. You buy it because you love your team, or that player, or your city, or all of the above. It's a sign of appreciation and loyalty, not a sign of a certain level of quality.

Why does any of this matter? It matters twice: First, it matters because driving t-shirt vendors out of business drives up the price of being a fan. If all you can buy are "authorized" NFL jerseys, then you can be sure that the "authorized" jerseys will cost you an arm and a leg. That's bad for fans, and it's especially bad for kids who want to be fans. Second, it matters because it allows the criminal justice system to get righteous on behalf of a rich organization -- the NFL -- that keeps most of the money from merchandise sales and that is obviously capable of handling its own affairs in this area. The P-G quotes local U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan: "'The crime,' she said, 'is actually a very serious one.' Penalties range from a fine of up to $2 million and 10 years in prison for the first offense to $5 million and 20 years in prison for the second offense." Don't federal crime-fighters have, like, terrorists to catch? Why are they hassling t-shirt vendors in the Strip?

SableGate: Notes and a New Hypothesis

As expected, a close reading of the contracts between the Mt. Lebanon School District and its former Superintendent, Margery Sable, adds little to what we already know (or I should say, don't know) about the reasons for her departure. I do have a new hypothesis, though, about what happened here. Read on.

The contract under which M. Sable was hired provides not only that her salary after her first year in the position "shall be based upon the Board's evaluation of the Superintendent's performance . . . ." (we knew this; M. Sable didn't get a raise last summer, after completing her first year). The contract also provides that "[t]he Board shall evaluate, in writing, the perfomance of the Superintendent no later than June 30 of each year, using a mutually agreed upon method as a basis for said evaluation." What that means is: There may be a couple of "smoking gun" documents out there -- one of them containing the rules of evaluation, and a second one containing the evaluation itself. It's possible that the rules were included in the evaluation, leading us to one document in total. It's also possible that the two sides never even agreed on the rules for evaluating her performance -- meaning, no smoking gun. The absence of a performance review can be significant in itself; it's a real-life version of Arthur Conan Doyle's curious incident of the dog in the night-time. Curious, of course, because the dog didn't bark.

I kind of like the hypothesis that the dog didn't bark, that the disagreement between the Superintendent and the Board was so profound that they couldn't even agree on the standards to apply to her evaluation.

Among the "Recitals" at the beginning of the Separation Agreement (a "recital" being a lawyer's way of writing out the reasons for entering into the contract, such as "Party A desires to do business with Party B," and so on) is this: "Superintendent has performed the duties and obligations pursuant to the Contract." The "Contract" is the original employment contract (see above), and what that contract requires is that the Superintendent "perform the duties of Superintendent of Schools in a competent and professional manner subject to the policies and regulations of the Board and the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania." Ordinarily, as a lawyer I wouldn't be inclined to put much weight on something in a Recital -- most of this stuff is included as a formality -- but then again, I'm reluctant to write off its inclusion as mere sloppy work as a lawyer. It sure sounds like M. Sable was doing what she was hired to do: run a school district.

The recital, though, should be paired with the paragraph on Confidentiality:

The District, including individual board members, and Superintendent agree that the statement set forth in Exhibit "A" hereto [which says that "the Agreement was reached because of differences of opinion with respect to the administration of the School District."] shall be the sole communication as to the circumstances of Superintendent's separation. No further comment will be made by District, or individual board members, or Superintendent . . . and both parties agree to maintain the confidentiality of such information except as is otherwise required by law; provided, however, that the District and/or its representatives may explain and defend the terms and conditions of this Agreement provided: (a) a request for production of this Agreement has been made and granted pursuant to the Right-to-Know Law, as amended, . . . and (b) inquiries are directed to the District and or its representatives concerning the terms and conditions of this Agreement. However, any explanation and defense of this Agreement shall not include comments on the Superintendent's performance of the duties of her office.

I put that last phrase in italics, because it's not just strange; it all but broadcasts the point that "the Superintendent's performance of the duties of her office" was the reason for her "separation" from the District. It also turns the secrecy objection to the negotiation of the deal on its head; the language sure makes it sound like M. Sable bought the silence of the Board, not the other way around.

Now, one way to reconcile this confidentiality clause with the recital is to conclude that Board members are prevented from talking about what a wonderful job M. Sable was doing. Somehow, that doesn't strike me as the right explanation of what was going on. Here's a different hypothesis: Given the way the agreement is written, it strikes me as plausible that Board members were unbelievably unhappy with M. Sable's performance. So unhappy, in fact, that M. Sable threatened to pursue a defamation claim against the Board. Let's assume, for argument's sake, that such a claim would have been groundless. It's fair to assume nonetheless that it would have been extremely expensive and time-consuming to resolve through the courts, not to mention enormously embarrassing for Mt. Lebanon, its schools, and members of the Board. Instead, the two sides walked away from each other, M. Sable negotiated for inclusion in the agreement of the recital regarding performance of her duties, and the Board is forever silenced from ever disclosing what it was that M. Sable was so concerned about. M. Sable can go on to her next job with her reputation intact. Mt. Lebanon takes a serious one-time hit to its reputation but avoids having its School District dragged through the mud for the two to three years that a defamation suit would have occupied. If I'm a member of the School Board, I can see the logic in that. As a taxpayer, I'm not thrilled with it, but I can sort of see the logic, too. Of course, not all of the loose ends are tied up. We're still left to wonder what it is, precisely, that is so explosive that its revelation would be (let us suppose further) career-ending for M. Sable. But that's just gossip; the hypothesis, if it proves out, explains both the Board's agreeing to the separation, and its secrecy.

Peduto Feels a Draft

Anticipating Mr. Tom Murphy's decision not to seek reelection, a group of concerned citizens set up a Draft Bill Peduto blog back in late November.

Tube City on Open Meetings

Jason at Tube City Online went me several steps better the other day, carrying on about secret dealings by local politicians (school directors chief among them) and their enablers -- us. From his December 17 entry:

Some bright --- make that "brave" --- state legislator needs to get some tougher public disclosure laws in place for all public elected bodies in Pennsylvania. Right now, the number of public records that are not available for the public to look at --- things as basic as police incident reports --- is stunning and sickening.

Or, say, the employment contracts of school superintendents.

News organizations have been agitating for tougher disclosure laws for years, but with their public credibility and respect hovering somewhere between "grave robbers" and "loan sharks," they're not exactly the best ones to be running the ball.

So writing angry letters to the editor, or going to board meetings to yell at the school directors, is just a lot of wasted energy. The newspapers know, and are powerless to do anything; the school board members know, and they don't care.

Instead, people in the Mon-Yough area, Mt. Lebanon or elsewhere who feel like they've been played for fools need to channel their anger into a lobbying effort, focused on their state senators and legislators, and directed at getting sweeping reforms of the state Public School Code (which hasn't been overhauled since 1949!) and the Open Meetings and Open Records laws. They're the only ones who have any power or motivation to change things.

Speaking of SableGate, copies of M. Sable's original employment agreement and her separation agreement are floating around the In-boxes of Mt. Lebanon, including mine. I'll post more after I've had time to look at them. But I'm not expecting to find anything interesting.

Best of the Pittsburgh Underground in 2004?

The title of the post says it all. Of course, if you post a "best of the underground" comment, then it's not quite underground any more. But the blog is running at about 200 page views per day, so the secret may still be safe.

Pudge Heffelfinger Was Here

William "Pudge" Heffelfinger was the first ever to be paid, legitimately, to play a game of football. And it happened here in Pittsburgh, in 1892.

Pitt Technology Transfer About to Score Big Time?

The Pittsburgh Business Times reported last week that Stentor, a San Francisco company that is commercializing UPMC imaging technology, is poised to cash in via the public markets. In November, Stentor filed an S-1 (aka a registration statement) with the SEC, an essential step leading to an IPO:

Stentor licenses technology developed at the University of Pittsburgh. In fact, sources said it's the first Pitt licensee to go public. If the offering goes well -- Stentor hopes to raise $69 million, according to the SEC filings -- it will be a big image boost for the university's technology transfer efforts.

Standing to profit more directly are UPMC Health System, which owns 5.6 percent of the company and is one of Stentor's largest customers, and Lancet Capital, UPMC's venture capital arm, which is Stentor's largest investor. . . .

Stentor's picture archive and communications systems technology allows hospitals and doctors to share X-rays and other patient images electronically. Around 200 hospitals nationwide have purchased Stentor's technology, the documents said. . . . Last year, Stentor's sales were $20.2 million and through the first nine months of 2004, topped $25.1 million.

The paper didn't report the percentage of the company that's up for sale, so it's difficult to judge the scale of the tech transfer success. $69 million is nice, and it's some nice PR for Pitt and UPMC, but this doesn't sound like a home run. (Not that there's anything wrong with that.)

Pittsburgh Blogfest II: January 19

Christina at Inner Bitch announces Blogfest II, with a nod to Henery the Eighth. Pittsburgh bloggers will gather at Finnegan's Wake on the North Side on the evening of Wednesday, January 19 to do whatever it is that bloggers, well, do.

The Ethics of Blogging

All bloggers should take a look at this New York Times essay last Sunday by George Washington U. law professor and NYT and New Yorker contributor Jeffrey Rosen. Professor Rosen's academic speciality is privacy law (he's the author of the very good The Unwanted Gaze), and his main topic in the Times is how blogs blur the lines between the private and public lives of the people who write them -- and of the people they write about. He writes, "As blogs expand, people will need to develop new social conventions to resurrect the boundaries between public and private interactions."

This is thought-provoking stuff, but he's missing some things, I think, when he focuses on the surprise expressed by the involuntarily objects of blogging. One is what seems to be our innate voyeurism. We love to watch! What else explains the attraction of reality TV? Blogs usually lack the video, but they also lack commercials. Many of those who are shocked, shocked (!) to find themselves described on blogs don't think twice about watching Survivor or The Apprentice or whatever it is that MTV shows. Two is the flip side of the voyeur in all of us: our innate desire to narrate our lives. The blogosphere is a Wide World of Sports for our daily lives, broadcasting the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat. Now if your agony is on someone else's blog, you might wish that you had Al Michaels as a commentator, but you ended up with Myron Cope, and I understand your unhappiness. But hey! You're on TV!

Ah well, but what about the involuntariness of it all? Why should those whose lives are blogged be subject to the whims of bloggers? Here I wonder if Professor Rosen is mistaken in the premise that our lives are basically private. He argues, in other words, that blogs push back on that by involuntarily exposing more of the paradigmatically private "us" than we'd like. But what if our lives are paradigmatically public to begin with, and it's up to to us to buy back our privacy? We do that in a lot of ways already; creating private space for ourselves is one of the things that homes are for. Does the burden of protecting privacy lie with the bloggers, or does it lie with the rest of us? Maybe, then, on this first day of winter, the point should be: If you don't want it to be blogged, go to the desert. Remember: WHIVSIV, or What Happens in Vegas, Stays in Vegas.

Pittsblog Blocked at Mellon Bank?

I've heard that access to Pittsblog is blocked by the servers at Mellon Bank. This sounds too weird to be true. But is Mellon trying to keep its people from blogging? Is it just me, or all blogspot-hosted blogs, or all blogs?

If blogs are blocked, is subscribing to a feed via a service like bloglines likely to solve the problem?

Top 10 Pittsburgh Products of 2004

George Carlin once said that a house is just a place for your stuff. What's the best "stuff" that folks around here came up with in 2004? Stuff for the home, stuff for the office, stuff to eat, stuff to play with. Stuff for building or learning or computing. Neat stuff, cool stuff, boring stuff (?), geek stuff, jock stuff. Any stuff at all.

Top Ten Most Promising Pittsburgh Start-Ups for 2004

The arts and culture folks have had a chance; now it's time for geeks and corporate types to shine. (We'll do not-for-profits in a later post.) Let's hear about the ten most promising young companies in Pittsburgh. Any field. If the firm was founded in 2004, that's best of all.

Recursive Blogging

Some nice folks have linked to Pittsblog as a Pennsylvania Destination of the Day for December 15, 2004.

SableGate Update

The Tribune-Review has got its teeth into the Mt. Lebanon school superintendent situation, and it won't let go:

Columnist Eric Heyl: "Mt. Lebanon handled Sable's departure much like it was a covert CIA search operation for bin Laden, only more secretive."

The Margery Sable termination agreement has been added to the list of items under review by the state Auditor General, as part of a previously-scheduled state audit of the School District.

The Trib editorializes about the audit:

The Mt. Lebanon mess should inspire every Pennsylvania taxpayer to demand complete accountability from each of the 501 school districts in the commonwealth. . . . [A]ll contracts with confidentiality clauses [should be reviewed] to ensure public funds are being used properly until the Legislature finally bans the clauses in every government contract.

UPDATE: The Post-Gazette's South section today includes a story on the Mt. Lebanon School Board meeting held last Monday night. Board members acknowledged that conflict between the Board and Margery Sable had been brewing for six months before her resignation from the district. The nature of the conflict, however, was not disclosed. The Board also noted that the separation agreement was negotiated through a lawyer other than the district's solicitor. (I looked for the story on the P-G site this morning, but I can't find it. UPDATE 7 p.m.: Here it is.) The print P-G today also has a story about hiring a new superintendent in McKeesport (the former South Allegheny superintendent) under circumstances that some people find murky. UPDATE 7 p.m.: Here's the McKeesport story.

Pitt = Forlorn U.

I laughed this morning reading this column by S.F. Chronicle sportswriter Scott Ostler, describing Walt Harris's arrival at Stanford and his departure from Pitt -- aka "Forlorn U." Ostler was channelling the comments of former Stanford and S.F. 49ers coach Bill Walsh. The Great Bill said: "[Harris] built a good program, and it is hopeless there at Pittsburgh. That part of town is sooo forlorn!"

Ah, to be filled with righteous indignation over the snobbery of the white wine crowd! But I'm *from* the Palo Alto area (aka, locally, "Shangri-La"), and I even went to Stanford. If you live there, and if you drive through Oakland occasionally (maybe Walsh was last here when he was coaching in the NFL), then the place *does* look forlorn.

I never quite got why Pitt and Walt Harris didn't get along. I get the vague sense that Pitt thought that the coach was something of smarty-pants. What's worse in Pittsburgh than a coach who's a smarty-pants? Only university administrators and faculty are allowed to be smarty-pants! (Cowher is a smart coach, but he's the antithesis of a smarty-pants.) Stanford! Stanford is Smarty-Pants U.! Their coaches are all but members of the faculty. They should love Walt Harris there.

Top 10 Theatrical Productions in Pittsburgh for 2004

The title of this post should be self-explanatory. What were the best shows in the region in 2004? Personally, I lean towards exploring regional and local theater, but post your favorites, whatever they were.

Top Ten Community Events in Pittsburgh in 2004

The website list didn't attract much -- maybe it was Friday, or maybe the task was too daunting, or maybe people had other things to do. Here's an easier one:
What were the best community events in the region in 2004? This would be "community" at any level: city, borough, township, municipality, neighborhood, etc. Leave it loose and let it fly.

Pghbloggers.org in Today's P-G

The creation of Pghbloggers is the hook for today's Post-Gazette story about blogging in general. I only wish that the paper had given up the space to mention more Pgh blogs themselves.

Top 10 Pittsburgh Websites of 2004

You can't always tell when a site went up, or when a site was revised, and a "top website" is always a difficult thing to identify. What are the criteria? Let's exclude blogs, but otherwise -- post your favorites (live links are fine), with a bit of explanation. Is it the layout? The content? The coding? The colors? Have fun with the best of the Pittsburgh web for 2004.

UPDATE: I'll nominate one. The University of Pittsburgh Library System has put up an extraordinary archive of digital versions of historic Pittsburgh photographs in the Pitt collection. The site is
Historic Pittsburgh.

Top Ten Concerts in Pittsburgh for 2004

Great work on the restaurant scene, everyone! Today's topic: The Ten Best Concerts -- Live Musical Performances -- in Pittsburgh in 2004. Any genre, any venue, any performer. Have at it.

Top Ten New Pittsburgh Restaurants of 2004

There's still plenty of room below to post your favorite Pittsburgh sports moments of 2004. Today's topic: The ten best new restaurants that opened in the Pittsburgh region in 2004. Any size, any style, any genre. One condition: All nominees must be locally owned. No chains or franchises, please. Can we come up with ten worth blogging? I'm sure we can.

Top Ten Sports Moments of 2004

Here's an easy one, to get us started:
What were the Top 10 Pittsburgh Sports Moments of 2004?

Top Ten Lists

Bored by SableGate? Bummed by Pittsburgh's political and economic sinkholes? Cheer up: It's the end of the year, and time for some top 10 lists. Over the next few days, I'll post a series of Top 10 Topics, of the following sort: Top 10 XYZ in the Pittsburgh region in 2004. Put responses in the Comments; I'll compile and re-post the results. Be cynical if you like; you can make the Top 10 a Bottom 10, a middle 10, or a no 10 at all. But above all, play nice.

Regional Leadership?

Reading about Big Ben's latest exploits this morning has me wondering: Who are the best leaders in the Pittsburgh region? Look at any and all domains (politics, business, education, arts, sports), ages, and experience levels. Look at different scales: neighborhoods and large organizations; for-profit, not-for-profit, and pure volunteerism. Name your criteria and name the ones who meet them. It's a season to celebrate and give thanks.

As the City Schools Turn

When it comes to hiring and firing a school Superintendent, the City of Pittsburgh has a longer-running soap opera than Mt. Lebanon.

What the two districts seem to have in common, judging from information available in the media: School Boards that prefer that their Superintendents work with the system. No rocking the boat allowed.

SableGate: Tribune Review Editorial

In an editorial today titled "Mt. Lebanon Molestation: Time for a Change", the Tribune-Review argues, "Worse, the district and Ms. Sable entered into a confidentiality agreement designed to keep secret the specific reasons for her departure. Public schools. Public officials. Public money. Public disclosure should not be a debating point. . . . By resignation, by impeachment or by ballot, this Mt. Lebanon school board must go."

I'm not quite ready to sign on to the conclusion, and I don't get the headline, but it's nice that the paper is still on the trail of the story.

SableGate: A Neighbor Speaks Out

Lebonian Daniel Siegel has a nice letter to the Trib about SableGate. He writes, "The Mt. Lebanon School Board is flying our $60 million school district without a map, without a plan and without a clue. It's time to get new pilots."

SableGate: 10 Questions to Ask the Lebo School Board

There's a Mt. Lebanon School Board meeting this coming Monday evening at 7:30 p.m. in the High School Library. This is a scheduled "reorganization" meeting, and it's in a small space, so the meeting isn't designed for ranting and complaining about SableGate. But the angry citizens of Mt. Lebanon will undoubtedly appear and ask to be heard. If they do, they should remember: The problem here is the secrecy, not the wisdom of the buyout of the ex-Superintendent. Maybe the $500,000 given to Margery Sable was money well spent; maybe it wasn't. Moreover, venting your anger is fine at home, but it doesn't advance the ball at a public meeting. (A suggestion: If people want to keep the fires burning, come up with a blue and gold ribbon or button that everyone can wear to show solidarity with the "no secrecy" issue.)

Instead of venting, ask questions. Make a record, in lawyer-speak. Even if you don't get many answers, the act of asking and getting nothing may be helpful down the road. Here are 10 questions to ask the Board:

1. Is the legal defense of the lawsuit filed by Michele Zappala-Peck being paid with School District funds? I assume that the answer to this question will be yes, but the Board may be unwilling to answer it.

2. Before finalizing her separation agreement with the School District, had Margery Sable made specific allegations of wrongdoing against the District and/or the Board? If so, what were those allegations? I assume that the Board will refuse to answer this question.

3. While she was employed by the School District, was Margery Sable ever notified that she had violated any rule or policy of the School District? If so, what was the nature of the violation? Did Margery Sable bring her conduct into compliance with the rule or policy? I assume that the Board will refuse to answer these questions.

4. Is the current Acting Superintendent a candidate for the position of Superintendent? Are any other current employees of the School District candidates for the position of Superintendent? I assume that the Board will refuse to answer these questions.

5. On behalf of the Board, who negotiated the terms and the timing of the separation agreement? Was a separation agreement discussed with Margery Sable during the summer of 2004, after she was not offered a raise alongside other District admininstrators? I assume that the Board will refuse to answer these questions.

6. Are there any policies or programs initiated by Margery Sable that the School District has decided to (or intends to) suspend or discard? If so, which policies or programs are involved, and why are they being suspended or discarded? I suspect that the Board will refuse to answer these questions.

7. What is the Board's position regarding review of and accountability for classroom performance by individual teachers? Is there a plan to implement any kind of review and accountability? If so, when, and what is the plan? If not, why not?

8. With respect to families of special needs and special education children, is the School District willing to submit to arbitration or mediation disputes over the scope of educational and other services provided by the District? If not, why not?

9. What percentage of the School Disrict's annual budget is spent on salaries of personnel who are neither active teachers nor maintenance/custodial personnel? This information is available (or should be available) in the District's public budget. Notably, however, the "Budget" link on the School District website is dead.

10. Can the Board guarantee that the contract offered to the next Superintendent will be structured so that in the event that the Superintendent does not complete his/her service under the contract, for reasons other than malfeasance by the Board, the Board's financial liability will be limited to compensation actually earned?

The Founding Fathers on a Free Press

Picking up on yesterday's topic, and inspired by the Anonymous reference to Thomas Jefferson in the Comments, I quote at length from the "Apology for Printers" published in 1731 by Benjamin Franklin in his Pennsylvania Gazette. Franklin, it might be said, was the first blogger:

Being frequently censur'd and condemn'd by different Persons for printing Things which they say ought not to be printed, I have sometimes thought it might be necessary to make a standing Apology for my self, and publish it once a Year, to be read upon all Occasions of that Nature. Much Business has hitherto hindered the execution of this Design; but having very lately given extraordinary Offence by printing an Advertisement with a certain "N.B." at the End of it, I find an Apology more particularly requisite at this Juncture, tho' it happens when I have not yet Leisure to write such a thing in the proper Form, and can only in a loose manner throw those Considerations together which should have been the Substance of it.

I request all who are angry with me on the Account of printing things they don't like, calmly to consider these following Particulars

1. That the Opinions of Men are almost as various as their Faces; an Observation general enough to become a common Proverb, "So many Men so many Minds."

2. That the Business of Printing has chiefly to do with Mens Opinions; most things that are printed tending to promote some, or oppose others.

3. That hence arises the peculiar Unhappiness of that Business, which other Callings are no way liable to; they who follow Printing being scarce able to do any thing in their way of getting a Living, which shall not probably give Offence to some, and perhaps to many; whereas the Smith, the Shoemaker, the Carpenter, or the Man of any other Trade, may work indifferently for People of all Persuasions, without offending any of them: and the Merchant may buy and sell with Jews, Turks, Hereticks, and Infidels of all sorts, and get Money by every one of them, without giving Offence to the most orthodox, of any sort; or suffering the least Censure or Ill-will on the Account from any Man whatever.

4. That it is as unreasonable in any one Man or Set of Men to expect to be pleas'd with every thing that is printed, as to think that nobody ought to be pleas'd but themselves.

5. Printers are educated in the Belief, that when Men differ in Opinion, both Sides ought equally to have the Advantage of being heard by the Publick; and that when Truth and Error have fair Play, the former is always an overmatch for the latter: Hence they chearfully serve all contending Writers that pay them well, without regarding on which side they are of the Question in Dispute.

6. Being thus continually employ'd in serving all Parties, Printers naturally acquire a vast Unconcernedness as to the right or wrong Opinions contain'd in what they print; regarding it only as the Matter of their daily labour: They print things full of Spleen and Animosity, with the utmost Calmness and Indifference, and without the least Ill-will to the Persons reflected on; who nevertheless unjustly think the Printer as much their Enemy as the Author, and join both together in their Resentment.

7. That it is unreasonable to imagine Printers approve of every thing they print, and to censure them on any particular thing accordingly; since in the way of their Business they print such great variety of things opposite and contradictory. It is likewise as unreasonable what some assert, "That Printers ought not to print any Thing but what they approve;" since if all of that Business should make such a Resolution, and abide by it, an End would thereby be put to Free Writing, and the World would afterwards have nothing to read but what happen'd to be the Opinions of Printers.

8. That if all Printers were determin'd not to print any thing till they were sure it would offend no body, there would be very little printed.

9. That if they sometimes print vicious or silly things not worth reading, it may not be because they approve such things themselves, but because the People are so viciously and corruptly educated that good things are not encouraged. . . .

10. That notwithstanding what might be urg'd in behalf of a Man's being allow'd to do in the Way of his Business whatever he is paid for, yet Printers do continually discourage the Printing of great Numbers of bad things, and stifle them in the Birth. I my self have constantly refused to print any thing that might countenance Vice, or promote Immorality; tho' by complying in such Cases with the corrupt Taste of the Majority, I might have got much Money. I have also always refus'd to print such things as might do real Injury to any Person, how much soever I have been solicited, and tempted with Offers of great Pay; and how much soever I have by refusing got the Ill-will of those who would have employ'd me. I have heretofore fallen under the Resentment of large Bodies of Men, for refusing absolutely to print any of their Party or Personal Reflections. In this Manner I have made my self many Enemies, and the constant Fatigue of denying is almost insupportable. But the Publick being unacquainted with all this, whenever the poor Printer happens either through Ignorance or much Persuasion, to do any thing that is generally thought worthy of Blame, he meets with no more Friendship or Favour on the above Account, than if there were no Merit in't at all. Thus, as "Waller" says,

"Poets loose half the Praise they would have got Were it but known what they discreetly blot;"

Yet are censur'd for every bad Line found in their Works with the utmost Severity.
. . .

I take leave to conclude with an old Fable, which some of my Readers have heard before, and some have not.

"A certain well-meaning Man and his Son, were travelling towards a Market Town, with an Ass which they had to sell. The Road was bad; and the old Man therefore rid, but the Son went a-foot. The first Passenger they met, asked the Father if he was not ashamed to ride by himself, and suffer the poor Lad to wade along thro' the Mire; this induced him to take up his Son behind him: He had not travelled far, when he met others, who said, they were two unmerciful Lubbers to get both on the Back of that poor Ass, in such a deep Road. Upon this the old Man gets off, and let his Son ride alone. The next they met called the Lad a graceless, rascally young Jackanapes, to ride in that Manner thro' the Dirt, while his aged Father trudged along on Foot; and they said the old Man was a Fool, for suffering it. He then bid his Son come down, and walk with him, and they travell'd on leading the Ass by the Halter; 'till they met another Company, who called them a Couple of sensless Blockheads, for going both on Foot in such a dirty Way, when they had an empty Ass with them, which they might ride upon. The old Man could bear no longer; My Son, said he, it grieves me much that we cannot please all these People; Let us throw the Ass over the next Bridge, and be no farther troubled with him."

Had the old Man been seen acting this last Resolution, he would probably have been call'd a Fool for troubling himself about the different Opinions of all that were pleas'd to find Fault with him: Therefore, tho' I have a Temper almost as complying as his, I intend not to imitate him in this last Particular. I consider the Variety of Humours among Men, and despair of pleasing every Body; yet I shall not therefore leave off Printing. I shall continue my Business. I shall not burn my Press and melt my Letters.

Later, James Madison wrote, in the Virginia Report of 1799:

Some degree of abuse is inseparable from the proper use of everything; and in no instance is this more true, than in that of the press. It has accordingly been decided by the practice of the states, that it is better to leave a few of its noxious branches to their luxuriant growth, than by pruning them away, to injure the vigour of those yielding the proper fruits. And can the wisdom of this policy be doubted by any who reflect, that to the press alone, chequered as it is with abuses, the world is indebted for all the triumphs which have been gained by reason and humanity, over error and oppression; who reflect, that to the same beneficent source, the United States owe much of the lights which conducted them to the rank of a free and independent nation; and which have improved their political system into a shape so auspicious to their happiness.

History session over! Have a great day everyone.

Free Press Rights for Bloggers

My colleague Eugene Volokh has a nice op-ed in today's New York Times on making sure that the First Amendment applies to bloggers, as well as the MSM (blogospherese for "MainStream Media"). Eugene writes:

Because of the Internet, anyone can be a journalist. Some so-called Weblogs - Internet-based opinion columns published by ordinary people - have hundreds of thousands of readers. I run a blog with more than 10,000 daily readers. We often publish news tips from friends or readers, some of which come with a condition of confidentiality.

The First Amendment can't give special rights to the established news media and not to upstart outlets like ours. Freedom of the press should apply to people equally, regardless of who they are, why they write or how popular they are.

Blog on, everyone.

Duquesne's Upcoming Darwin Day

Duquesne U. has announced the program for next February's Darwin Day, a celebration of science and humanity in the context of the work of Charles Darwin.

Pittsblog in the "Real" Media

Today's Trib picks up where Pittsblog leaves off.

In SableGate-related news, the principal of one of Mt. Lebanon's two middle schools has announced her resignation, after only 18 months on the job, to spend more time with her husband and young children. But I've heard rumors that she's a Friend of Marge (FOM). Signs of a purge in Lebo?