Forum » Gender Society Public Forums » Polly Ticks » TG Presidential Candidate Denied "Trib" Coverage

TG Presidential Candidate Denied "Trib" Coverage

Tags : None
  • Trannyweb member and U.S. presidential candidate Bennie Lee "Ben" Ferguson recently received an e-mail from "Tranny Tribune" staffer Robyn Webb regarding a request for further coverage of her campaign. It reads in part:

    "I am going to be brutally honest with you about your campaign. Unless you
    announce a radical change in your views concerning GLBT political issues, it
    will be my recommendation that Trannyweb not endorse or publicize your
    candidacy any further. It is my belief that your expectation of support
    from this community on the one hand, while you actively seek to undermine
    the GLBT cause on the other hand is the height of hypocrisy, and I cannot in
    all good conscience support any candidate who would engage in such
    practices."


    Ferguson's response follows:



    "Dear Robyn,
    I want to make it clear from the outset that I do not wish to address this issue with you as a personal dispute between us. Having said that, I view your attitude toward Trannyweb coverage of my presidential campaign as the "height of hypocrisy" in itself. By traditional journalistic standards, stories have generally been considered newsworthy based upon their own objective merits, not upon some subjective concept of political correctness. My presidential campaign is newsworthy on the basis of my being probably the only transgendered candidate in this election, perhaps in U.S. history, regardless of my stances on any particular issue. By your standards, a presidential bid by Condoleeza Rice or Colin Powell would not be newsworthy for a publication with an African-American readership based solely on their political views.
    Additionally, I find it more than coincidental that coverage of my campaign was granted by the "Tranny Tribune" prior to my post concerning the issue of openly GLBT persons serving in the U.S. military in the "Polly Ticks" section of the Trannyweb forums, your reply to which read in part, "I would make the suggestion that candidate Ferguson rethink these positions when seeking support from the LGBT community, or seek support elsewhere." It sounds like you may have meant to say, "Change your position on this issue to conform to the LGBT party line or you will be denied coverage on this website."
    This is precisely what I find so hypocritical about the GLBT establishment. One is constantly subjected to this left-leaning group's vilification of the right as intolerant. If someone such as myself, however, espouses views which contradict their positions on GLBT issues, they are usually marginalized, ostracized, and portrayed as some kind of a GLBT "Uncle Tom." (A case in point was the refusal of a local GLBT publication to endorse my candidacy for the Kansas House in the last election in spite of my only opponent's being an entrenched conservative Republican who has held the seat for over twenty years.)
    The bottom line is that I refuse to be silenced by the right or the left. You are obviously free to exercise your discretion in regard to what you choose to publish in the "Tranny Tribune," but I shall make full use of all the other venues on the site to publicize my campaign. That, is, of course, unless you intend to oust me from the site altogether. You should also be aware that I intend to post both your e-mail and this one in the "Polly Ticks" forum.
    Once again, I wish to emphasize that it is not my intention to make this a personal issue between us. You have always been quite kind to me in spite of our political differences. I wish you well and suppose that we can only agree to disagree.
    Warm regards,
    Bennie Lee Ferguson"
      July 11, 2007 10:59 PM BST
    0
  • 2 2627
    Never mind I won't say that it would have been rude.
    <p>Karen Brad</p>
      July 12, 2007 12:52 AM BST
    0
  • My comments were meant only with regard to endorsement, as opposed to
    coverage. Certainly, I would consider an objective account of your
    campaign, however, the journalistic integrity you demand would require inclusion of
    the entire picture, including the negative, such as your deliberate actions in opposition to the
    Local Law Enforcement Hate Crime Prevention Act, and your vociferous
    disapproval of the right of gay men and women to serve in our nation's
    armed forces. Is this the sort of coverage you seek? It has
    been said that any press is good press. The fact is that I am not an
    editor of the Tribune, and have no authority to approve or disapprove the
    content therein. I am only a contributing columnist, and I am free to
    accept or decline any writing assignment I see fit. Further, the language
    contained in my email message to you stated specifically that it would be
    my RECOMMENDATION that TW withdraw active support or endorsement of your
    campaign. Whether Katie Glover, whose decision it would ultimately be,
    follows my recommendation, is entirely up to her.

    Candidates for office, when seeking endorsement from particular special
    interests, such as the GLBT community, in turn advance the agenda of these
    groups. Otherwise, what would be the point of such endorsement? It would
    be one thing if you were simply noncommittal with regard to the GLBT
    political agenda, but when you express views that are specifically
    antithetical to it, and, in fact go so far as to take political action
    against it, and yet still insist on seeking the support of the community,
    how do you expect to be characterized?

    Indeed, transgender you may be, but in this context, no more so than
    Condaleeza Rice is black, and it is my feeling that you don't really have
    the best interest of the transgender community at heart any more than Ms
    Rice has the real well being of the black community at heart. Would it be
    right for African American voters to endorse Obama solely because he is
    black, without regard for his policies? Similarly, I feel it would not be
    fitting for GLBT voters to vote for you solely because you are gay and
    transgender, without considering your views.

    Of course, in the spirit of the free exchange of ideas that characterizes the American political process, I do not regard these differences of opinion nor your public attack against me to be in any way personal.
      July 12, 2007 3:01 AM BST
    0
  • “…probably the only transgendered candidate in this election…”
    Is anyone actually aware of the fact that you are transgender apart from Trannyweb members?
    I’m not that bothered about who they let into the armed forces, but when I read your policy on banning gays from joining, well, had I been American you would have just lost my vote. Here in Britain, gays are allowed to join the armed forces. The army hasn’t broken down into a hotbed of mincing debauchery. Obviously, one’s sexual preference has nothing to do with one’s ability to do this sort of job. To promote the myth that it has is disgraceful, and suggests to me that any politician doing so is just pandering to the opinion of the majority in a bid to get votes. Though I suspect in reality that the majority of Americans do actually believe that gays should be allowed to serve; you may be shooting yourself in the foot here, perhaps because you are TG so obviously are unable to use a rifle…
    Britain also has new laws on hate crime, tied in with equal rights for TG’s and gays. They are a GOOD thing. The only people I’d expect to see voting against those rights are the people that hate gays and TG’s and whatever other minority, previously oppressed groups are covered by them.
    Bennie, I have to agree with Robyn; you seek coverage of your campaign here because you are TG, yet we wouldn’t guess it from your policies. Furthermore, your policies on these sort of issues are utterly detrimental to our cause. Indeed, this is hypocrisy. If you are an openly TG candidate then stand up and fight for issues that are important to TG people (this ought to include yourself!) If you are firmly in the closet when it comes to your political ambitions then your campaign has no particular relevance here.
    I welcome open debate, but not people who are fighting against us, promoting prejudice, and trying to keep the USA strictly redneck. The situation for TG’s in the UK is constantly improving, I’d go so far as to say it’s a safe place for us to live; wouldn’t you like to see that happen in the USA?
    Your policies might go down better with the American Family Values Association. Better not tell them you’re TG though, eh?
    xx
      July 12, 2007 12:20 PM BST
    0
  • Hi Bennie,

    I'm sorry if you got the wrong impression from Robyn's email but you have not been denied any coverage in the Trib. I am the editor and I decide what goes in. So far we have always been happy to publish updates on your campaign irrespective of your views on specific subjects.

    There will always be people who will say that we should not include you because you support US troops in Iraq or because you don't support US troops in Iraq, or because you support the hate crimes bill or because you don't support the hate crimes bill.

    That's what politics is about. You will never, ever in your political career find people unanimously backing your policies. There will always be people who do not agree and that is as it should be in a healthy democracy.

    The sole reason that the Trib is backing your campaign is because you are one of our TG sisters and although we may not agree with all of your views, I'm sure the majority of us are proud of you for having the guts to get up and do something rather than nothing. Most TG people are content to just sit around and moan.

    That is why we must back Bennie Lee girls, because although she may not tick all of your boxes, she is one of the best hopes we have for some good press right now.

    Hugs,

    Katie x
    PS Please send me your latest update Bennie, and I'll put it in the August issue of The Trib, due out on Saturday August 4th.
    Success is the ability to go from one failure to the next without any loss of enthusiasm!
      July 13, 2007 12:43 PM BST
    0
  • I think it is clear from my posts that I don't agree with all of Bennie's platform. That said, I want to reinforce the importance of distinguishing between support and news coverage. It is a personal decision to support a candidate. It is a professional responsibility to provide news coverage of a candidate. I can think of no more important reason to cover a candidate's campaign than the possibility that it is damaging to the GLBT community. I would certainly wish to know what was happening. A true journalist, in the tradition of Huntley and Brinkley, would give unbiased coverage and allow the reader to decide. This does not happen in real life. One only needs to read The Daily News and the L.A. Times in Los Angeles to see that the first is conservative and the second liberal IN THEIR COVERAGE. If the Tranny Tribune wishes to take a stand in it's support, that is one issue. If it denies coverage of a TG persons campaign, then it denies it's readers an important source of news for personal reasons. This reflects poorly on any publication.

    Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that I disagree with Bennie's platform to the point of not voting for her....I might still vote for her for the effect of demonstrating to the public that we are here, we are a force to be noted and we are not going away because they choose to ignore us and our rights. I don't think that Bennie will be our next President....however, this does not mean she cannot contribute to bringing us into the public eye by participating in the election process. I would definitely vote for Bennie ahead of George Bush if those were my two choices. I don't like either of my U.S. Senators in CA. However, there are issues on which I do agree with them. I voted Democrat across the board in the last election to send a message to the Republican Party and to Bush. It is the first time in my iife I have voted Democrat. In this case, the country agreed with me and the power in congress shifted to the left. Yesterday, the House voted to withdrew US troops from Iraq by April of 2008. I feel that voting for people I did not like as candidates had an effect on a bigger issue. What would happen if Bennie got 1% of the popular vote in the Presidential election? You bet people would take notice of us! Even by her running, that could happen. We have to decide as individuals if we feel that is more important or not than Bennie's position on GLBT issues. Even if people point out Bennie is against Hate Crimes legislation, it opens up dialog on these issues and probably coverage of other TG spokespersons. It could be the BEST thing that happens to get public attention for TG/TS issues. This is realpolitik, not theoretical or ethical factors. Anyone who has seen parliamentary politics knows the power of politics based on practical and material factors.

    Agree or disagree with Bennie as you see fit. Don't deny us the right to make our own decisions by denying us coverage of this candidate or any candidate who impacts our community for good or bad.

    **************************************

    NOTE: i WROTE THIS AND POSTED IT BEFORE SEEING KATIE'S POST. It had no influence on my post.
    "A live lived in fear is a life half-lived." - Native American proverb. "Inside every man is a woman who was drowned in testosterone before birth". - Wendy Jeanette Larsen "It is better to be hated for what you are than loved for what you're not." - Andre Gide (French writer)
      July 13, 2007 12:59 PM BST
    0
  • I wouldn't vote for you solely on the grounds that I don't agree with anything you say, as indeed I don't agree with most of my American sisters who breathe a peculiar strain of conservatism that is anathema to me. But that doesn't mean I don't like them or don't respect them. I doubt whether many people will vote for you simply on the basis of your sexuality and gender. To be elected to high office you have to address issues and you have done this. You cannot put yourself forward as the spokeswoman of one community and expect to win elections, you have to cross boundaries. There is a Latin American candidate for President who may well secure the Latin American vote but to win the presidency he has to move beyond this core support, the same goes for Mr Obama, and your good self. The fact that you are who you are is representation enough and should be reported as such. Perhaps unfortunately, democracy is all about compromise and being compromised and I don't think as individuals or as a community we can afford to that and it seems to me in your case that it is already a road well travelled.
    Porscha
      July 22, 2007 10:43 AM BST
    0
  • You made an excellent point, Porscha. Bennie is a candidate who happens to be transgnedered. How she chooses to support transgender issues is separate from that. When we forget that we are stereotyping her. A Christian candidate might oppose school prayer or having the Cross on a state flag or the national flag, "In God We Trust" not withstanding. Bennie has to follow her beliefs and we have to vote ours. And the media has to give us the opportunity to make an informed vote.
    "A live lived in fear is a life half-lived." - Native American proverb. "Inside every man is a woman who was drowned in testosterone before birth". - Wendy Jeanette Larsen "It is better to be hated for what you are than loved for what you're not." - Andre Gide (French writer)
      July 22, 2007 7:52 PM BST
    0
  • You'll be happy to know that Bennie has consented to an interview concerning her candidacy that we hope will appear in the September issue of the Trib. She will be given the opportunity to voice her opinions, and readers/voters can then draw their own conclusions and make an informed decision.
      July 22, 2007 10:12 PM BST
    0