Goldenseal (Goldencensor?) Magazine: “The Great Kanawha County Textbook War”
Fall 2011
http://www.wvculture.org/goldenseal/Fall11/textbookwar.html
By Karl Priest
On 18 June 2009 I contacted John Lilly, the editor of Goldenseal, and offered to write an article about the Kanawha County Textbook Controversy. Previously I had written two articles for the magazine. My correspondence with Mr. Lilly follows with some emails only being referenced in my email of 9 December 2011(typos corrected when found).
16 September 2011
John:
I was surprised to hear that the Fall issue has something on the TBW. Someone saw an ad on Facebook.
My issue has not arrived and I will be leaving town tomorrow before the mail runs.
Why did you not contact me?
Thank you.
Karl
-------------------------------------------
19 September 2011
Hi Karl.
Good to hear from you. The magazine went in the mail last Wednesday. I’m sorry your copy did not arrive as of the end of the week. Yes, we ran the textbook story in this issue. I’m sorry I didn’t get in touch earlier, but we ran a rather extensive sidebar on additional reading, and your book was featured prominently. We decided to highlight the books in lieu of inviting personal “pro and con” sidebars as we felt that the books would offer more in-depth treatments of the various points of view than would 300-word “op ed ” pieces. I look forward to hearing your comments once you have seen the published piece.
Thanks for getting in touch.
Sincerely,
John Lilly
Editor/Goldenseal
-------------------------------------------
5 December 2011 (Monday)
I received a copy of the Fall edition of Goldenseal. I was rather perturbed to find my letter (see below) had not been printed. I telephoned Mr. Lilly and expressed my feelings. What I brought up during the phone conversation is reiterated and elaborated upon in my 9 December 2011 email.
9 December 2011
(Friday)
John:
Since I assume you are a man of your word I am concerned why you did not provide the promised statement about why you did not print my letter written to respond to Trey Kay’s article in the Fall 2011 issue of Goldenseal. You told me you would contact me by today.
In case you have been ill I am sending this as a formal request for your response as soon as you are well.
Let me remind you of some things before presenting five questions.
On June 22, 2009, in response to my offer to provide an article about the Textbook War, you wrote: “ We have been in touch with Trey Kay about a possible feature concerning the text book controversy. Should that manuscript come to fruition, I’ll be in touch with you about a possible sidebar.” You did not get in touch with me.
On September 7, 2010, in response to my expression of dismay that my book was not listed in the "New Books Available" section of Goldenseal, you wrote: “ We don’t expect to publish our regular book review section again until Summer 2011. We are also working on a special report about the text book controversy, however, for sometime on ’11 (hopefully). In that case, we would likely give your book special mention and invite you to write a sidebar on the topic. We will keep you posted.” You did not invite me to write a sidebar nor did you keep me posted. On September 19 you wrote, "We decided to highlight the books in lieu of inviting personal “pro and con” sidebars as we felt that the books would offer more in-depth treatments of the various points of view than would 300-word “op ed ” pieces. I look forward to hearing your comments once you have seen the published piece." A “pro and con” (which was news to me) would have still tilted the piece against the protesters, but at least the protester side would have been provided. See question number five regarding your decision to “highlight the books.”
On September 19, 2011, in response to my request to have my letter published, you wrote: “Sure, Karl. I would welcome a ‘Letter to the Editor.’ On October 13, 2011, in response to another query about me submitting a letter you wrote: “Please send along what you have. This will be part of our ‘Letters from Readers’ section, so length is indeed a factor. I look forward to reading your comments.” Based upon your statement it should be understandable that I expected my letter to be printed. However, on December 5, 2011, during a telephone conversation, you told me that my letter was too “inflammatory.”
I look forward to your promised reasoned response to my letter pointing out what was too “inflammatory.” In addition to that, please answer the following questions.
1. Why did you not allow me the opportunity to revise my letter to suit your opinion of non-inflammatory? You could have discussed your concern about my letter prior to publication in the next issue.
2. Why did you publish a photo of Marvin Horan beside the KKK figure when there were plenty of other KKK photos although the KKK involvement was late, minor, and NOT part of the mainline protest? Surely, you did not want to slur Pastor Horan. You must have unintentionally overlooked the fact that you could have contacted me for comment about whether or not Horan was sympathetic to the KKK. I could have put you in touch directly with Pastor Horan. That would have been the objective and honest thing for an editor to do.
3. Why did you not run a photo of Avis Hill looking at the bullet holes in his church window or a photo of protest leader Donald Means looking at his burned out car? You must be aware of the violence inflicted upon the protesters.
4. How do you justify a sidebar including my book and two books by scholars who have a personal bias against the protesters? You surely do not think that is fair. Oh, by the way, you got the name of the publisher of my book wrong.
5. Did you find any factual errors in my letter? Since I pointed out factual error, glaring omissions, and some anti-protester slant in Kay’s article it seems to me that a sense of fair play and a desire to tell truthful history would have been of value to you.
Mr. Kay is not an unattached observer. He considers Jim Lewis a friend and dated Lewis’s daughter at one time. Mr. Kay is an unapologetic liberal who admits to not sharing the philosophy of the protesters. I am amazed he did as well as he did in producing his documentary. He will tell you that he received “heat” from protester haters (my term) for giving “too much attention to the protester perspective.” You see John, the other side (and right now I feel like the evidence points to you being on that side) is fanatical about portraying the protesters as ignorant, fanatical, racists. That is a LIE, and you helped perpetuate that LIE. I hope you can understand my anger. Goldenseal has personally insulted me. More importantly Goldenseal has slurred some exceptionally good and kind West Virginians who tried to defend their children and American traditional values. Ultimately Goldenseal has provided false and biased information about what is arguably one of the top five historical events in West Virginia.
As I said in our telephone conversation, your decision indicates that either you have a personal agenda or you are brain-washed. I hope the former condition is not the case. The latter condition is sad, but common due to the overwhelming propaganda perpetuated over the past 37 years. I respectfully request that you do the right thing and set the record straight in a prominent way so that future generations have a chance to consider BOTH sides of the story.
I look forward to reading your promised explanation of why my letter was too “inflammatory” and your answers to the five questions posed in this email.
Thank you.
Karl
-------------------------------------------
12 December 2011 (Monday)
Good morning Karl –
My written response to your letter of October 13 and your phone call of December 5 was drafted on December 7. It has since been forwarded to my supervisor and the Governor’s press office for their review. I will send it on to you as soon as it has been approved. Thank you for your patience.
Sincerely,
John Lilly
Editor/Goldenseal
-------------------------------------------
17 December 2011 (Saturday)
John:
The second week has passed since you said you would respond in “a couple of days.”
Why is it necessary for you to have your decision screened by an attorney, the bureaucracy, and politicians? You either made an honest mistake or your heart-breaking prejudice got the best of your editorial integrity. Either way,editor ethics should guide you to only one conclusion—the protesters were slurred and the protesters deserve an opportunity to adequately respond.
The major leaders (Alice Moore and five preachers) will allow me to provide that response in collaboration with them. That is the right thing to do. Shall we proceed without further equivocation?
Karl
-------------------------------------------
The snail mail letter arrived on 12-20. It was first class and meter dated 12-19.
December 15, 2011
Dear Karl,
I received your phone call on Monday, December 5, 2011, questioning my decision not to publish your letter of October 13, concerning our Fall 2011 story titled, "The Great Kanawha County Textbook War," by Trey Kay. As I attempted to explain to you on the phone, your letter was inflammatory and provocative in my judgment and not suitable for publication.
In your letter, you state in reference to racial slurs used on protest signs, "I have always said that any such signs would have been planted by liberals and photographed for propaganda purposes." This statement is provocative and unsubstantiated. You state further, "It is amazing that the antiprotesters did not think of it since they did other sneaky things to cause trouble in the protester ranks:' This statement is inflammatory, provocative and unsubstantiated.
In your letter, you state in reference to bombings, "There is reason to believe the explosion at the board office was done by someone working against the protesters." This statement is also unsubstantiated and provocative.
In your letter, you state, "The article insinuated that a lot of parents kept their children out because they were intimidated by the protesters." This statement is inflammatory. The article states, "The Reverend Avis Hill called for school boycotts." As you know, Rev. Hill was a leader of the protest movement, and he urged parents to keep their children home.
On five occasions in your letter, you use the term "liberal," "liberals" or "liberalism" to characterize those whose point of view differs from yours, including the statement" ... the highminded hypocrisy of liberals." This hate-filled language is simply not acceptable in GOLDENSEAL magazine'. My job as editor requires me to make decisions about magazine content, and this decision was clear.
In addition, your confrontational tone and accusations of bias, censorship and "brain-washing" during our phone conversation are not acceptable. We have received many positive comments about our textbook story, plus a few from people who felt it was too deferential to the protestors. We took great pains to ensure that the basic points of view of all sides were represented both in text and in illustrations. The radio documentary upon which our story was based received numerous awards for journalism, including the George Foster Peabody and Edward R. Murrow awards, as well as the DuPont/Columbia Silver Baton. Our sidebar titled, "Read More aboutit" highlighted three additional texts for those interested in more information or different points of view. Your book Protester Voices: The 1974 Textbook Tea Party was featured prominently.
Karl, I am not unaware of the times in which we live, where talk radio, television news, and Internet sources freely encourage open animosity toward those with opposing viewpoints. I did receive equally inappropriate letters from the pro-textbook side of this issue, and I am determined not to subject our readers to the bitter back-and-forth that would surely result from the publication of these letters.
Should you have any further questions or comments, please address them to my supervisor, Ms. Caryn Gresham, Deputy Commissioner of the Division of Culture and History.
Sincerely,
John Lilly
Editor
-------------------------------------------
21 December 2011
John:
Thank you for finally providing an answer to my concerns. Your letter dated 15 December arrived on 20 December. Email is a lot faster as you know.
I had hoped we could settle this between ourselves, but since you brought your supervisor into the conversation that is fine with me. I trust you have forwarded all of my emails to her. I will be happy to respond to any correspondence from whomever wishes to address this egregious act of censorship Perhaps your supervisor will answer the questions below which I asked you in my 9 December email. To be clear, I am hereby formally requesting an answer to each of those questions from either of you.
First, some comments about your letter.
Regarding my statement about the alleged racial slurs on signs—it is amazing that an editor who wants to claim to be neutral does not see that the mention of those signs is “ inflammatory, provocative and unsubstantiated.” It is a glaring double-standard to not allow my side to respond.
Regarding my statement about the board office bombing—my statement has as much plausibility as any insinuation that the bomb was placed by someone sympathetic to the protest. Had you read my book you would have seen why.
Regarding your concern about my use of the term “liberal” to refer to someone who is a liberal—astounding! You called my reference to their hypocrisy “hate-filled language”—astonishing! It is fine with you that good people (the protesters) can be dragged through the mud, but one dare not call a liberal a “hypocrite.”
Regarding your statement about my use of the terms “bias, censorship, and brain-washing” during our telephone conversation--you should remember that I used those tentatively because I was unsure if you had just made an innocent oversight. Now, it is obvious that you are either biased or brain-washed. I cannot help with the former, but am willing to help with the latter. Start by reading my book.
Regarding your list of honors received by Trey Kay (with the reminder that I have much respect for Mr. Kay”--I repeat from my 9 December email: Mr. Kay is not an unattached observer. He considers Jim Lewis a friend and dated Lewis’s daughter at one time.
Regarding your statement that you received “equally inappropriate letters from the pro-book side”--please delete identifying information and send me copies of those letters.
Now, editorial ethics should make it clear that the following questions should be answered without further delay.
1. Why did you not allow me the opportunity to revise my letter to suit your opinion of non-inflammatory? You could have discussed your concern about my letter prior to publication in the next issue.
2. Why did you publish a photo of Marvin Horan beside the KKK figure when there were plenty of other KKK photos although the KKK involvement was late, minor, and NOT part of the mainline protest? Surely, you did not want to slur Pastor Horan. You must have unintentionally overlooked the fact that you could have contacted me for comment about whether or not Horan was sympathetic to the KKK. I could have put you in touch directly with Pastor Horan. That would have been the objective and honest thing for an editor to do.
3. Why did you not run a photo of Avis Hill looking at the bullet holes in his church window or a photo of protest leader Donald Means looking at his burned out car? You must be aware of the violence inflicted upon the protesters.
4. How do you justify a sidebar including my book and two books by scholars who have a personal bias against the protesters? You surely do not think that is fair. Oh, by the way, you got the name of the publisher of my book wrong.
5. Did you find any factual errors in my letter? Since I pointed out factual error, glaring omissions, and some anti-protester slant in Kay’s article it seems to me that a sense of fair play and a desire to tell truthful history would have been of value to you.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Karl
CC: Caryn Gresham, Deputy Commissioner
NO REPLY WAS RECEIVED.
-------------------------------------------
January 4, 2012
Dear Ms. Gresham,
The fact is that thousands of good West Virginia citizens have been mocked and slandered by the Great Kanawha County Textbook article (Fall, 2011). The matter could have been settled without fanfare with a reasonable amount of fair play. The protesters (by me or someone in leadership) should have had a chance to respond to the article. Only one letter would not have rectified the damage done, but the protesters are used to never having a level playing field with media and would have accepted that and been done with it. Now, due to the Goldenseal article containing false and biased information being blocked from rebuttal, more serious damage has been done to the thousands of protesters’ reputations and legacy. This is unacceptable and Goldenseal is ethically obligated to make an effort to allow the protesters to defend their integrity and honor.The debate over whether or not my article is inflammatory is a matter of opinion. My opinion obviously does not count. So let’s remove me from the equation.Alice More is known by friend and foe as an articulate and genteel lady. Please allow her to respond and print her response prominently.Following are examples of factual errors, glaring omissions, and anti-protester slant connected to the Great Kanawha County Textbook article.
1. Although I maintained correspondence with Mr. Lilly I was not afforded the opportunity to revise my letter to suit his opinion of non-inflammatory?
2. The photo of Marvin Horan beside the KKK figure was featured although there were plenty of other KKK photos and no mention although the KKK involvement was late, minor, and NOT part of the mainline protest. I could easily have been contacted me for comment about whether or not Horan was sympathetic to the KKK. I could have put the editor in touch directly with Pastor Horan. That would have been the objective and honest thing for an editor to do.
3. Photos of protest leader Avis Hill looking at the bullet holes in his church window or a photo of protest leader Donald Means looking at his burned out car would have shown the violence inflicted upon the protesters.
4. The sidebar included my book and two books by scholars who have a personal bias against the protesters?
5. Although Mr. Kay is the most objective journalist I know of who has written about the Protest he is not an unattached observer.
6. The article stated that the protested books were "Mostly high school supplemental books available as additional reading at the teachers' discretion." Actually, the adoption included the main language books for the elementary level. Between 65-80% of Kanawha County parents refused to allow their children to use those books when provided opt-out forms late into the protest.
7. The article insinuated that a lot of parents kept their children out because they were intimidated by the protesters. The facts are that the protesters at individual schools were friends and neighbors. Photos and film show that the school pickets were peaceful.
8. Both of Trey’s projects failed to mention that the Business and Professional Peoples’ Alliance for Better Textbooks was a MAJOR protester group.
9. The facts are that a miniscule minority who were radicals, unconnected to the mainline protesters, bombed a very few schools. My book (Protester Voices—The 1974 Textbook Tea Party) mutes that slur against the protesters by documenting that damage to property was minimal. There is reason to believe the explosion at the board office was done by someone working against the protesters.
10. A major, glaring, shortcoming was not stating that the man who was shot was seriously wounded by a gun fired by a leader of a group organized to oppose the protesters! That group quickly changed its name and the media never showed much interest in the shooter’s liberalism.
11. The protesters did not object to "writers of color." In Trey's documentary and the Goldenseal article the claim is made that someone saw signs "everywhere" around the county reading, "Get the n------- books out of the county." I checked with Trey and he has never seen a photograph of that sign. While writing my book I searched three extensive files of newspaper articles and did not see such a photo.
12. The quote Trey used to conclude his article made the protesters appear childish. In fact, the source of that quote repeatedly and hatefully called the protesters “stupid" in the documentary.
Please take immediate and unequivocal steps to right the wrong that Goldenseal (perhaps unintentionally) has done to some very fine West Virginians.
Thank you.
Yours truly,
Karl Priest
NO REPLY WAS RECEIVED.
-------------------------------------------
141 Karmel Lane
Poca, WV 25159
13 January 2012
Ms. Caryn Gresham
Deputy Commissioner
WV Division of Culture and History
The Culture Center
Capitol Complex
1900 Kanawha Boulevard East
Charleston WV 25305-0300
Dear Ms. Gresham:
On 15 December 2011 Mr. John Lilly told me, “Should you have any further questions or comments, please address them to my supervisor, Ms. Caryn Gresham, Deputy Commissioner of the Division of Culture and History.”
In the same letter Mr. Lilly stated, “I did receive equally inappropriate letters from the pro-textbook side of this issue...”
Since submitted letters are intended for public viewing I submit the following request.
Pursuant to the West Virginia Freedom of Information Act, West Virginia Code
Code 29B-1-1 et seq, I hereby request copies of the following public records:
Copies of all letters received by Goldenseal regarding the article “the Great Kanawha County Textbook War” by Trey Kay (Fall 2011).
I will pay a reasonable fee for the cost of copies. However, if this fee will be more than twenty dollars ($20.00), I would like the opportunity to review the documents in person in order to determine which copies I want.
Please respond to this request within five (5) business days by either mailing me the copies with a bill for the charges, or advising me of the time and place at which I may inspect the documents, and what the cost will be per copy. If you prefer, I can pick them up at your office and pay for them at that time.
If you have any questions or need additional information from me, I may be reached by telephone at 304-769-0217 at anytime.
Thank you for your prompt attention to my request.
Yours truly,
Karl Priest
NO REPLY WAS RECEIVED.
-------------------------------------------
27 January 2012
The Honorable Darrell McGraw
West Virginia Attorney General
Building 1 Room E-26
Charleston, WV 25306
Dear Mr. McGraw:
As you will see in the accompanying letter I sent a Freedom of Information request to Ms. Caryn Gresham, Deputy Commissioner of the WV Division of Culture and History. The time for her reply has elapsed and it appears she is in violation of the law.
Whether or not punitive measures should be pursued is up to your office. I am asking that you advise Ms. Gresham of the law and require her to provide the requested documents.
Thank you.
Yours truly,
Karl Priest
-------------------------------------------
January 31, 2012
Dear Mr. Priest:
We are in receipt of your letter concerning the Freedom of information request you sent to the West Virginia Division of Culture and History.
The Attorney General's Office would represent the Division of Culture and History in any dispute between you and the Division regarding documents which mayor may not be disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act. Therefore, it would be inconsistent with our ethical responsibilities to our client to take a position in this matter which would be opposite that of our client.
Very truly yours,
Frances A. Hughes
Chief Attorney General
-------------------------------------------
2 February 2012
The Honorable Earl Ray Tomblin
Governor of West Virginia
Office of the Governor
State Capitol
1900 Kanawha Boulevard, East
Charleston, West Virginia 25305
Dear Governor Tomblin:
I filed a Freedom of Information Act request with Ms. Caryn Gresham, the commissioner of the West Virginia Culture and History. The request was ignored. I requested assistance from the West Virginia Attorney General and my request was declined by Ms. Frances A. Hughes, the Chief deputy Attorney General. Copies of the correspondence are enclosed.
The letter from Ms. Hughes implies that Ms. Gresham is in violation of the law. Faced with a choice of assisting a tax-paying citizen or defending a public servant, Ms. Hughes chose the latter.
Please use the power of your office to require Ms. Gresham to obey the law and provide the documents I requested under the Freedom of Information Act.
Thank you.
Yours truly,
Karl Priest
Enclosure:
13 January 2012 FOAI request
27 January 2012 Request to WVAG
31 January 2102 response from WVAG
-------------------------------------------
On 10 February I telephoned the governor’s office and was told that my reuest was with the legal department and they were busy with the legislative session so I should check back next week. On 17 February I called and was connected to Deputy General Counsel Jeff Shaver. He said that Mrs. Gresham had emailed me at the wrong address and had also sent a regular mail. No explanation was provided for the missing regular mail letter. Mr. Shaver got things rolling and I heard from Mrs. Gresham via email that day and I made an appointment to come to her office. A short time latter that day, she said that Mr. Shaver had suggested she send a pdf of the letter (below) via email and I received that on 20 February. On 17 February I received a regular mail letter dated 20 January (with a note “Resent 2/17/12) that was a response to my FOIA request. On 21 February I sent the governor (via the website) a thank you for Mr. Shaver’s help. Next, I sent the following email under the subject: Request for Fair Treatment.
21 February 2012
Mrs. Caryn Gresham
Deputy Commissioner
West Virginia Division of Culture and History
Dear Mrs. Gresham:
Some may use the word "unethical" regarding how Goldenseal handled my request to respond to the article about the Great Textbook War. I choose to use the word "unfortunate." Here is a quick summation of the situation.
1. On 18 June 2009 I contacted Goldenseal editor John Lilly, told him about Trey Kay’s audio documentary, and offered to write an article about the Great Textbook War.
2. On 22 June 2009 Mr. Lilly told me that Mr. Kay was working on an article and , “ I’ll be in touch with you about a possible sidebar.”
3. On 16 September 2011, after Trey Kay's article appeared, I asked Mr. Lilly why he did not let me know the article was being published. Although he was not obligated, that would have been a common courtesy.
4. On 19 September 2011 Mr. Lilly wrote, "I would welcome a “Letter to the Editor.”
5. On 5 December 2011 I telephoned Mr. Lilly to express dismay that my letter was not published in the next edition of Goldenseal. He stated that my letter was too inflammatory and he would let me know his reasoning by 9 December.
6. On 9 December 2011, having not received his email, I wrote to Mr. Lilly detailing our correspondence regarding my letter. If you do not have a copy of that email I will be happy to provide it. One pertinent part is that I reminded him that he said (13 October), “Please send along what you have. This will be part of our ‘Letters from Readers’ section..."
7. On 20 December 2011 I received his letter (from the 5 December conversation) dated 15 December.
8. On 21 December 2011 I responded to Mr. Lilly's comments and included you on the email copy list. I asked some questions in that letter one of which was, " Did you find any factual errors in my letter?" I did not receive a response.
9. On 4 January 2012 I wrote directly to you citing 12 objective examples of factual errors, glaring omissions, and anti-protester slant that were in Mr. Kay's article. I did not receive a reply.
10. On 13 January 2012, I began the Freedom of Information (FOIA) procedure because Mr. Lilly told me (15 December 2011) " I did receive equally inappropriate letters from the pro-textbook side of this issue..."
Now that I have read the only other letter received by Goldenseal I renew, with added justification, my request that Goldenseal print a response to Mr. Kay's article. That letter consisted of Bible bashing and praise to Mr. Lilly for exposing the “narrow and ignorant viewpoints of the religious extremists.” The writer supports my point that Mr. Kay’s article was biased.
I will assume that all Goldenseal personnel concerned have had good intentions. However, the decisions made based upon those intentions were unfortunate. Correction is both warranted and compelled.
When Goldenseal published Kay’s inflammatory article it slurred thousands of people who were the Kanawha County Textbook protesters. Being accustomed to that kind of behavior from the press, I (as one of the people slurred) was only mildly aggravated. When Goldenseal refused to allow a rebuttal, the matter was amplified because readers (including those in the future) would expect to see rebuttal in the next issue. Now, at this late date, allowing a response will have greatly decreased effect but will still be a matter of record. To completely censor a response from the protesters’ side would be an egregious display of one-sided journalism. Please take immediate and unequivocal steps to right the wrong that Goldenseal (albeit unintentionally) has done to some very fine West Virginians.
As I previously told you, I am quite willing to revise my letter or even step aside and allow another knowledgeable source provide the protester point of view. Alice More is known by friend and foe as an articulate and genteel lady. She told me that she would be happy to respond. Please, without further delay, allow one of us to respond to Mr. Kay's article and print the response prominently.
Sincerely,
Karl Priest
NO REPLY WAS RECEIVED.
-------------------------------------------
4 March 2012
Mr. Randal Reid-Smith
Commissioner
West Virginia Division of Culture and History
Dear Commissioner Reid-Smith:
For many weeks I have been trying to resolve a situation of censorship and inaccurate history involving an article published in Goldenseal. Now, I am appealing to you for help.
It is not my desire for anyone to receive reprimand. I am seeking simple journalistic justice. Honest history has not been served by what Goldenseal published. If the article is allowed to go unanswered it amounts to true censorship.
I respectfully request that you resolve this matter without further delay.
A copy of my email to Deputy Commissioner Gresham is below my name. That will provide ample information for you to consider. To date, I have not received a reply from Ms. Gresham. I have a detailed record of all correspondence if you would like to see it.
I assume that the posted mission of your department will be upheld in this matter.
“The mission of the West Virginia Division of Culture and History is to identify, preserve, protect, promote and present the ideas, arts and artifacts of West Virginia’s heritage, building pride in our past accomplishments and confidence in our future.”
Thank you.
Yours truly,
Karl Priest
NO REPLY WAS RECEIVED.
-------------------------------------------
Note:
On 29 February 2012 I used the contact email provided on the Goldenseal website to request the email address of the commissioner of the West Virginia Division of Culture and History. The response was:
Mr. Priest:
If you would like to contact Commissioner Reid-Smith via email, you may do so to my address. I will then forward it to the Commissioner.
Thank you.
Bethany K. Cline
Executive Assistant to the Commissioner
Therefore, the next contact was directed to Ms. Cline.
9 March 2012
Dear Ms. Cline:
Does Mr. Reid-Smith intent on replying to my request of 4 March 2012?
I have pasted a copy of that email below my name.
Thank you.
Karl Priest
NO REPLY WAS RECEIVED.
-------------------------------------------
10 March 2012
The Honorable Earl Ray Tomblin
Office of the Governor
State Capitol
1900 Kanawha Boulevard, East
Charleston, West Virginia 25305
Dear Governor Thomblin:
I have politely appealed for fair treatment from Goldenseal magazine. I have not been afforded the courtesy of a response except for a Freedom of Information request and then Mr. Jeffrey M. Shawver (Deputy General Counsel of your office) had to persuade the Goldenseal official to follow the law.
Now, I am appealing to your office to bring this matter to a close by doing the ethical and honorable thing regarding the matter which should be adequately explained in the accompanying copies of recent correspondence with Goldenseal.
Thank you for your prompt attention to my request.
Sincerely,
Karl Priest
Enclosures
-------------------------------------------
I telephoned the governor's office on 13 March and was told that my letter arrived on the previous day and was referred to the legal department and that I should wait a few days and check back..
-------------------------------------------
20 March 2012
Jeffrey M. Shawver
Deputy General Counsel
Office of Governor Earl Ray Tomblin
Dear Mr. Shawver:
According to Governor Tomblin’s office you have been assigned to handle my letter to Governor Tomblin dated 10 March 2012. This is to follow-up my voice mail to you this morning. I think Governor Tomblin should use the following information to convey to Goldenseal that the ethical thing to do is to allow a rebuttal to the article (“Great Kanawha County Textbook War,” Fall 2011) which continued inaccurate historical information as well as content that slurred thousands of good West Virginia citizens and their posterity.
The following is excerpted from the “Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics” (http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp). Although this is directed to news reporting it certainly should serve as a guideline for historical recording.
>Test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error.
>Diligently seek out subjects of news stories to give them the opportunity to respond to allegations of wrongdoing.
>Make certain that headlines, news teases and promotional material, photos, video, audio, graphics, sound bites and quotations do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.
>Never distort the content of news photos or video.
>Examine their own cultural values and avoid imposing those values on others.
>Support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.
>Give voice to the voiceless; official and unofficial sources of information can be equally valid.
>Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage.
>Encourage the public to voice grievances against the news media.
>Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
The following is excerpted from the “Statement on Standards of Professional Conduct” of the American Historical Society (http://www.historians.org/pubs/free/ProfessionalStandards.cfm). Emphasis is in the original.
> Historians strive constantly to improve our collective understanding of the past through a complex process of critical dialogue—with each other, with the wider public, and with the historical record—in which we explore former lives and worlds in search of answers to the most compelling questions of our own time and place.
> By practicing their craft with integrity, historians acquire a reputation for trustworthiness that is arguably their single most precious professional asset. The trust and respect both of one's peers and of the public at large are among the greatest and most hard-won achievements that any historian can attain. It is foolish indeed to put them at risk.
> All historians believe in honoring the integrity of the historical record. They do not fabricate evidence.
> We honor the historical record, but understand that its interpretation constantly evolves as historians analyze primary documents in light of the ever-expanding body of secondary literature that places those documents in a larger context. By "documents," historians typically mean all forms of evidence—not just written texts, but artifacts, images, statistics, oral recollections, the built and natural environment, and many other things—that have survived as records of former times. By "secondary literature," we typically mean all subsequent interpretations of those former times based on the evidence contained in primary documents.
> Honoring the historical record also means leaving a clear trail for subsequent historians to follow.
> Knowing that trust is ultimately more important than winning a debate for the wrong reasons, professional historians are as interested in defining the limits and uncertainties of their own arguments as they are in persuading others that those arguments are correct. Finally, the trail of evidence left by any single work of history becomes a key starting point for subsequent investigations of the same subject, and thus makes a critical contribution to our collective capacity to ask and answer new questions about the past.
> Furthermore, the different peoples whose past lives we seek to understand held views of their lives that were often very different from each other—and from our own. Doing justice to those views means to some extent trying (never wholly successfully) to see their worlds through their eyes. This is especially true when people in the past disagreed or came into conflict with each other, since any adequate understanding of their world must somehow encompass their disagreements and competing points of view within a broader context. Multiple, conflicting perspectives are among the truths of history.
> (W)e understand that interpretive disagreements are vital to the creative ferment of our profession, and can in fact contribute to some of our most original and valuable insights...professional historians recognize that the resulting disagreements can deepen and enrich historical understanding by generating new questions, new arguments, and new lines of investigation.
> Historians celebrate intellectual communities governed by mutual respect and constructive criticism. The preeminent value of such communities is reasoned discourse—the continuous colloquy among historians holding diverse points of view who learn from each other...
> Professional integrity in thepractice of history requires awareness of one's own biases and a readiness to follow sound method and analysis wherever they may lead.
> Because interpreting the past is so vital to democratic debate and civic life in the public realm, historians regularly have the opportunity to discuss the implications of their knowledge for concerns and controversies in the present—including present controversies about past events.
Mr. Shawver, I trust that you will convey this additional information to Governor Tomblin. The reading of only the emphasized excerpts from the statement of professional conduct for historians provides ample reason for Goldenseal to allow even more of a rebuttal than the single letter I originally requested.
Thank you.
Yours truly,
Karl Priest
-------------------------------------------
Trey Kay (author of the article which is the subject of this appeal) was made aware of this deplorable situation. Mr. Kay and I had a telephone conversation regarding this matter on March 20, 2012. I think that Mr. Kay has no problem with the publication of a rebuttal article.
------------------------------------------
21 March 2012
Jeffrey M. Shawver
Deputy General Counsel
Office of Governor Earl Ray Tomblin
Dear Mr. Shawver:
Thank you for having your colleague call me at on 20 March. I believe his name was Mr. Huffman. I apologize if I seemed to have ended the call sort of abruptly. I was standing outside of my house waiting for the Ford garage courtesy van. The driver was lost and I had been taking his phone calls for directions. Another call arrived while I was speaking to your colleague and I had to take it due to the late hour (4:17 PM) and knowing the driver was near his quitting time.
I understand that Governor Tomblin will respond to my request for ethical and fair treatment regarding the Goldenseal article within a week to ten days. Please correct me if I am wrong. I understand that the governor’s office is busy during this post-legislative session.
Yours truly,
Karl Priest
Mr. Shawver responded the same day:
Yes, it is a busy time for our office. I am currently out of the office in meetings. We are reviewing your request and will respond within the timeframe indicated earlier. Thanks.
-------------------------------------------
2 April 2012
Jeffrey M. Shawver
Deputy General Counsel
Office of Governor Earl Ray Tomblin
Dear Mr. Shawver:
I still await Governor Tomblin's response to my request for help in the matter of unethical journalism in the state supported Goldenseal magazine.
Recently I spoke with the author of the article to which parts of I object. Mr. Trey Kay (Mr. Kay’s email) is an honorable man who sincerely wants to produce accurate history. He may not agree with the points I have raised about his article, but he indicated he has no problem with a rebuttal being printed in Goldenseal. In fact, he may even support such a move if asked.
I hope the governor will take that into consideration along with other items I have provided.
Sincerely,
Karl Priest
NO REPLY WAS RECEIVED.
-------------------------------------------
12 April 2012
Jeffrey M. Shawver
Deputy General Counsel
Office of Governor Earl Ray Tomblin
Dear Mr. Shawver:
On Tuesday I found a letter in my mail which was addressed to someone else and mistakenly delivered to my box. Of course, I returned it to the post office.
Since the promised response from Governor Tomblin is way past due, I am concerned that it may have been "lost in the mail."
Please send both a regular mail and email copy of the governor's response to my request dated 10 March 2012.
Thank you.
Karl Priest
------------------------------------------
On 19 April 2012 I received a telephone call from Ms. Caryn Gresham, Deputy Commissioner of the Division of Culture and History. The conversation was pleasant and she informed me that I could write an article for the next edition. She granted my request for Alice Moore to be the co-author. Later I decided that Mrs. Moore deserved to write the bulk of the article.
19 April 2012
Dear Governor Tomblin:
Thank you so very much for assisting me with my request to have accurate (at least by publishing two viewpoints) West Virginia history recorded.
I know your schedule has been busy since I submitted my request. Also, I know that you did the right thing (as I see it) despite potential wrath from those who despise the folks known as the Kanawha County Textbook Protesters. For nearly forty years there has been an onslaught of misinformation, mistakes, and intentional propaganda which has served to defame the protesters. Sadly, good intentioned people have been misinformed and brain-washed. I have been surprised at how many Christian and/or conservatives are aware of only one side of that complicated story. Besides my book (http://www.insectman.us/testimony/protester-voices.htm) I have developed some webpages (http://www.insectman.us/testimony/textbook-protester-truth/the-facts.htm) to try to bring the truth to light.
Your assistance with the Goldenseal matter will help to do a good thing. Even if you disagree with my point-of-view, I think you will be satisfied that the citizens of West Virginia, and future generations of those interested in history, have been well served.
Today Ms. Gresham telephoned me and we had a very pleasant conversation. She graciously offered me an opportunity to prepare an article for the summer editor of Goldenseal. I am going to ask Alice Moore to write the bulk of the article. She is a lady that nearly everyone (friend and foe) considers to be the epitome of graciousness.
Thank you for your leadership and courage.
Sincerely,
Karl Priest
-------------------------------------------
The June 2012 edition of Goldenseal contained our article “America’s First Modern Tea Party”. However, it was not listed in the table of contents or placed on the cover map indicating story
------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------
My censored letter:
Trey Kay is a talented and honest journalist of whom I have high regard. There are some good things in his article (“Great Kanawha County Textbook War”, Fall, 2011). Like his radio documentary, Trey’s article is only slightly slanted against the protesters which are by far the best we have ever had from a secular source.
It is regrettable that Trey did not use his article to correct some things and improve upon his documentary.
The article stated that the protested books were "Mostly high school supplemental books available as additional reading at the teachers' discretion". Actually, the adoption included the main language books for the elementary level. Between 65-80% of Kanawha County parents refused to allow their children to use those books when provided opt-out forms late into the protest.
The article insinuated that a lot of parents kept their children out because they were intimidated by the protesters. The facts are that the protesters at individual schools were friends and neighbors. Photos show that they were peaceful. Except for a rare critical comment, children attending school were not harassed.
Both of Trey’s projects failed to mention that the Business and Professional Peoples’ Alliance for Better Textbooks was a MAJOR protester group. Liberals cannot use that group to enhance the negative image they want to portray about the protesters.
The facts are that some radicals, unconnected to the mainline protesters, bombed some schools. My book (Protester Voices—The 1974 Textbook Tea Party) mutes that slur against the protesters by documenting that damage to property was minimal. There is reason to believe the explosion at the board office was done by someone working against the protesters.
A major, glaring, shortcoming by Trey was not stating that the man who was shot was seriously wounded by a gun fired by a leader of a group organized to oppose the protesters! That group quickly changed its name and the media never showed much interest in the shooter’s liberalism.
The protesters did not object to "writers of color." My book documents that the black community got led astray by their liberal leaders. In Trey's documentary and the Goldenseal article the claim is made that someone saw signs "everywhere" the county reading, "Get the n------- books out of the county." I checked with Trey and he has never seen a photograph of that sign. While writing my book I searched three extensive files of newspaper articles and did not see such a photo. It is obvious that someone said something to support an agenda and others repeated and likely embellished it. I have always said that any such signs would have been planted by liberals and photographed for propaganda purposes. It is amazing that the anti-protesters did not think of it since they did other sneaky things to cause trouble in the protester ranks.
The quote Trey used to conclude his article made the protesters appear childish. In fact, the source of that quote repeatedly called the protesters “stupid" in the documentary and is an example of the high-minded hypocrisy of liberals. The critic should practice what she preaches in her last sentence and learn to look at viewpoints other than her own and not fall apart.
On October 7, 2011 a Textbook Protest Truth Program was held at the LaBelle Theatre in South Charleston. That program was filmed and a documentary will be produced. Anyone who wants the truth about the Great Textbook War can find it in my book and that documentary.
-------------------------------------------
The letter obtained through the FOIA request:
Hi, John-
Trey Kay's "Great Kanawha County Textbook War"described
an event we can't be proud of, but one worth knowing about. It Was an important part of the excellent Fall issue.
The protester's sign I HAVE A BIBLE I DON'T NEED THOSE DIRTY BOOKS no doubt brought many responses to her unintended but legitimate point: that her Bible is dirty enough so she doesn’t need the other books.
The irony is that the Bible—commendable though it is as mo.ral guidance, inspiration, and poetry--contains enough murders, rapes, and other crimes and misbehaviors to surely make it more objectionable for school use than the other "dirty" books.
The quality and suitability of schoolbooks is a matter of legitimate concern for parents, but the narrow and ignorant viewpoints of the religious extremists among them produce problems all the way from faulty yardsticks to criminal behavior.
Your inclusion of this article is an example of the "light of day" exposure that educates all of' us. Thanks for the history lesson.
(Signature removed by Goldenseal)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
For more about the censorship of the protesters see the “censorship slur” page of Textbook Protester Truth.
Read more about the censorship and suppression of Protester Voices.
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
For the record, I do not post personal correspondence on my website. I distinguish between personal and professional correspondence. For example, my correspondence regarding the WVU Curriculum is professional although it is directed to me personally. I post it as a matter of historical record. That said, there are other situations, such as when I had a dialogue with Richard Dawkins that I post the emails because of the scientific (in that case) value.
I know an atheist who is fanatical about his religious dogma even though he fervently denies being religious. He is a likeable man with high integrity. Just because I correctly refer to him as a "flaming atheist" does not mean I do not like him. In fact, Christ commands Christians to love everyone. Therefore, there are a lot of people that I do not like, yet I love them only through Christ whose Spirit dwells in me.
I try to always speak forthrightly and truthfully although I sometimes fail. It is right that I do the same about the Christian religion. Sadly, if a person wears the label "Christian," it does not always come with high ethics. Some of the most unscrupulous men with whom I have dealt claimed to be Christians. That should not be a reflection upon Jesus Christ (who gave everyone a free will), but rather a statement about humans. Here is an analogy. I was in the Navy and know a lot about how Marines think and act. I also know a lot of their lingo and terminology. I could fool a lot of people into thinking that I am a former Marine. However, I could not fool a real Marine. Also, if a combat situation arose, I couldn't fool hardly anyone.
However, if my friends and brethren are attacked by whomever—a nice guy or not—I take them to task. It is nothing personal.
TEXTBOOK WAR MAIN PAGE