Freedom must be saved

The potential closure of an iconic publication such as ‘Freedom’ is an absolute travesty, and would be in whatever circumstances that it may have arisen. However, the reasons for which it found itself in such a perilous financial state makes me feel sick to the pit of my stomach.

Submitted by working class … on July 19, 2012

Freedom was founded in 1886 by a group of volunteers, and despite format changes, is still in publication today, 125 years from when it first appeared. Freedom has been written and edited by some of the most legendary figures in the movement, and has a well-deserved reputation.

I am no expert of the finances at Freedom, but clearly those finances are limited. Any substantial or unexpected cost was bound to put a spanner in the works. What you would not expect is an allegedly ‘left leaning’, anti-fascist, photojournalist, to near bankrupt the newspaper over the accidental use of a photograph in a book.

David Hoffman, a well-established photojournalist, took issue with a photograph used in the 2009 book, “Beating the Fascists”, that didn’t have his permission. Rather than just accepting an apology for a genuine mistake, the rat bastard decided to go after Freedom and threatened them with legal action. Ultimately they have had to hand over £4,000 to the cunt, which has left them in dire straits.

Freedom is launching an appeal for donations and subscriptions. If nothing changes then it will cease to exist in its current printed form in October.

I started writing the international news pages a few months ago, which has given me an insight into the hard work and commitment of all those involved. They really do bust their asses every month to ensure the paper is finished.

Freedom has given so much to the movement for well over a century, I really hope the movement can pull together for a really worthwhile cause.

***Please click on this link for more detailed information and how you can help***

Comments

the button

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by the button on July 19, 2012

I have mixed feelings about this. In many ways, Freedom has improved (I got my first copy in 1984, and they sent me a free copy of Green Anarchist too, along with some poems printed on postcards :wall: ). But it's pretty difficult being "the movement's paper," when there isn't really a movement to be the paper of. And while I salute the efforts of those involved (among whom I number some of my closest friends), I have to ask myself if it's worth it for the sake of 300-odd subscribers and minimum public sales. And before anyone says, "More people should write for it and sell it," my pre-emptive response would be "No-one's being stopping you/me/us, and hasn't been for some time."

If Freedom does cease paper publication, it'll be in no sense the fault of the people who produce it. I just don't think there's the demand for it, tbh.

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on July 19, 2012

It was more than one photo, but even being generous and assuming most or all of them were his (they weren't) I did a quick calculation and the total value doesn't come to much over £3,000 - basically what he took advantage of was our inability to dispute it, as if Freedom had lost in court it would have been bankrupted immediately.

He may come on here later trying to justify himself, he's been whining on Twitter recently:

"Hoffman"

Freedom blame **. I blame their theft & lies. But they have £1m asset squirreled in holding company, lose no sleep!

Firstly, his "assets" line is way out. The "holding company" he's talking about is the Friends of Freedom, who hold the building in trust. The building is worth nowhere near his estimate and is in any case very specifically not the same thing as the Press.

The Press is involved in the paper, book publishing and sales through the shop on the ground floor. The building, held in trust by the Friends of Freedom, currently provides space for the Press, Corporate Watch, the Advisory Service for Squatters, SF and LCAP which otherwise would be way beyond any of our reach. The Friends have nothing whatsoever to do with publishing decisions made by the Press.

So what he went after was the Press collective, which has no assets other than a couple of rooms full of books (which may be valued at quite a lot but can't be used to pay debts, sadly) and a small amount in the bank. And rather than do the decent thing and ask for a non-monetary solution like a public apology, he's rinsed it for as much as he can get away with.

The big problem here is that in doing so he has effectively bolloxed the main group in the building which pays most of its running costs through sales of various products. So by pressing his absurdly high claim he's putting the viability of not just the Press, but of the building and thus the future of some of the movement's most important groups at risk.

He has form for this shit and has so I hear been going after lots of other people too. He seems to be building up a retirement fund by going after anyone he can grab a few grand off regardless of how much it damages their ability to function - but hey, he still reckons he's "left wing" and "sympathetic" if you can work that one out.

Battlescarred

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Battlescarred on July 19, 2012

This piece of excrement should be made unwelcome on any future events where he turns up to take photos. He's bankrupted Freedom and has no guilt about it at all. A miserable apology for a human being.

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on July 19, 2012

Hoffman in the process of really not getting this:

twitter.com/davidhoffmanuk

He seems to think accusing us of "thieving" his intellectual property is going to make all the anarchists like him again :roll:.

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on July 19, 2012

It's not about the money IT'S A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE!!1!

But I DO get four large

raw

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by raw on July 19, 2012

he's a dirty little scumbag and should be treated as such

Spikymike

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Spikymike on July 19, 2012

Given the advantages of web based access and the increasing costs of printing and mailng I suspect the days of regularly published and distributed radical/revolutionary journals in hard copy is drawing to a close, which as an old-stager still preferring that format for anything longer than a couple of pages is disapointing.

I have been one of the more recent regular subscribers to Freedom and whilst it's not the most interesting of journals around it still performs a useful function. It is one of several printed journals I subsribe to and partly for the reason that I have experienced two lengthy internet disconnections in the past. It may be that some of those old skills will be still be needed from time to time if, or when, those with the political and commercial controls of the Internet decide to selectively shut down or censor our other means of communication?

oisleep

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by oisleep on July 19, 2012

David Hoffman should be made persona non grata at any marches, demonstrations or other left wing events due to his role in all this

This supposed anti-fascist, who made a career off the back of photographing anti-fascists 'at work' and receiving protection from same that allowed him to do so, has prioritised his own greed and self interest above any political principles whatsoever. He has also allowed himself to be used as the useful idiot of those with a more sinister & political agenda

He also relished with glee the prospect of several long term militant anti-fascists from AFA being named in court, with the potential of exposing and linking them to activities described in the book, all of which he saw as a by-product/collateral damage of him pursuing a claim for copyright of photos which had been legitimately given to AFA over twenty years ago and had been used in numerous publications in the past without any complaint from him.

He also attempted to force journalists who had interviewed the authors to reveal their sources (through threats of legal action) despite this being in clear contradiction of NUJ rules, of which he is a member

He also refused to accept an early settlement made on good faith and boasted about his desire to put Freedom Press out of business

Earlier this year he sued a drugs charity (and a primary care trust) for using photographs in good faith that they believed they had the right to use, this ultimately ended up closing down the charity and he successfully established the precedent that 'innocence is no defence'

The guy is a fucking parasite and should be treated as such by anyone involved in progressive politics

oisleep

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by oisleep on July 19, 2012

Also just to clarify, the photos weren't used accidentally - they were used on the understanding that AFA had the right to use them, as said photos had been supplied to AFA over a number of years by Searchlight (who Hoffman was a snapper for) in exchange for intelligence and had been used in numerous AFA publications over the previous twenty years with no complaint from any party

Then all of a sudden with the publication of the book, a claim was made that these photos had been stolen from Hoffman (despite no crime ever being reported in the intervening 20 years where the photos had been used on regular occasions in various other publications)

From the very outset of this though, it's been clear that there was also another agenda at play and not just the narrow pursuit of copyright by an individual - so while it's crap what has happened in relation to him extracting the 4 grand from freedom, this outcome wasn't the outcome that he and his backers were ultimately looking for

Battlescarred

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Battlescarred on July 19, 2012

Does the NUJ know about this foul behaviour?

oisleep

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by oisleep on July 19, 2012

Yes - apparently anarchist donnacha delong (sp?) was helping Hoffman out with his case against FP

Ed

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Ed on July 19, 2012

oisleep

Yes - apparently anarchist donnacha delong (sp?) was helping Hoffman out with his case against FP

Seriously?! Donnacha posts here so I'd like to hear his side on this (i.e. is it true or not?).. if it is then personally I think Donnacha should be isolated out of the movement as well..

Steven.

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Steven. on July 19, 2012

Yeah, someone should contact Donnacha for his side of the story. But if that is true that is totally unacceptable. And as for this photographer guy, what a total piece of shit.

working class …

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by working class … on July 19, 2012

David Hoffman ‏@davidhoffmanuk
I tried 2 let F'dom off with few 100 but their lies, theft & obstruction sank them.

working class …

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by working class … on July 19, 2012

David Hoffman ‏@davidhoffmanuk
I tried 2 let F'dom off with few 100 but their lies, theft & obstruction sank them.

klas batalo

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by klas batalo on July 19, 2012

anyone have any friends with anonymous? :bb:

oisleep

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by oisleep on July 19, 2012

Ed

oisleep

Yes - apparently anarchist donnacha delong (sp?) was helping Hoffman out with his case against FP

Seriously?! Donnacha posts here so I'd like to hear his side on this (i.e. is it true or not?).. if it is then personally I think Donnacha should be isolated out of the movement as well..

At one point he did appear to be acting as some kind of representative for Hoffman, presumably in his NUJ capacity (I have been blind copied on various emails between FP and him in relation to this, so it's not just hearsay)

He should tell his side of the story though as you say

oisleep

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by oisleep on July 19, 2012

working class self organisation

David Hoffman ‏@davidhoffmanuk
I tried 2 let F'dom off with few 100

He's a lying prick

Since he first raised this thing in October 2011, he persistently refused to even discuss any kind of settlement that FP had offered him. And the reason why he refused? Because he wouldn't begin to talk about anything until FP had handed over names & addresses of the authors of the book. A strange approach for someone to take who on the surface was only interested in pursuing his copyright claim with the publishers of the book. FP quite rightly refused to give him this information (they didn't have it anyway, but they were still pressurised by Trading Standards under threat of criminal charge to reveal what information they did have, which they also admirably refused to do )

He took a similar approach with a journalist who had posted a copy of the cover pic on his blog - demanded money for copyright infringement but offered to waive it if said journalist revealed his sources and handed over names & addresses of the authors of the book

I'll leave you all to join up the dots as to why a Searchlight snapper & representative would be interested in these kind of details

donnacha.delong

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by donnacha.delong on July 19, 2012

I was asked by David to be an intermediate between him and Freedom Press because I knew them. I did so, trying to help both sides come to an agreement. David wasn't happy with Freedom Press' response, so decided to take legal action. I withdrew from the process at that stage and did not help him after that point. Andy Meinke and Dean Talent can confirm that this was my only involvement.

Mr. Jolly

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Mr. Jolly on July 19, 2012

He also fucked over a fellow NUJ member Brian Whelan because he used one of the photographs in his blog where he interviews the authors, refused to hand over names and so had to pay up. Is it tolerable that NUJ members should be asking other members to reveal their sources?

http://brianwhelan.net/post/6033834484/street-politics-beating-the-fascists

Choccy

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Choccy on July 19, 2012

What a piece of fucking leeching shit.

raw

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by raw on July 19, 2012

I think it should be "movement" policy to tell this guy to fuck off out of any demo he is seen on. agree?

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on July 20, 2012

This supposed anti-fascist, who made a career off the back of photographing anti-fascists 'at work' and receiving protection from same that allowed him to do so

He should be billed for close protection services, reckon it'd come to a bit more than £4,000 ;)

Edit: Interesting, one of Hoffman's mates on Twitter writes:

Young whippersnapper, angry young zealot even, there's a backstory beyond even that (you weren't there)

Basically saying this is in part about going after Red Action? Would certainly explain the insistence of a supposed journalist on other people naming their sources.

Mr. Jolly

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Mr. Jolly on July 20, 2012

Or he is hinting that the Photographer has a personal gripe with RA, rather than a wider conspiracy with Searchlight?

rat

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by rat on July 20, 2012

Maybe this unfortunate incident will help to remind British anarchists that journalists do tend to be parasites and never to trust any of them.

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on July 20, 2012

I'm a journalist. And the third longest-serving member of the Freedom Press collective. And the second longest continuously-serving member of North London SolFed. And an editor of Black Flag. And have never come close to abusing my position to damage any left wing or anarchist organisation.

Want to try "any" again?

Mr. Jolly

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Mr. Jolly on July 20, 2012

zero

Maybe this unfortunate incident will help to remind British anarchists that journalists do tend to be parasites and never to trust any of them.

Sadly this is the all to common paranoid angle that some anarchists have about anyone outside certain subcultural bubbles, it doesn't do us any favours.

rat

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by rat on July 20, 2012

I'll try again:

Journalists do tend to be parasites; never trust any of them.

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on July 20, 2012

Well I respect your stubborn streak at least, you might want to rethink the acting like a massive idiot bit though.

Fall Back

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Fall Back on July 20, 2012

raw

I think it should be "movement" policy to tell this guy to fuck off out of any demo he is seen on. agree?

Definitely agree. Reckon it might be worth trying go get a common statement from the various Feds, groups, collectives etc that he isn't welcome at anything we organise? Probably even activist groups beyond anarchy ones.

Photographing lefty events seems to be his bread and butter, let's make sure he knows this won't be so easy anymore.

raw

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by raw on July 20, 2012

Fall Back

raw

I think it should be "movement" policy to tell this guy to fuck off out of any demo he is seen on. agree?

Definitely agree. Reckon it might be worth trying go get a common statement from the various Feds, groups, collectives etc that he isn't welcome at anything we organise? Probably even activist groups beyond anarchy ones.

Photographing lefty events seems to be his bread and butter, let's make sure he knows this won't be so easy anymore.

Great idea - which org wants to start the ball rolling? Feel free to email [email protected] and I can bring it up. Also might be good to check out the orgs he's used to photograph like the Liberate Tate people.

raw

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by raw on July 20, 2012

zero

I'll try again:

Journalists do tend to be parasites; never trust any of them.

I think this has and still is my sentiment purely from experience.

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on July 20, 2012

Your sentiment includes dealing with me for the last seven years, on and off, would you say I've been an untrustworthy parasite, in your experience?

Larry O'Hara

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Larry O'Hara on July 20, 2012

I agree with Fallback above: something needs to be done.

It is an open question as to Hoffman's precise motivations: on the surface, merely money (he did get some from the Met Police a while ago), however going after the addresses of Beating the Fascists authors perhaps points to another agenda.

We know (from an admission by a South London photographer used still by the SWP I believe) that photographers share photos with cops.

Excrement as Hoffman evidently is, there is another issue raised by this thread, about the continuing viability or otherwise of hard copy publications in the digital age. As the publisher/editor of one such (Notes From the Borderland) I clearly have an interest, but also an opinion.

If you go into any supermarket, the shelves are packed with glossy high-production value magazines (Exchange & Mart/Parkers Guide aside). So, clearly, people do still buy things like that: it is just that they often don't buy Leftist versions. Otherwise, supermarkets wouldn't sell them. There are all sort of complex reasons for this state of affairs, but it illustrates it isn't a simple question of hard copy being defunct at all. It is interesting that following Hope Not Hate's split from Searchlight, the former (which had been virtual) has felt the need to produce a magazine.

The very fact of a radical bookshop being in existence (Freedom & Housman's too) creates an anti-capitalist space for real-life humans to connect. With the rise of e-books too, that is under threat.

Aside from improving production values, in my view Left/anarchists need to get involved in this whole virtual/digital vs real world debate. There is some fascinating stuff out there (eg Lanier's I am Not a Gadget). A conference/debate on these matters would, I suggest, bring in more than the 'usual suspects', and hence enlarge the space for radical hard copy publications.

raw

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by raw on July 20, 2012

Rob Ray

Your sentiment includes dealing with me for the last seven years, on and off, would you say I've been an untrustworthy parasite, in your experience?

I've related to you as an anarchist comrade first and foremost Rob

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on July 20, 2012

Okay, but I am also a journalist, as are a fair few other people in the movement. I get annoyed about the "all" stuff because for people who are new and/or don't know my background it can actively get in the way to have that automatic tarring going on. Obviously I'd never tell people not to be careful, but there's a big difference between a tendency and a totality.

Mr. Jolly

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Mr. Jolly on July 20, 2012

raw

Rob Ray

Your sentiment includes dealing with me for the last seven years, on and off, would you say I've been an untrustworthy parasite, in your experience?

I've related to you as an anarchist comrade first and foremost Rob

But this whole situation has arisen because of problems BETWEEN journalists.

oisleep

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by oisleep on July 20, 2012

no it hasn't

there is an incidental episode in this whole sorry saga between journalists that provides further evidence as to David Hoffman's suspect character, but this was a by-product of the wider situation, it wasn't its cause

journalists have really nothing to do with the crux of the issue here

georgestapleton

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by georgestapleton on July 20, 2012

Rob Ray

Okay, but I am also a journalist, as are a fair few other people in the movement. I get annoyed about the "all" stuff because for people who are new and/or don't know my background it can actively get in the way to have that automatic tarring going on. Obviously I'd never tell people not to be careful, but there's a big difference between a tendency and a totality.

Ok but you are employed by the radical press and that does result in different pressures. Of the 30-40 people who make a living in journalism that I have encountered, there are four I trust personally and three I trust professionally.

Those three are you, the editor of Look Left in Ireland, and Donnacha (who as far as I know isn't actually a journalist anymore but rather is a media advisor). Every single journalist I know who makes money in political journalism where they are not working for the radical press is untrustworthy professionally. And that includes one person who said he used to write truthfully but by the time it got to print his articles always contained slurs, and lies and misrepresentations. (This person, I don't know very well, but from my few encounters seems to be a decent bloke and I believe him when he says what he submitted wouldn't originally contain the bad bits.)

I mean when you write an article for the times/guardian/telegraph on a demonstration/political movement and it isn't a load of complete and utter crap, I'll be extremely impressed. Now you've never written anything like that. And I consider you a friend. I like you personally as well as professionally. So this is not a personal criticism. Political journalism and journalists have a role in society that does put them at odds with our movement. That doesn't mean secluding ourselves from the press as the WOMBLES kind-of tried to do. But really I don't think criticizing journalists is any less legitimate than, for example, criticizing left wing councillors or politicians purely because they are politicians. Some of them are great. For example, Paul Murphy a socialist party MEP in Ireland is, I think, a really good guy who is a serious and sincere socialist. But if he got upset when people criticize politicians in general I'd think its as ridiculous as when lefty journalists get up when people criticize journalists in general or when lefty academics get upset when people criticize academics in general. Or if he thinks, and he does, that he can rise above the contradictions of the position he holds, I'd think it ridiculous. Politicians are politicians, journalists are journalists and academics are academics. It doesn't make them bad people or cant be part of the movement, but it does often make them do bad things and things that damage the movement.

And I'm saying this as someone who would like to be an academic and tried to go down that road and who would like to work in financial/economic journalism and will probably try to go down that road in the future. But there is no denying that journalism is a compromising position.

I generally think, the whole lefty thing that so big in London about having un-corrupting jobs is absurd. But its equally absurd to say that jobs are not corrupting or that they don't make workers do things that they wouldn't otherwise do. (And not just because your boss forces you to.)

(The possible exception to all of this would be Paul Mason. But even there I don't know if I'd trust him. And I have no idea how he gets away with what he does.)

donnacha.delong

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by donnacha.delong on July 20, 2012

I'm still a journalist, I just can't make much money out of it, so I tend to write and present Circled A on occasions for nothing and try to make a living from editorial advice.

raw

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by raw on July 20, 2012

I agree with georgestapleton. The biggest critiques of journalists should be from journalists rather than being their defenders or apologists. It is an inherent role that journalists play, especially political journalists who seemed more interested in defending their profession than their anarchist principles.

Ed

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Ed on July 20, 2012

georgestapleton

I don't think criticizing journalists is any less legitimate than, for example, criticizing left wing councillors or politicians purely because they are politicians. Some of them are great. For example, Paul Murphy a socialist party MEP in Ireland is, I think, a really good guy who is a serious and sincere socialist. But if he got upset when people criticize politicians in general I'd think its as ridiculous as when lefty journalists get up when people criticize journalists in general or when lefty academics get upset when people criticize academics in general. Or if he thinks, and he does, that he can rise above the contradictions of the position he holds, I'd think it ridiculous. Politicians are politicians, journalists are journalists and academics are academics. It doesn't make them bad people or cant be part of the movement, but it does often make them do bad things and things that damage the movement.

With the utmost respect and not meant at all as a cheap one-liner, I can't help but think this says more about your opinion of politicians than it does about the role of journos or academics in society.

Mr. Jolly

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Mr. Jolly on July 20, 2012

Photo journalists, journalists, publishers etc. all same world iosleep, thats what I was getting at. For someone to say fuck journalists, when the people who are being attacked are journalists, publishers etc, not aimed at the meta conspiracy, rather they relationship between wanker, Whelan, Freedom, NUJ etc.

martinh

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by martinh on July 20, 2012

Some of the comments on here seem to confirm what I've long suspected about this character, namely that he had a bigger agenda that involved attacking his bosses political enemies.

I agree he should be persona non grata at anything organised by anarchists or with significant anarchist involvement. I also think that this should be spread beyond the anarchist movement. If he is in the business of trying to close down radical publishers, it should be of concern to anyone who thinks that there should be radical publishers. The fact that he's shut down a charity using his same despicable tactics should be spread far and wide. His actions put him in the same category as a scab IMO and he should be treated as such and this should be made clear to everyone.

One question for the NUJ members- can he be expelled for his behaviour? The loss of his press card would at least minimise his ability to continue his parasitic workings on behalf of his paymasters.

Regards,

Martin

rat

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by rat on July 20, 2012

it might be worth trying go get a common statement from the various Feds, groups, collectives etc

Who would such a statement be aimed at?
Who the audience be?
What would be the point?
How would it be backed-up?
Wouldn't it just provide Hoffman with a good laugh?

Armchair Anarchist

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Armchair Anarchist on July 20, 2012

What a despicable scumbag. Isn't this the bloke who had his collar felt for putting the Class War Cameron is a wanker poster in his window?

martinh

One question for the NUJ members- can he be expelled for his behaviour? The loss of his press card would at least minimise his ability to continue his parasitic workings on behalf of his paymasters.

NUJ code of conduct, not sure that any of it applies in this case though:

http://media.gn.apc.org/nujcode.html

steve y

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by steve y on July 20, 2012

I knew David Hoffman in the late 80s and 90s, who was pleasant enough with anti-fascists around AFA, etc. Truth is that he had to be for protection, something he forgets quite easily - he owes us. This is especially the case as he was nothing but an isolated Searchlight photographer without much integrity and a total Gable-poodle. I suspect this Freedom case has much to do with Gable's hostility to the left and anarchism, along with a pretence alliance with the white-boy largely skinhead AFA gang - of which I was a critical member for too many years. In 1992 I was expelled from London AFA for proposing something along the following lines, which I have also talked about, with open arms, at the founding meeting of a London AF meeting to join with the national Anti-Fascist Network:

The new Anti-Fascist Network response to EDL must develop both its own intelligence, and serious sensitivity and militant integration with the youth of communities now attacked by fascists - Muslim, Arab, Black and Asian. Something AFA never did. But also we need to develop a rounded understanding that fascism is but one part of the strategic divide and rule method of the ruling class, and that this is against women, LGBTQ, etc. The ruling class grasp much better than the left that the systems of oppression are interconnected systems inside one system of oppression - and they play their divide and rule instrument according to need. Blinkered AFA only saw white working class male youth to either recruit or beat up.

That strategic temperature was turned up in the 70's and 80's by the ruling class in face or working class strength; then turned down in the following decades according to need (look at the eccentric Stephen Lawrence publicity) following serious uk and global working class defeat; and now it will be turned up again as they impose deeper and deeper austerity measures globally and here. Gable and Red Action are two sides of a sick coin that needs chucking in the Thames! What forced the BNP turn to electoralism was not the self-glorifying myth of AFA/Red Action in 'Beating the Fascists', but the broad defeat of the working class and new needs of the ruling class. An effective new AFN is how to beat Hoffman/Gable, but all this belongs in another thread, just like the good/bad journalist debate.

solid - stevey

Fall Back

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Fall Back on July 20, 2012

zero

Who would such a statement be aimed at?

It would be asking people to not give Hoffman access to protests they had organised.

Who the audience be?

It would be asking people to not give Hoffman access to protests they had organised.

What would be the point?

It would be asking people to not give Hoffman access to protests they had organised.

How would it be backed-up?

By not giving him easy access to protests we've organised.

Wouldn't it just provide Hoffman with a good laugh?

Given that it's how he makes his money, no.

rat

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by rat on July 20, 2012

People?

Fall Back

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Fall Back on July 20, 2012

people(pee-puh l)
noun

1. persons indefinitely or collectively; persons in general: to find it easy to talk to people; What will people think?
2. persons, whether men, women, or children, considered as numerable individuals forming a group: Twenty people volunteered to help.
3. human beings, as distinguished from animals or other beings.

welshboy

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by welshboy on July 20, 2012

I posted a wee bit about this on my blog, just so there may be something 'permanent' for the time being. If folk want me to change or add anything PM me or put it in the comments.
http://whitthef.wordpress.com/2012/07/20/what-a-fanny-david-hoffman/
(edited to add: nothing new, just a permanent post that isn't a forum thread)

Mr. Jolly

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Mr. Jolly on July 20, 2012

Has Hoffman been making any direct noises to Freedom et al. wanting to put his side of the story?

Choccy

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Choccy on July 21, 2012

Fallback's made clear the reasons for both a public statement to articulate that Hoffman is unwelcome at any sort of radical event, and that should he show at any, that people make him uncomfortable, as his parasitic, opportunistic, calculated, deceitful pursuit of this case means his cards are marked.

Choccy

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Choccy on July 21, 2012

Mr. Jolly

Has Hoffman been making any direct noises to Freedom et al. wanting to put his side of the story?

he's talking shite on twitter about 'right to reply' in Freedom, the dialogue seems to be going:

PARASITICCUNTHOFFMAN: why won't you give me right of reply?
F:you're welcome to send a letter
PARASITICCUNT: WHY WONT YOU GIVE ME RIGHT OF REPLY
F: send in a letter
PARASITICCUNT: they won't even give me right to reply

Jared

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Jared on July 21, 2012

Totally feel the anger about this and share it, but cmon, can we please lay off the patriarchal language? ie cunt, cuntish, fanny... I don't mean to be a stickler but seriously, a lot of our comrades are women and using those terms negatively is not that cool. :oops:

welshboy

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by welshboy on July 21, 2012

You're not worried about the term 'prick' though Jared?

Jared

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Jared on July 21, 2012

You're not worried about the term 'prick' though Jared?

Didn't see that coming ;)

plasmatelly

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by plasmatelly on July 21, 2012

I remember the attack on the bookshop and how people from everywhere sent money in - even though the paper was rubbish. This is different, this photographer has essentially brought the paper itself to the precipice. There's no question, how this has come about is shameful and I'm sure it'll rumble on for some time to come.
The question is - is there enough genuine support from class-struggle anarchists to keep this thing alive? If there isn't then it's goodnight Freedom.
I'm more uncomfortable with the idea of it folding than supportive of the paper itself. I haven't really picked up from any of these posts that people are prepared to hand over money to bail the paper out.

Mr. Jolly

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Mr. Jolly on July 21, 2012

Jared

Totally feel the anger about this and share it, but cmon, can we please lay off the patriarchal language? ie cunt, cuntish, fanny... I don't mean to be a stickler but seriously, a lot of our comrades are women and using those terms negatively is not that cool. :oops:

Don't want to get into the peurile argument about the preponderance of potty mouthed patter, but I think one of our Liverpool SF comrades makes decent points, suffice to say don't think you speak for all feminists, or your gallantry is appreciated by all women, be they anarchist or not.

http://magiczebras.posterous.com/can-we-check-our-cunting-privilege

***Edit*** Given the public nature of Libcom, and us projecting some sort of 'image' and all that reeling in the expletives may be a worthy goal...

Ed

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Ed on July 21, 2012

It might be worth chucking in that 'cunt' means different things in different places.. I think in the States its a particularly nasty way of calling a woman a slut (which is already pretty nasty), I think its the same in Australia and so could be the same in NZ (where Jared is from). In the UK, its basically a way of calling someone a dick (or, if you go to Northern Ireland, a way of greeting old friends ;) ) and pretty much every feminist that I know, male or female, uses it.

rat

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by rat on July 21, 2012

Getting back on track.
plasmatelly raises the most significant issue:

The question is - is there enough genuine support from class-struggle anarchists to keep this thing alive?

If there isn't then it's goodnight Freedom.

Jared

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Jared on July 21, 2012

The last thing I want to do is derail this thread, so I'll just add quickly that here in NZ it's not cool to use that term in most circles. I couldn't care less if it's PC or not, but for me it's a matter of respect, and I'm just trying to act the same both online and in person (rather than some act of gallantry). So yeah, sorry if the UK movement is ok with it—we must be a few years behind in the antipodes!

Jared

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Jared on July 21, 2012

Deleted: double post

Choccy

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Choccy on July 21, 2012

Hoffman is a dickhead, a prick, a ballbag, a cock, a bellend, a scrote, and a parasitic cunt.

raw

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by raw on July 21, 2012

Latest from hoffman on twitter:

David Hoffman ‏@davidhoffmanuk
@scnnr You're confusing me with someone who gives a fuck. I'll reply on Freedom or just let them rattle on.

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on July 22, 2012

He reckons he's sent "an offer," haven't seen it myself though.

edit: Meaning his "conditions" for deigning to write something, afict.

madashell

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by madashell on July 22, 2012

Is there a way to donate to Freedom online?

slothjabber

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by slothjabber on July 22, 2012

plasmatelly

I remember the attack on the bookshop and how people from everywhere sent money in - even though the paper was rubbish. This is different, this photographer has essentially brought the paper itself to the precipice. There's no question, how this has come about is shameful and I'm sure it'll rumble on for some time to come.
The question is - is there enough genuine support from class-struggle anarchists to keep this thing alive? If there isn't then it's goodnight Freedom.
I'm more uncomfortable with the idea of it folding than supportive of the paper itself. I haven't really picked up from any of these posts that people are prepared to hand over money to bail the paper out.

This is the point, I think. Are those of us (some of us not even 'class struggle anarchists' anymore) who think that Freedom's existence is more important than our agreement with its 'line' prepared to do anything about it?

It may fold in October. It may not. A subscription is currently £22, or £18 for claimants. There's a load of different options here: http://www.freedompress.org.uk/news/newspaper/subscribe/ - use the drop-down menu under 'subscription rates' to find your preferred method of paying; there's also a note saying 'phone us for discount bundles to sell'.

I've approached my local radical-ish bookshop and they said they'll take some. I'll be taking out some form of subscription in the next couple of days.

If this hadn't have happened now, it may be that Freedom might have folded next year or the year after because people aren't prepared to save it - it's not worth saving. If, on the other hand, this is rather an opportunity than a crisis (to appropriate a bit of orientalist pop-psychology), then if we rally round we can save it.

Is 'Freedom' the best paper around espousing class politics? No, not in my opinion. Is it worth saving? Yes, I think so.

Serge Forward

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Serge Forward on July 22, 2012

Surely, now that this Hoffman chappie has legally established his 'matter of principle' it would now be even more principled of him to donate the four grand back to Freedom Press. I guess it would also be in his own financial interest to do this, given that he stands to lose more than four grand a result of this... lost future work, lost potential photo opportunities, loss of credibility, loss of good name, lost this, that and the other...

martinh

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by martinh on July 22, 2012

Serge - nice idea,but I think this particular ploy of his was intended to get someone involved in the AFA book into court so that identities became public. Hoffman is only a pawn in this game, albeit one who deserves ostracising for it. He's doing the state's work for them and is in the same league as the police infiltrators in my view.

jack white

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by jack white on July 22, 2012

Just got a subscription there now. Have there been many people getting them in the last few days?

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on July 22, 2012

Won't know until the sub gets around to totting them up.

jack white

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by jack white on July 22, 2012

Well good luck. I'll follow the threads, hope things work out. I would hate to see Freedom finish because of some shit like this.

oisleep

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by oisleep on July 22, 2012

martinh

Serge - nice idea,but I think this particular ploy of his was intended to get someone involved in the AFA book into court so that identities became public. Hoffman is only a pawn in this game, albeit one who deserves ostracising for it. He's doing the state's work for them and is in the same league as the police infiltrators in my view.

absolutely

(hence my point earlier that this is nothing to do with journalism or journalists - it's political)

Choccy

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Choccy on July 22, 2012

jack white

Just got a subscription there now. Have there been many people getting them in the last few days?

Got a subscription myself too, again, I don't read Freedom that much but think it's very important that it exists, been to lots of meetings, benefits, talks there and the idea of it folding because of a parasitic opportunist doing others dirty work is disturbing.

dara

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by dara on July 22, 2012

I think yous should stop chest-beating about the c**k photographer and worry about how to save Freedom. Two quick suggestions on money to deal with the current crisis:

1. Make online donations as easy as possible - I really like Kickstarter as a payment platform, it's easier to use than PayPal and takes less of a commission. Set something up as soon as you can.

2. Ask for funding from UK and international anarchist organisations. I imagine most would be good for a few hundred quid at least.

More generally, it's important to remember that very few newspapers/magazines are self-financing, most are cross-subsidised through other mechanisms. For small leftwing newspapers this is doubly true. You should figure out long-term funding mechanisms. These could include:
- Setting up anarchist/leftwing clubs with bar licenses in cities with significant enough population.
- Annual/monthly donations from UK anarchist organisations
- Fundraisers: gigs, table quizzes, raffles, public talks, etc.

Obviously, all this requires getting a lot of new people involved to support the paper. I don't think it makes sense for Freedom to be so under-supported by the UK anarchist organisations. Politically, it would make sense for all the libertarian socialists to centralise their news media around Freedom, since the small differences in their politics are better explored through journals anyway.

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on July 22, 2012

The plan's to have a meeting in August to actually work through some of this stuff and explain the nuts and bolts of what we think we need to do - Kickstarter's actually a US thing and I don't think it operates in Britain yet but there's a British-based one which might be doable.

noscman1

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by noscman1 on July 22, 2012

Perhaps freedom could continue as an online newspaper, in a manner similar to how you can read the occupied times of london online. Although that would cost money e.g server space and so on.

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on July 22, 2012

We have a site and yes that could become part of the future if the paper itself proves unsustainable, but the idea is to keep it going as a paper product, partly for historic reasons but also because not everyone has internet access and for those that do, a (good) newspaper is actually an excellent way of disciplining writers to cut out the dross and make sure you see the important stuff.

dara

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by dara on July 22, 2012

Yeah, I was wondering whether the UK version was operational yet. Try IndieGoGo, they're available for anyone with a bank account to use.

Global Access

No matter where you live, you can start your campaign and collect money from any country in the world as long as you have a valid bank account.

EDIT: Those sites are all about the rewards. Maybe you could offer book vouchers and subscriptions.

no1

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by no1 on July 22, 2012

A UK version of Kickstarter is meant to be launched in autumn - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18780184

Choccy

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Choccy on July 22, 2012

dara

I think yous should stop chest-beating about the c**k photographer and worry about how to save Freedom.

what? most of the comments on this page of the thread are people saying they've taken out subscriptions to help Freedom or posting up links to how to subscribe an so on
Very poor, misplaced opening sentence making me think you haven't followed this thread at all.
Though your suggestions stand as very useful, just a terrible way to introduce it.

[edit]i was gonna start this with 'fuck off you pious wanker' but decided against it

dara

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by dara on July 22, 2012

Sorry, was in a bad mood about the whole thing.

rat

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by rat on July 22, 2012

No doubt ex-members of Red Action will be chipping into the Freedom paper print fund too.

petey

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by petey on July 22, 2012

Ed

I think in the States its a particularly nasty way of calling a woman a slut

it's a much stronger, rarely used version of 'prick' or 'bastard.' i've never heard it used as a term specific to women.

working class …

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by working class … on July 22, 2012

As soon as pay-day comes this month, I will take out a subscription (rather than buying from a shop) and will make a donation.

I have a few ideas:

1) Not sure how it would work with Freedom, but the Morning Star have some type of shareholder scheme. I don't know specifics of what it entails, but I believe that they raise plenty of money this way.

2) Not sure if they still do, but the SWP/Bookmarks ran a scheme in which you could pay a lump sum (not sure how much) and in exchange you received a copy of every new bookmarks publication upon its release.

3) Going back to the Morning Star, they offer an electronic subscription offer (cheaper than a paper copy) it is a PDF file, that gets emailed to you the night before it hits the shops. To ensure that people still buy a paper copy (if that is still the aim) there could be a two week delay. Meaning that the paper copy is distributed when it is printed, but the e-version is sent out two weeks later, at a greatly reduced price (i.e, 50p).

4) an electronic archive of all available copies of freedom on pdf that requires a small subscription for full access, or allows you to buy individual copies for a much smaller fee. New editions of the paper could go on two months after their initial publication.

5) A pdf flyer created by Freedom, summarising all of the issues and the need to raise money etc, and they ways in which people can contribute (A5 size). something that is easily distributed on paper and online.

6) Donations. I may be wrong (often am) but sometimes I think people can be reluctant to donate money because the organisation wanting money can price themselves out of the donation. you could click on donate on some websites and it would give you the option of what you are able to donate....£5, £10, or £20....Some people may only want to donate 50p or £1. Also, they may just think that 50p or £1 is not worth bothering with, so perhaps some encouragement for people to donate whatever they can regardless of how small. Perhaps advertise a 50p monthly donation via direct debit?

7) Do subscriptions have to annual??? can people not pay monthly? with perhaps a reduced overall price if you take out a full year.

8) The Freedom shop online.....the shop page is not at all appealing, and there is not much on there. In the last 6 months I have spent over £100 on books published by freedom (the centenary editions) and other stuff. I have also purchased many back copies of Freedom....but I did not buy any of them from freedom, I had to go elsewhere. how come??

Robin Banks

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Robin Banks on July 22, 2012

Totally feel the anger about this and share it, but cmon, can we please lay off the patriarchal language? ie cunt, cuntish, fanny...

Yes, what the little dears need is a big strong man to step forward to voice their concerns for them.

Jared

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Jared on July 23, 2012

It was my personal concern actually Robin: as a cis man I'm not comfortable with that term thrown around, especially when used negatively by (I'm assuming) other cis men. I've already said why on page 3, if anyone wants to PM me they can, but lets not derail the thread as there's been some constructive ideas put forward on how to move Freedom forward.

rat

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by rat on July 23, 2012

Fall Back

people(pee-puh l)
noun

1. persons indefinitely or collectively; persons in general: to find it easy to talk to people; What will people think?
2. persons, whether men, women, or children, considered as numerable individuals forming a group: Twenty people volunteered to help.
3. human beings, as distinguished from animals or other beings.

So a statement circulated to pee-puh l who go on demos?
And the statement would be sent to pee-puh l who organise demos too?
How would such a statement be implemented?
On demos pee-puh l would have to spot Hoffman and challenge him constantly for the duration of the march. A flyer outlining his behaviour would have to be on hand to inform pee-puh l on the demo why this particular photographer was being challenged.
Maybe he’d carry on snapping away anyway?
If Hoffman appears at demos where none of the pee-puh l who know about his antics are, he would be able to carry on taking photos unchallenged.

raw

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by raw on July 23, 2012

Jared

It was my personal concern actually Robin: as a cis man I'm not comfortable with that term thrown around, especially when used negatively by (I'm assuming) other cis men. I've already said why on page 3, if anyone wants to PM me they can, but lets not derail the thread as there's been some constructive ideas put forward on how to move Freedom forward.

Sorry what is a cis man?

Croy

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Croy on July 23, 2012

This is sad to hear, I wrote for the paper once before. If I have got anything to spare or find myself employed soon, I will be donating or subscribing.

Robin Banks

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Robin Banks on July 23, 2012

Jared

It was my personal concern actually Robin: as a cis man I'm not comfortable with that term thrown around, especially when used negatively by (I'm assuming) other cis men. I've already said why on page 3, if anyone wants to PM me they can, but lets not derail the thread as there's been some constructive ideas put forward on how to move Freedom forward.

Sorry, it's just whenever I've ever seen this crop up it's usually a couple of men outraged without even bothering to ask the women what their feelings are which makes it a bit ironic to be using the patriarchy card. But yes, sorry for the derail, as you were.

Robin Banks

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Robin Banks on July 23, 2012

My suggestion: are anybody undertaking street sales of the paper? On the many demos I've attended I've seen plenty of socialist worker and socialist paper sellers but don't think I can recall Freedom ever being available. With the larger demos this could be due to anarchists having thier own actions planned on the day but I don't see why other demonstrations couldn't be targetted. Same with a street stall, have those avenues ever been considered?

no1

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by no1 on July 23, 2012

I'd be surprised if the trots sell a lot of papers at demos, I think it's mostly a way to dominate political space with their brand.

Robin Banks

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Robin Banks on July 23, 2012

no1

I'd be surprised if the trots sell a lot of papers at demos, I think it's mostly a way to dominate political space with their brand.

Possibly so. But the fact remains that you only really encounter Freedom if you are one of the few who are into niche hard left politics and stumble upon it through reading of it online, attending the book fair or chancing upon the shop (or one of their distributors). 'Presence' can actually lead to paper sales and subscriptions along with perhaps more sympathisers and activists to the movement.

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on July 23, 2012

Yeah street sales are actually a good way of getting the name out - Black Flag will often sell out on a big demo and that's actually more expensive. We were hoping to get that going but again, needs people to volunteer and organise it.

working class …

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by working class … on July 23, 2012

I remember reading something saying that @ the TUC march last year, they sold around 1500 copies of socialist worker on the streets. which fair enough, is not a lot in the context of a march attended by 500,000 people, but it is still a decent amount.

Also, the socialist worker has a very well established networks of distribution, and regular weekly paper sales, so is bound to sell less on demonstrations, because most people who would want to read it will already have access to one of those well established distribution networks, and already have a copy

the same cannot be said for freedom

I think freedom would go down really well at a big demo if it was readily available. The other thing with socialist worker is that (for some people) its like marmite, you love it or hate it. its very well known and widely read, and instantly recognisable. So far a lot of people, freedom may be something they would buy, and if they like it...who knows

Robin Banks

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Robin Banks on July 23, 2012

Rob Ray

Yeah street sales are actually a good way of getting the name out - Black Flag will often sell out on a big demo and that's actually more expensive. We were hoping to get that going but again, needs people to volunteer and organise it.

I'm not part of the collective but would gladly offer some of my time doing that for the cause. Will pop in the shop in the next week or two to register interest, or is everything on hold until the bookfair?

Jared

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Jared on July 24, 2012

This is a long shot and you may not want to try, but you could let the International Institute for Social History (Amsterdam) know the plight of Freedom. They hold quite a lot of Freedom archives after all, and may see a point in helping out financially?

georgestapleton

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by georgestapleton on July 24, 2012

I don't know. I've tried doing street sales before and its very slow. I think people should do it on four or five occasions before proposing it as a means of selling the paper.

The WSM changed from doing street sales to a free sheet when they realised that if all the hours spent doing street sales were spent working for McDonalds then the paper print run could be increased and given out for free. ex. you stand on a corner for two hours and sell four papers making £4, work in McDonalds for the same period you make £12, which pays for 12 papers which can then be given out for free. The point is that peoples time is worth something and as a source of finance for a radical paper its a pretty shit use of our resources. (I've spent lots of time on street corners handing out leaflets to get out message out, and thats fine. But standing on a street corner and getting the message to four people because you are charging for the paper - its not fun and a bad use of time.)

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on July 24, 2012

It's less street corner sales and more targeted things like events that make the time worth it tbh - we've not been able to put papers in at a lot of the regional bookfairs and alternative press events for example, or have people out on the big marches to nearly the degree that we should.

Robin: Yep we're looking to be coming out again next month and for October, depends on how much support we get whether we can continue much beyond that.

Android

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Android on July 24, 2012

I agree with georgestapleton. When I was in AF, we did regular street distribution at Oxford Rd Station / Cornerhouse in Manchester. Resistance was free, so we always managed to get rid of some. But my impression was that it was quite a low strike rate, as in people who actually read it etc. And if we had charged for it I suspect we would have sold very few. I think it is difficult to make this work as when people come across you, especially at a distance, there isn't much to distinguish you from someone employed by nightclub handing stuff out or a charity mugger.

To reiterate what GS said I would think carefully about how this would work practically before committing to it. Maybe talk to others who have done this kind of activity before.

Edit: cross-posted with Rob Ray, that sounds a lot more effective way to get it out there. Maybe ask local groups of either of the anarchist federations to put it on their stalls at the local/regional bookfairs etc.

Steven.

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Steven. on July 24, 2012

I do see George's point, and in general people should factory and the amount of time they spend doing something intensive evaluating whether it is worthwhile.

However, actual readership of things given out for free is much lower than that of something which people have paid for, which is worth bearing in mind. Although we can't really accurately assess the quantitative difference.

Harrison

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Harrison on July 24, 2012

georgestapleton

I don't know. I've tried doing street sales before and its very slow. I think people should do it on four or five occasions before proposing it as a means of selling the paper.

The WSM changed from doing street sales to a free sheet when they realised that if all the hours spent doing street sales were spent working for McDonalds then the paper print run could be increased and given out for free. ex. you stand on a corner for two hours and sell four papers making £4, work in McDonalds for the same period you make £12, which pays for 12 papers which can then be given out for free. The point is that peoples time is worth something and as a source of finance for a radical paper its a pretty shit use of our resources. (I've spent lots of time on street corners handing out leaflets to get out message out, and thats fine. But standing on a street corner and getting the message to four people because you are charging for the paper - its not fun and a bad use of time.)

agree, but theres also a problem with free distributions where a lot are just thrown away by disinterested people.

if you charge something like 10p or 20p then it strikes a perfect balance between people not taking it if they just want to be polite, whilst still not making it costly.

smush

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by smush on July 25, 2012

the button

... while I salute the efforts of those involved (among whom I number some of my closest friends), I have to ask myself if it's worth it for the sake of 300-odd subscribers and minimum public sales.

It's obviously a difficult financial situation, but far out, if I was involved in a monthly 24-page publication with a subscriber-base of 300 (!) that would give me every reason to keep going. Maybe it's a matter of scale: 300 people sounds like an awful lot to me but maybe to someone who lives in a town that has twice as many inhabitants than this whole country (Aotearoa/NZ) it seems like nothing...?

Jared, support your korero all the way!

slothjabber

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by slothjabber on July 26, 2012

If Freedom only ever gets 300 subscribers, then perhaps it's time to let it die, becaue if only 300 people in the world care to read it then it's not a newspaper it's an expensively-produced club newlestter.

However if an attempt to raise its profile means more people subscribe and/or regualrly read it then it's going to be worth saving, surely?

I agree with Rob Ray that selling on demos is better than random street corner sales, which seems fairly futile, unless there is a particular 'pitch' that can be guaranteed and then presumably only in a location that doesn't have a stockist anyway; better still I would think in the long term would be people approaching local bookshops and suchlike and asking if they'll take some. Demo sales are good for 'hooking' people (if you have something that hooks, anyway) but they need to be able to get hold of it afterwards, either through subscriptions or a local supplier. Local stockists have the added advantage that 'passing trade' might pick it up as well.

Improving the quality of the paper - and everyone I know who's actualy offered an opinion on this says quality is improving all the time - is obviously a good start; but convincing people to take the punt is the trick. The more often people see it, the more likely they are to buy it, I would suspect; so that means stockists, and a higher profile at events, and possibly more street sales, bearing in mind what georgestapleton said - £4 for two hours selling is not as efficient as working in McDonalds for two hours and making £12 which you then donate to the organisation. On the other hand, with two hours selling papers (or not selling papers) you don't have to work in McDonalds for 2 hours. I know which I'd rather do on a sunny Saturday, or even a windy rainy Wednesday.

Strret sales and even sales at demos won't save Freedom. Significantly increasing the number of subscribers will, obviously, but finding more stockists might, or can be an important part of a strategy that might, and I think that should be a (not the only) priority.

Current stockists are: 9 in London; 1 in the suburbs of Birmingham; 1 in Brighton; 1 in Bristol; 3 in Edinburgh; 1 in Liverpool; 1 in Nottingham; 1 in Southampton - and I've just persuaded a shop in Leicester to take them, but they haven't arrived yet.

Nothing in: Leeds; Glasgow; Manchester; Sheffield; Aberdeen; Norwich; Plymouth; Cardiff; Swansea; Newcastle; Belfast; Coventry; York; Dundee; Carlisle; Stoke...

Maybe comrades in those places could start looking for possible places that might stock them?

Choccy

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Choccy on July 26, 2012

Might be worth contacting the Warzone Centre for distro in Belfast, they have an open cafe almost everyday, and gigs/talks etc might consider taking a few.
Also, give Just Books a shout.

Harrison

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Harrison on July 26, 2012

There should be more licensed anarchist bars in England.
- makes a tonne of cash for the movement, whilst being managed collectively.
- looks great.
- promotes the anarchy.
- stocks anarchy stuff on the side.

Croy

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Croy on July 26, 2012

Harrison

There should be more licensed anarchist bars in England.
- makes a tonne of cash for the movement, whilst being managed collectively.
- looks great.
- promotes the anarchy.
- stocks anarchy stuff on the side.

I didnt know there was such a thing ?

Choccy

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Choccy on July 26, 2012

Bradford 1 in 12 was licensed as private members was it not? Played there in 2004 but can barely remember, they defo served alcohol.

Harrison

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Harrison on July 26, 2012

whoever downrated my post, let them be crushed under the iron fist of an effective libertarian movement.

they are fairly prevalent in europe. and you can get non-anarchies drinking their as well if the bars are clean/nice and in busy-ish areas.

EDIT: i think 1in12 still is private members, don't know if they still sell alcohol though..

Steven.

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Steven. on July 26, 2012

With getting freedom stocked elsewhere, I know when I was one of the editors at least none of the places that stocked it ever paid for it. The money together they owed was in the thousands of pounds but we never got well organised enough to invoice them for it… I don't know if that situation has changed now.

As others point out, the key to long-term stability is having more subscribers, and supporting subscribers in my view

JoeMaguire

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by JoeMaguire on July 26, 2012

Members bar is not a bad idea, but it does open the discussion about managing a business under capitalism.

Theft

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Theft on July 27, 2012

It would also be worth them having a paypal option, as Google checkout only allows for people with Credit Cards.

lzbl

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by lzbl on July 27, 2012

the croydonian anarchist

Harrison

There should be more licensed anarchist bars in England.
- makes a tonne of cash for the movement, whilst being managed collectively.
- looks great.
- promotes the anarchy.
- stocks anarchy stuff on the side.

I didnt know there was such a thing ?

There's one in Brighton, licensed as a private member's club. Although they're nice to have around I really don't think they're the answer to anything. Plus you have to have enough dedicated not-flakey anarchies to actually sort it out and run it well enough not to give police and licensing authorities an excuse to shut it down. I can't think of many towns where that is true.

As for funding freedom:

I suppose that the response to this will indicate whether or not people actually want Freedom to carry on existing.

There are websites like 'gofundme' etc where you get the money immediately rather than waiting for a funding level to be reached a la kickstarter, but I don't know whether that is better than having a paypal donate button.

Given the importance of this, I think that keeping some kind of appeal button in a visible space at the top of the website would be helpful right now. It's not immediately apparent how to bung money freedom's way.

If there is an easy link to a donations page etc, could someone post it up here? I think that if we started sharing that round the internet you might get a fair bit from people who can't/won't subscribe.

slothjabber

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by slothjabber on July 27, 2012

Steven.

With getting freedom stocked elsewhere, I know when I was one of the editors at least none of the places that stocked it ever paid for it. The money together they owed was in the thousands of pounds but we never got well organised enough to invoice them for it… I don't know if that situation has changed now.

As others point out, the key to long-term stability is having more subscribers, and supporting subscribers in my view

I don't know if you're agreeing with me or not Steven; but I agree that subscribers are the guarantee of survival.

I think shops can be an important strategy, but there are problems and they can't be the only stretegy.

How many copies of Freedom remain unsold, back in Whitechapel? At the end of the month, how many are left? Those, could, potentially, all have been sent out into the world. If they're still unsold, you are down the cost of some bundles sent out. If some of them are sold and you get the money back, then you offset the postage against what you get back. If some are sold and you don't get the money back, you're down the postage but more people are reading it and you might get more subscribers. But having back copies in Whitechapel doesn't beneft the paper at all.

Not all shops will work like the bookshop that I've persuaded to take Freedom: it's not a case of Freedom dispatching copies to the shop and the shop sending back money. I've volunteered to take the copies to the shop, and I'm doing the stock-take. At the end of the month, I'll tell the shop how many copies have been sold, and I'll get the money which I'll send down to Freedom. If no money comes in, Freedom can chase me. So what I'm saying I suppose is that shops, plus some local people who are prepared to help with distribution and collection of cash, will be a way to expand sales.

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on July 27, 2012

Yeah that comes down to needing someone who deals primarily with distribution - as a role it's actually more important than getting a new writer or even page editor because it's the sort of thing which needs someone to regularly maintain a track of income/outgoings, who's paid what and what's owing etc.

Have had a word with the web person, apparently we're not allowed to take direct donations through the website for some reason so supporter subs are the best way around it atm - or a cheque made out to "Freedom Press" and sent to 84b Whitechapel High Street, London E1 7QX will also do the job. Paypal's being looked at but there's a lot of hoops to jump through so may take a wee while to get done.

Harrison

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Harrison on July 27, 2012

JoeMaguire

Members bar is not a bad idea, but it does open the discussion about managing a business under capitalism.

true. but i think if its self-managed by staff (a cooperative) then its not so bad.

Harrison

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Harrison on July 27, 2012

lzbl

I really don't think they're the answer to anything

they get more cash for the movement surely thats an important thing (although i don't think private members would earn enough to make this point valid). especially when considering something like Freedom was never run financially sustainably but instead working off a single large donation. but agree with the other points about bars and thanks for posting them.

re: the online payments options, the most important thing is to have the online option most people are on (paypal...). i know i get really annoyed when i have to sign up for a new payment option everytime i bought something.

also make a huge subscribe button (and donate button) and stick it on the very top of the web page.

Choccy

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Choccy on July 30, 2012

since everyone's up on this INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY shit, I'm calling out DSG, and Laurie , Penny for their use of the FULL meme.

DSG probably got paid millions for that Guardian interview. They owe me and Partybucket £4,000 cos it seems that's the going rate.

Choccy

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Choccy on July 30, 2012

oh and if any of yous use it again don't think I won't come for you and bankrupt your entire families, I'm not interested in the money, IT'S THE PRINCIPLE

the button

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by the button on July 30, 2012

Plus there's the tshirt royalties. There must be tens of people with a tshirt.

working class …

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by working class … on August 1, 2012

A response by David Hoffman

http://northernvoicesmag.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/tales-of-hoffman.html

working class …

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by working class … on August 1, 2012

More info

http://northernvoicesmag.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/copyright-fruits-of-photographing.html

Steven.

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Steven. on August 1, 2012

working class self organisation

A response by David Hoffman

http://northernvoicesmag.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/tales-of-hoffman.html

well he shows himself to be a disingenuous prick.

But he seems to be saying that freedom were aware of the potential copyright claim before they published it, and decided to publish it anyway. Is this true? Or did the potential issue only come to light after the book had already been printed?

Choccy

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Choccy on August 1, 2012

since Hoffman is being fairly fuckin brazen in his email responses there, what has happened with the suggested joint statement by anarchist organisations, sympathetic groups and beyond? Did anyone begin drafting something? Seems like it's still an important thing to do while Hoffman's putting out shite like:

"You might mention the Freedom have £1m plus asset squirrelled away in a holding company just like any City fat cat. They don't need an appeal for money, they're just greedy. But you won't. You might mention that Freedom used stolen pics for the (rather crap) book ['Beating the Fascists']. But you won't."

rat

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by rat on August 1, 2012

A statement from anarchists seems futile. He'd probably quite enjoy it:

If a handful of armchair anarchists want to be rude about me then I expect I can take it. I've had my teeth knocked out by cops, had my life threatened by genuine BNP murderer (and by a dozen others from '70s NF [National Front] to 2012 EDL [English Defence League] ) and I've survived every major riot in the U.K..

Croy

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Croy on August 1, 2012

zero

A statement from anarchists seems futile. He'd probably quite enjoy it:

If a handful of armchair anarchists want to be rude about me then I expect I can take it. I've had my teeth knocked out by cops, had my life threatened by genuine BNP murderer (and by a dozen others from '70s NF [National Front] to 2012 EDL [English Defence League] ) and I've survived every major riot in the U.K..

I agree, although obviously SF etc are not armchair anarchists it would only satisfy him. But what might be better is instead a statement stressing the need to keep Freedom going (if the orgs involve think there is a need collectively, which should be decided by a vote or similar democratic means) signed by a number of organizations and individuals.

Choccy

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Choccy on August 1, 2012

It's absolutely not futile. He showed up at the Mile End olympic protest at the weekend apparently. It seems people don't know how much of a parasitic deceitful opportunist he is. They need to.

And he needs to be made aware that he is unwelcome at every radical event up and down the country.

Uncreative

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Uncreative on August 1, 2012

arsehole

I've survived every major riot in the U.K.

Shame, that.

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on August 2, 2012

But he seems to be saying that freedom were aware of the potential copyright claim before they published it, and decided to publish it anyway. Is this true?

We were told they were free to use by Red Action, who afaik thought similarly. Certainly when the collective voted on whether to publish we all thought it was taken care of.

rat

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by rat on August 2, 2012

Red Action, friends of the anarchists.

(With friends like these — who needs enemies?)

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on August 2, 2012

It's not about friendship, it's about 1. Publishing a book which gives some (partial) insight into street level anti-fascism, leading to 2. Not ratting people out.

working class …

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by working class … on August 2, 2012

Freedom public meeting

http://libcom.org/blog/invitation-public-meeting-freedom-press-02082012

thegunshow

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by thegunshow on August 2, 2012

The replies here are depressing. Particularly embarrassing are the two Irish anarchist wannabe hacks, dara & george, unusual levels of self-deception there.

The facts of this case are as follows;

- David Hoffman makes a living photographing anarchist movements primarily, he owns a nice house in Bow and made a big noise about the police removing a Class War poster from his window.

- David Hoffman professes to be some sort of anarchist, quoting Gustav Landauer in the about me section of his Facebook profile. He is also telling anyone who will listen that Freedom are not real anarchists but rich kids and has convinced himself they have £1million stashed away - which he has set his greedy eyes on. He boasted on Facebook of his plans to take Freedom down.

- Business is not booming for photographers, so Hoffman relies heavily on litigation for his income. He successfully sued the Met for £30k after being injured photographing the G20 protests. He prides himself on being a ‘litigious bastard’, earlier this year he successfully sued the now defunct drugs charity DARE for £25k, settling for £10k and established his own legal precedent that ‘innocence is no defence’. DARE’s error was to post 19 photographs of various drugs for the purpose of teaching young people about substance abuse, not knowing they were not fully licensed to use them. This is to name but a few of his court cases.

- Hoffman contacted fellow NUJ member Brian Whelan, a journalist who interviewed the authors of Beating the Fascists, threatening legal action if he did not reveal his sources (name and addresses) or hand over a £390 fee for posting the image from the book cover on his blog. Hoffman was paid £390 by Whelan who refused to name names, but went on to warn the reporter that he may still be forced to reveal his sources in court - warning about the illegal activities in the book that "the action which I intend to take will bring these serious criminal acts to the attention of the authorities. Should that happen then the emails and other material that you have which relate to those others involved may be required as evidence'. This clearly goes against the NUJ's (of which Hoffman is an activist) code of conduct.

- Hoffman has recently made a number of public appearances speaking against disclosure orders that forces photographers from having to hand information over to the police. Most people on the left and in the NUJ are unaware of his duplicity.

This matter is of vital importance to all anarchists, journalists and anti-fascists.

oisleep

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by oisleep on August 3, 2012

Rob Ray

But he seems to be saying that freedom were aware of the potential copyright claim before they published it, and decided to publish it anyway. Is this true?

We were told they were free to use by Red Action, who afaik thought similarly. Certainly when the collective voted on whether to publish we all thought it was taken care of.

First of all, I would caution anyone to take at face value anything that Hoffman says in relation to this

All the 'offending photos' had been used in various AFA publications over a period of twenty years without so much as a peep out of Hoffman (a number of those photos are featured in the AFA back catalogue on this very site)

They had been handed over to AFA by Searchlight in exchange for information over the years, on the understanding that AFA could use them in whatever way they so fit. Something that Searchlight of course now deny, yet they cannot explain why no one in the last twenty years has objected to these same photos appearing in various AFA publications, pamphlets and bulletins

The fact that this had been done over the last twenty years without any complaint from either Hoffman or Searchlight (nor had the same pictures appeared anywhere else other than in AFA publications) in our eyes established that there was no doubt over the usage of the photos. Obviously to push this confidence to the limit and test it in court brought numerous risks and pitfalls that would have exposed both FP and the collective authorship to risks that were just not worth it, hence the ultimate decision to settle to avoid both the exposure and potential criminal proceedings (for the authors) and substantial costs (for FP) that a court case would have brought

During the course of getting the book published, there was numerous attempts to stop its publication (carter ruck etc..) which took up a substantial amount of time in combatting. So the idea that anyone involved in the book would knowingly use photos where there was doubt over the copyright is just absurd. Why after spending nearly two years fighting off attempts from various corners to stop the book being published would anyone involved with it give such an open goal to the political opponents of the book

I can also vouch for the authenticity of the quote by Hoffman (in the post by the gunshow below) showing his glee about anti-fascist militants being exposed in court and linked to criminal activities detailed in the book etc.

I was passed on a copy of that mail at the time and this cemented the view that was already held that this in essence, wasn't just a case of a narrow copyright claim by an aggrieved snapper, but something much more profoundly political & sinister - with Hoffman playing a blinder as the useful idiot

Steven.

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Steven. on August 3, 2012

Thanks for the clarification. Don't worry, I didn't believe what Hoffman was saying, as pretty much everything else was clearly bullshit. But that hadn't been rebutted anywhere else so I thought I would ask.

Battlescarred

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Battlescarred on August 4, 2012

From you? ROFLMAO!!

Choccy

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Choccy on August 4, 2012

Are you serious JimClarke?
Fuckin hell, dickhead.

[edit - 'no platform' could be anything, be creative]

Battlescarred

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Battlescarred on August 4, 2012

This dupe, who didn't bother to ask Freedom for their view, swallowed Hoffman's stories hook line and sinker
http://re-photo.co.uk/?p=1686

thegunshow

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by thegunshow on August 4, 2012

Battlescarred

This dupe, who didn't bother to ask Freedom for their view, swallowed Hoffman's stories hook line and sinker
http://re-photo.co.uk/?p=1686

This is almost line for line written by Hoffman.

Outrageous that the admin thinks he knows best how to manage this struggle and removed the details of Hoffman's next public appearence.

Please contact the Bishopsgate Institute and ask them to reconsider letting this man speak on the growth of 'state surveillance' at their Radical London event.

Contact - http://www.bishopsgate.org.uk/form.aspx?id=18

Event details - http://www.bishopsgate.org.uk/events_detail.aspx?ID=236

thegunshow

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by thegunshow on August 4, 2012

As an aside, Hoffman is thus far trouncing Freedom Press on this issue, shame to see the bulk of anarchists (outside the collective) just roll over.

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on August 4, 2012

How so?

thegunshow

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by thegunshow on August 4, 2012

Rob Ray

How so?

National statement never materialised. He has attended demos since this became public.

thegunshow

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by thegunshow on August 4, 2012

Tommy Ascaso

thegunshow, let people organise without undermining their efforts. A statement is being circulated and will be released soon, it will be backed up with direct action which is being planned at the moment.

Moronic, your idea is to tell everyone to wait two months for a 'direct action' - against a fucking 66 year old man?

Putting the word out and getting his talk pulled is direct action. Making his peers realise how scummy he has behaved, is direct action. You are the one undermining efforts and attempting to hold a secret vanguard action on behalf of the movement.

Hoffman's current line on this is Nobody whose opinion I care about will do anything but laugh.
- the point is to change this.

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on August 4, 2012

Chill out thegunshow, Jim's not telling anyone else to wait to do anything, let alone acting as a vanguard, he's just saying that something is being sorted out after you accused the entire movement of not doing anything.

thegunshow

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by thegunshow on August 4, 2012

Rob Ray

Chill out thegunshow, Jim's not telling anyone else to wait to do anything, let alone acting as a vanguard, he's just saying that something is being sorted out after you accused the entire movement of not doing anything.

He did remove posts yesterday that included details of Hoffman's public talk, so that his secret action in 2 months time might save the day.

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on August 4, 2012

I saw those posts, and he was right to remove them. Police are on these boards, it's a fucking stupid idea to publicly advertise direct actions here ahead of time and can get people in a lot of trouble if it implies anything like a conspiracy. Again, this doesn't prevent people doing anything or imply he thinks people should wait 2 months (?) - it's a normal security measure.

thegunshow

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by thegunshow on August 4, 2012

There was no suggestion of illegality. Just that he should be denied a platform.

Khawaga

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Khawaga on August 4, 2012

Tell that to the police if shit hits the fan. It's not like they blow things out of proportion at all...

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on August 4, 2012

A suggestion made ahead of time, with the police reading, effectively guaranteeing their presence.

And if it subsequently kicks off? Oh yes, I'm sure a lawyer would have real trouble leading a jury to conclude that anarchists saying "let's No Platform this guy" doesn't imply a conspiracy to commit violence. You and I may be aware that actually it means making his show a bit uncomfortable with a bit of shouting and such, but the red and black flag is associated in the public mind with violence, direct action is associated with violence.

Use your damn head.

thegunshow

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by thegunshow on August 4, 2012

Hoffman has attempted to get other snappers to follow suit and sue freedom, a quick look at this thread would easily convince most that they'll meet little but infighting and big talk of they do.

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on August 4, 2012

I know exactly what Hoffman's doing, and the only one attempting to spark infighting and talking big while doing little atm is you.

thegunshow

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by thegunshow on August 4, 2012

Rob Ray

A suggestion made ahead of time, with the police reading, effectively guaranteeing their presence.

And if it subsequently kicks off? Oh yes, I'm sure a lawyer would have real trouble leading a jury to conclude that anarchists saying "let's No Platform this guy" doesn't imply a conspiracy to commit violence. Use your damn head.

What kicks off? Libcom isn't even a site based around the vain politics of kicking off. The call was to have the event cancelled now, rather than to march down there.

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on August 4, 2012

Then feel free to give the venue a ring with your view and suggest others do so, I doubt that would be taken down. Don't make ambiguous, public calls for direct action which can put other people in the shit.

thegunshow

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by thegunshow on August 4, 2012

Good grief. You're intentionally mistaking what I didn't say for what Jim did.

admin: don't reveal users' personal information

Rob Ray

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Rob Ray on August 4, 2012

It's possible I'm remembering wrong, but I'm not intentionally mistaking anything. I clearly remember thinking "that's a bit dodgy" when I saw the No Platform post and everything else you've put up to date has been criticising pretty much everyone for not being direct enough in taking Hoffman on (or not doing it quickly enough).

thegunshow

11 years 10 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by thegunshow on August 4, 2012

Tommy Ascaso

Aren't you both meant to be in the pub with the rest of us now? Would be much better if we discussed this off the boards instead of having individuals deciding unilaterally on what the movement should be doing.

I'm working. I've sent a delegate to knock some sense into you. (also not a threat).

working class …

11 years 9 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by working class … on August 8, 2012

More from David Hoffman

http://northernvoicesmag.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/tales-of-hoffman-part-two.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Arbeiten

11 years 9 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by Arbeiten on August 8, 2012

There will be no vanguards in our movement!

Out of interested, do anarchist circles not have any other way of exchanging information other than posting it in libcom?

working class …

11 years 9 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by working class … on August 11, 2012

http://libcom.org/blog/lengthy-reply-david-hoffman-11082012

libcom

11 years 9 months ago

In reply to by libcom.org

Submitted by libcom on August 12, 2012

Off topic post unpublished - If you want to make tangential links to your own pet subject, go start another thread.