CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

[Charles Heath]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

In the midst of all this never ending crap, reading the current issue of Hallowed Ground from CWPT is truly refreshing. Particularly enjoyable is the article entitled "Skim Milk Yankees" about Athens, MO. This is good background material for the upcoming Athens, MO, event in August. Much of it has been posted online before, but with the ups and downs of various fora, listservers, and basic email evaporation, it is nice to see this material in one spot.

I hope the Trans-Miss folks can chuckle and mostly overlook that minor typo on the back cover. Very minor. Heheheh.

[Bob 125th NYSVI]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

Well a couple of thoughts from the peanut gallery.

Firstly, I was charter subscriber to CWH and was very pleased with the first couple of issues. Quite honestly the last couple of ones have been less than interesting to me and I find do not help very much with my reenacting. Unless it improves I will not be renewing my subscription.

After years of being a CCG subscriber I canceled that because the quality of the articles (in my opinion) were going down hill, contained out of date information and as others have pointed out I recognized articles "written" as being virtually the work of someone else. Obviously CCG was not doing it's due diligence to ensure an article submitted was not someone elses work with a new sentence or two thrown in.

That being said maybe the 'problem' is not either magizine in and of itself but the lack of quality submitted articles. It seems that there isn't enough quality material to support EITHER magizine never mind both.

On the 'Letters to the editor' issue (in journalism class they were refered to as the 'nut' page) while it is regretable that someone would publish 'private' correspondence without informing the other party or putting it all in context I guess I am not surprised by it and neither should any of the rest of us be surprised either.

Letters and diaries are a prime source of our own research, of any historical research. Yet the writer (with some exceptions), when writing, usually doesn't expect other parties to become aware of what is written. They certainly don't expect their thoughts to be published at a later date for all the world to see.

Certainly we read the more personal parts of the diary/letter and a good historian doesn't expose those unless they help with the point the historian is trying to make. Yet those thoughts are there, available for misuse.

So let this be a cautionary tale about how what we write, anywhere in any medium, can be used by others for both good and evil.

And that there are people who will ALWAYS take things 'out of context' for their own reasons.

It is a regretable reality of a literate society. But this is not the first or last case in which this sort of thing will happen.

[CJDaley]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

Nevermind....

[Charles Heath]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

To add to the mix, a magazine (newspaper format) that I'd been told a number of times had gone belly up was spied at a nearby event. To wit, I picked up a copy of "Smoke & Fire News" for the first time in several years. Although this publication serves a different niche within the living history hobby, the parallels are there between that era and the CW. Several of the articles were well written, and well worth reading.

Bob hit the nail on the head. There isn't enough quality material to support both CCG and CWH. Most people can see a pattern here:

...left, and the Watchdog went into the toilet.

...left, and CCG went into the toilet.

...left, and CWH -- don't forget to jiggle the handle.

[Johnny Lloyd]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

...left, and CWH -- don't forget to jiggle the handle.

Charles-

CWH is still pretty decent as a publication, but...

I've been dismayed that in the last few issues of CWH the "Regidemented Quartermistress" and other non-quality, mainstream-as-it-gets Paki vendors have been accepted for advertising space. I know the objective is to make money for any magazine, but isn't there some blane, bloody standards for vendors to pass in CWH???

Anyone else with me on this? -Johnny Lloyd

[Bob 125th NYSVI]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

Charles-

CWH is still pretty decent as a publication, but...

I've been dismayed that in the last few issues of CWH the "Regidemented Quartermistress" and other non-quality, mainstream-as-it-gets Paki vendors have been accepted for advertising space. I know the objective is to make money for any magazine, but isn't there some blane, bloody standards for vendors to pass in CWH???

Anyone else with me on this? -Johnny Lloyd

As a business it is not in their interest to turn away advertiers to suit a 'guessed at' list of whom and whom is not an appropriate supplier for their readership.

Also many people who subscribe to and read the magazine may find certain vendors perfectly acceptable even if you don't.

I never do business with many of the companies that appear in magazines I read, that is my decision. However I accept the right of the advertiser to try and reach me through whatever channels they can and certainly will never fault an enterprise for trying to be profitable by accepting advertising from whomever is willing to foot the bill.

Capitalism and caveat emptor go hand in hand.

[Matt Caldwell]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

Charles-

CWH is still pretty decent as a publication, but...

I've been dismayed that in the last few issues of CWH the "Regidemented Quartermistress" and other non-quality, mainstream-as-it-gets Paki vendors have been accepted for advertising space. I know the objective is to make money for any magazine, but isn't there some blane, bloody standards for vendors to pass in CWH???

Anyone else with me on this? -Johnny Lloyd

Jim, no axe to grind, just got caught up.

[JimKindred]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

The subject of this thread is the ethics of printing doctored private correspondence in a magazine pretending it to be a letter to the editor. This is not a thread dealing with the internal management of the CWH or the quality of articles in either magazine. If you have an axe to grind with either of those two subjects start a new thread.

[paulcalloway]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

Thanks Jim for moderating that and yes, this thread needs to stay on track regarding the CCG's March edition of the Camp Chase Gossip section.

Those with concerns about the direction of the CCG at large, or the CWH are encouraged to start their own threads on those subjects.

I would urge you all to withhold your fire on CWH to some degree as I'm under the understanding that there are some changes pending in the direction that the CWH is heading. I'll take a wait and see approach as more details are released.

[paulcalloway]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

A note from Craig in reply to this thread:

This is a little weak. Since I am currently not a member of the A-C Forum, nor likely to become one again, would you mind asking those brave souls hiding behind your internet forum with questions or comments for me to send them to my email address? CraigLBarry@aol.com. I can promise an answer in writing.

- Craig L Barry

[Hank Trent]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

A note from Craig in reply to this thread:

Since I'm not the type to hide bravely :), I sent this email to Craig:

Hi Craig,

Thought I'd take you up on your offer to email you directly, concerning the thread on the AC forum at http://www.authentic-campaigner.com/...ad.php?t=17090 .

To help everyone understand the situation, because I think a lot of folks are puzzled about what's going on, I'd like to post your reply to this email on the AC forum. If you wouldn't want it posted there, no need to reply, and if you do reply, that means it's okay for me to post your reply (whole thing, no editing) on that thread.

Here's my question:

Who decided to print Troy Groves' private message and your response to him as a letter to the editor, and what was the reason behind it? Were you aware it would happen before it went to print?

As I mentioned in that thread, Phil's post caught me by surprise when he implied you didn't know it would be printed, so I think if folks could hear your point of view (or the magazine's point of view), it would help them understand the reasoning behind why the correspondence was printed. However, if it's private information, no need to reply. Thanks!

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[DougCooper]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

A note from Craig in reply to this thread:

Mr B certainly has my e-mail address. I sent a note before this thread was begun on that March issue, cancelling my subscription to the Watchdog (Dr Jekyll) which had of course turned into CCG (Mr Hyde). I did not know about the subject of this thread at that time...but would have had even more to say obviously.

[AZReenactor]

Oh great, an invitation to write more "letters to the editor"...

I strongly advise against this course of action. Apparently any correspondence with Mr. Berry is regarded by him to be a "letter to the editor", since he considers himself an editor, and thus, according to him, any message he receives is fair game to be edited and published in that rag. More likely your answer in writing will be an answer in print, not just in writing.

This is a little weak. Since I am currently not a member of the A-C Forum, nor likely to become one again, would you mind asking those brave souls hiding behind your internet forum with questions or comments for me to send them to my email address? CraigLBarry@aol.com. I can promise an answer in writing.

- Craig L Barry

The thing that strikes me most peculiar about Dingle-Barry's claim of ignorance is that the response from the editor that was published over his name in no way matches the responses that he sent during the course of our private conversation. If he didn't plan on publishing my side of our conversation as a letter to the editor in CCG, why did he draft the reply from the editor that he did?

Anyways, I prefer to let sleeping Dawgs lie (and continue to die slowly on their own).

[Hank Trent]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

Here is Craig Barry's reply to me via email, posted with permission, in response to my email a couple posts above. I just wrote him a one-sentence thank-you as a reply, and I'll bow out now, as I don't have much else to say.

Phil would be correct. My correspondence with Troy Groves was not intended for publication in Camp Chase Gazette. The Watchdog editors, Bill Christen and I, discussed the matter privately with Paul Calloway and agreed to let him handle the issues raised in the e-mail directly with Troy. I don't believe there is any dispute on that. As gentlemen, it was understood that Troy was to apologize for his truly idiotic comments and that would be that. Any apology to The Watchdog from Troy is still pending, which is neither here nor there. We agreed to handle this as gentlemen, and let the matter drop.

However, The Watchdog is no longer a self-published quarterly and the reasons for that have been discussed here previously in detail. It is now published in The Camp Chase Gazette and as you might expect we (the editors) obviously discuss such matters internally, just as we should presume Paul discusses A-C Forum business matters with his staff. Here is the difference, and "the takeaway" for us from all this. Camp Chase Gazette is not run on a gentlemen's agreement like The Watchdog, and the A-C Forum, it is a widely circulated magazine which calls itself The Voice of Civil War Reenacting. In other words, the Camp Chase Gazette is part of "the media," the free press or whatever you choose to call it. And like other media outlets, it is run by professional journalists, not Civil War hobbyists. The point that has been made very clear from all this is that there is no "private," "confidential," "sub-Rosa" or "just-between-us" with the media. We learned that the hard way. Whatever the case with the media, we are all still gentlemen here, and as would be appropriate among gentlemen, I have offered my apologies to Paul Calloway on the behalf of The Watchdog. Not for my response to Troy, but for the violation of trust that occurred by virtue of our correspondence being unwittingly published in the Gazette.

The media is what it is. However, that sword can cut both ways. We should learn from this to use "the media" as it is available to us to cast a positive light on the hobby we enjoy and to encourage participation for those who are interested. The Watchdog will continue writing and publishing material germane to the authentic living history community and of interest for them to read. There are articles in the pipeline from contributors pending publication on the A-C Forum's excellent response for preservation of the land near Perryville (a/k/a Paul Calloway's "A Call to Arms"), an event report from Winter '64, and so on. In the real world, Paul Calloway sells pharmaceuticals, and he has often commented that he could make a fortune selling a cream that made people's skin thicker and not their heads. We need to put our slights and grudges aside, learn from this and move on.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[JimKindred]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

The question still remains, who provided a copy of the PMs to the CCG staff to publish? The CCG staff did not obtain these all on their own. His answer seems to skip right over this part.