Last week, the Batesville Daily Guard took used its platform to insult and attack a local gay man – only days after they had erased mention of him in his late partner's obituary.
A spokesman for the Guard had originally told GLAAD they planned to apologize to Terrance James, the man whom it had edited out of his partner's obituary, and to revisit their policies around excluding mention of surviving partners in obituaries. Instead, the paper printed a full page attack against Mr. James, insulting him by issuing a highly offensive tirade against him.
We wrote about the Guard's decision to exclude the name of Terrance James in the obituary of his partner of ten years. Instead of taking positive proactive steps, the paper completely hardened on their discriminatory stance, insisting that excluding a surviving partner of ten years is justifiable. At GLAAD, we completely disagree. Excluding a grieving partner from recognition is cruel and insensitive. It's wrong.
Last week, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) launched an online petition and took out a full page ad in Friday's Guard, calling on the paper to change their policy.
The Center for Artistic Revolution (CAR) has been on this issue since day one and has instituted a ground campaign of outreach to the paper to encourage changing the policy.
Instead of using this as an opportunity to open up a dialogue, the paper responded with personal attacks against the man they had already removed from his partner's obituary. In Friday's paper, the page following the HRC ad contained an editorial that concluded, "The Guard does not owe Mr. James a free obituary or an apology." They printed a long insult to Terrance, insinuating that he's a liar with an "AGENDA" (their scare-bolding and capitalization) in that announcement.
They're wrong.
The Batesville Guard has gone from insensitive to downright mean-spirited and repugnant.
Please join us, HRC and CAR in calling on the Guard to correct its policy and to use its pages to make things right – not to make things worse.
Contact the Guard and let them know that the paper does in fact owe Mr. James an apology, and should re-run the obituary, including recognition of the surviving partner
TAKE ACTION NOW
A spokesman for the Guard had originally told GLAAD they planned to apologize to Terrance James, the man whom it had edited out of his partner's obituary, and to revisit their policies around excluding mention of surviving partners in obituaries. Instead, the paper printed a full page attack against Mr. James, insulting him by issuing a highly offensive tirade against him.
We wrote about the Guard's decision to exclude the name of Terrance James in the obituary of his partner of ten years. Instead of taking positive proactive steps, the paper completely hardened on their discriminatory stance, insisting that excluding a surviving partner of ten years is justifiable. At GLAAD, we completely disagree. Excluding a grieving partner from recognition is cruel and insensitive. It's wrong.
Last week, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) launched an online petition and took out a full page ad in Friday's Guard, calling on the paper to change their policy.
The Center for Artistic Revolution (CAR) has been on this issue since day one and has instituted a ground campaign of outreach to the paper to encourage changing the policy.
Instead of using this as an opportunity to open up a dialogue, the paper responded with personal attacks against the man they had already removed from his partner's obituary. In Friday's paper, the page following the HRC ad contained an editorial that concluded, "The Guard does not owe Mr. James a free obituary or an apology." They printed a long insult to Terrance, insinuating that he's a liar with an "AGENDA" (their scare-bolding and capitalization) in that announcement.
They're wrong.
The Batesville Guard has gone from insensitive to downright mean-spirited and repugnant.
Please join us, HRC and CAR in calling on the Guard to correct its policy and to use its pages to make things right – not to make things worse.
Contact the Guard and let them know that the paper does in fact owe Mr. James an apology, and should re-run the obituary, including recognition of the surviving partner
TAKE ACTION NOW
Issues:
