Regarding the Emory Wheel article:
:http://www.emorywheel.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/10/10/3f86484674de4
I have seen newspapers occasionally perpetrate hoaxes on April 1st, but Andrew Ackerman’s opinion column in the Emory University’s student newspaper on Friday ranks right up there as one of the more fantastic concoctions perpetrated in print, regardless of the date. Well, even an "intemperate" soul like myself is deserving of a good laugh once in a while, and my family and I had a great laugh over the Emory Wheel’s conspiracy theory. No, I am not Bellesiles, nor am I "in cahoots" with him or any of his associates. My research and my opinions are 100 per cent my own. I have never said otherwise.
The linchpin of Ackerman’s piece is a theory that I somehow received an advance copy of Michael Bellesiles’ second edition of Arming America, since I described aspects of the new foreword and the cover. However, if you compare my article with my internet source (both linked here), it should be abundantly obvious to even a junior high cub reporter where my information came from. Why Mr. Ackerman could not locate this site, or even whether he tried, is a good question and deserving of an answer.
http://www.historynewsnetwork.com/comments/19502.html
http://www.atomicbooks.com/comingsoonoct.html
I found it strange also that Mr. Ackerman’s work was referenced and praised by many. Did NOBODY think to check to see if this website existed? Among those praising Mr. Ackerman for his ‘scoop’ were several authors of weblogs, including Ralph Luker here at HNN who twice declared, "Benny Smith meet Mary Rosh", comparing me to pro-gun author John Lott who invented a fictitious on-line persona to defend himself. Although I’ve considered ‘blogs’ to be mostly self-indulgent gossip-mongering, these internet columnists would have us believe that they know the worldwide web better than anyone else. Obviously, this is not the case.
What you see here is a microcosm of the smear campaign against Michael Bellesiles and Arming America. Criticism is picked up and repeated ad infinitum without anybody checking to see whether the criticism is valid or whether the critic is biased. I am reminded of how Professor James Lindgren, Bellesiles’ chief critic, was rebuked in Emory University’s Bellesiles investigation for accusing Bellesiles of an incorrect militia count, when it turned out that Bellesiles was correct. Lindgren’s excuse was that he was quoting another critic and did not bother to check the primary source material to see if the criticism was accurate. What an incredible abuse of academic authority!
Anyhow, in the case of the Emory Wheel editorial (it was not a "news" item), I thought it might be instructive to read the e-mail exchanges between Mr. Ackerman and myself, which I have reprinted below, with the most recent e-mail on top. I have removed only ads, phone numbers and other personal identifying information (there was one last e-mail from Mr. Ackerman where he briefly asked me to contact him by phone, but the story was in print before I had a chance to respond):
Benny: I appreciate you getting back to me. In any event, no, a lot of what you've written about is not available to the public on the Internet or at my local library. That's just insulting and condescending. The cover of the forthcoming paperback that you described isn't available at Soft Skull Press' site nor anywhere else. Bernstein's forward isn't available, either. Yet you insist that they are. Would you tell me where I can find them? A lot of people would like to know how you found them. In my column for tomorrow's Wheel, I make it clear that Professor Bellesiles is either using you as his mouthpiece or is you. I've looked at the IP addresses from some of your messages. They appear to originate from a Michigan ISP, giving credence to your claim to be a database administrator from Detroit. But there's no way you could have known anything about the cover or the Bernstein forward or a number of other minutiae related to Bellesiles and _Arming America_ unless you were close to Michael or an online persona that he invented. Yet you've written on HNN that you don't know Bellesiles personally. So something's wrong here. You just won't talk about it seriously. -Andrew >
Andrew, Although I am both flattered and amused that my humble scribbles here might be mistaken for that of a respected author and essayist, I do not believe those making such "charges" are serious. None of my information is "secretive." It is all available, either on the internet or at your local library. > >Benny > >
Benny: > >A lot of people insist that you're really Bellesiles, and it's beginning to sound like you are, considering the secretive information that you're privy to and a random database administration from Detroit wouldn't have access to. How do you respond to those charges? > >-Andrew > >>
Andrew, >> >> No, I do not have an advance copy of the second edition of Arming America. My information came from the internet, although I do not have the website handy. I hope your coverage of the Bellesiles matter in the future will be more balanced. Unfortunately, the Emory Wheel has been less than objective in the past, depending much upon many sources who bore personal/professional grudges, or who were ideologically aligned against the theses Professor Bellesiles proposed. Check out this website:
>>http://www.jointogether.org/gv/news/features/reader/0,2061,566717,00.html
It describes what happens when hard core politics trumps academic freedom in this neo-conservative age. When the new edition of Arming America comes out, I hope you read the new foreword by Richard B. Bernstein. It also describes how right wing power politics can silence voices that we need to hear. Journalism should always be on the side of free speech, particularly when it involves academic freedom. Unfortunately, the Wheel allowed itself to be seduced and abused by the radical right. Benny >> >> >>
Andrew Ackerman wrote: Hi there. I'm working on a column for the Emory Wheel, Emory's student paper. You're probably familiar with my stories last year on the Bellesiles controversy. I see that you've posted recently on HNN regarding the forthcoming paperback 2nd edition of _Arming America_. Did you obtain a preview copy of the Soft Skull book? If not, how were you able to describe its cover so accurately? >> >>Thanks, >>Andrew >> >>-- >>Andrew Ackerman >>Editor in Chief,
Note that Mr. Ackerman discovered that my posting address indicated that I am from Michigan, as I have stated. He even admits that gave credence to my story." Did that appear in the Emory newspaper article then? No. Why let the facts get in the way of a good story? I realize that rumor and gossip is often more sexy than the truth, but it is the truth that respectable journalists should always print. Also note that I spelled "foreword" correctly. One of the Emory Wheel’s reader responses chided Mr. Ackerman for spelling it incorrectly, at which time the Emory corrected itself but left the misquote of me unchanged, except for a ‘sic’ to try to put the blame for the spelling mistake upon me. That may be just sloppy journalism, but I also think it is also representative of the immature manner in which Emory has covered the Bellesiles matter. I still do believe they have allowed themselves to be seduced and abused by the gun lobby in this matter. And it unfortunately continues a sad trend at the Wheel. And it damages the integrity of Emory University itself, particularly when the article is so publicly praised by a member of the university’s inner echelon.
by Benny Smith on October 12, 2003 at 9:04 AM