Newspaper Page Text
Flagpole Magazine •
February 14, 199
Dan Feedback...
Last week I wrote an article for Flagpole. I rarely do that Mostly I make sure that somebody else is writing, confer with Jared to make
sure that we cover events that are going on in town, sell and build the ads and stay up 30-40 hours straight putting this rag together. I had
a lot of feedback on my editorial on Dan Matthews. I did make a mistake; I let somebody get me more angry than I had been in years.
No, I didn’t explain to all of the readers why I was angry. It was not an unprovoked attack, I know that and Dan should know that as well.
It is not always a good idea to act when you ’re angry and yet the situation could not slide by without Dan being called on his actions. What
situation you ask? In a nutshell Dan betrayed my trust and the trust of all of us here at the Flagpole. He looked me in the eye and told me
that he would not publish some information he learned while hanging out in our office (for hours, waiting for Shackler to drop off their press
kit) and then proceeded to do just that. That’s the nutshell, there are lots of minor points and details, they really don’t matter. It was and
is a question of trust and integrity. I am not a writer as many of the fetter writers have so cleverly deduced. I am guilty of being to harsh
on Dan, I expected more from him than he was able to give. All he did was lie. All he did was break his word. Our government and
corporations do that daily and on a much grandeur scale. Comparatively Dan’s actions, my actions and reactions to the both of us are
small things.
Many of you may have thought the tone and matter of my editorial on Dan was harsh and as somebody said vicious, hard as it may be
for you to believe that was not the intent. Others have told me that it was about time, on the money and they loved it, that was not the intent
either. My intent was to express my anger in a pointed and public way, help Dan to remember that the pen can cut two ways and that his
word should mean something and breaking it should have some consequences. Not very many readers could have known what the intent
was, I didn’t tell them. I am sorry to the readers for the confusion that was created when I did not explain the reasons behind my anger.
Dennis F. Greenia
What follows now are some comments that were dropped off or mailed in to the Flagpole office:
Letter #1
Dan Feedback I
Dear Sirs-
My appreciation for the editorial con
cerning Dan Matthews. The unmitigated
cruelty was superb. Keep up the good
shirk.
Your Servant In Christ,
Lumpy Bullsperm
Letter #2
Dan Feedback II
Dear Jared or other Flagpole people,
Will you please print this?
, Thanks,
David Guice
Letter #3
Dan Feedback III
Gentle Publisher and Editor:
Co ’'gratulations on your public execu
tion of local music critic Dan Matthews. All
future members of Dan-Bashers-Anony-
mous are at this moment overjoyed with
your personal attack on Dan’s writing and
lifestyle. Particularly appealing was the
implication that Dan is unqualified to be any
sort of critic, but on a whim decided he
wanted to cover the music 'scene" here in
Athens. Dan’s 'fantasy," as Dennis so
nicely summed up his career, is the result of
four years of journalism school, several
years as both a news and sports writer for
several Georgia newspapers and countless
years of absorbing information about music
in general and specifically in Athens.
Recent Observer Telephone Polls
started the bash-Dan craze, and althouoh I
believe that all critics need feedback, when
the attacks become personal, the attc.ul<ers
are the ones with the problem. Dan has
given a lot of bands much needed promo
tion — I know many musicians who couldn't
or wouldn’t deny this. He performs a func
tion, a job with definite perks and pitfalls.
Booking a nightclub may be a “painful” and
thankless task, but being a critic makes you
an obvious target. Jared can always hang
up the phone, a luxury writers rarely have.
Unlike Jared and Dennis, very few writers
have complete editorial control of a publica
tion either. I would assume that this would
induce some tolerance and understanding
instead of fostering dislike and grandiose,
self-righteous diatribes.
If you have a comment on Dan's cover
age (or lack thereof) of local clubs and/or
bands, then say it; however, devoting sev
eral inches and valuable ink and paper to
vent a personal vendetta speaks very
poorly of any 'journalistic integrity." I use
that term loosely here, mostly because I find
absolutely nothing to qualify Dennis’ article
for anyth ing more that the high school paper
I used to edit, and even we probably
wouldn’t have published : t. (And by the way
Dennis, at least Dan seems to understand
the difference between "your" and “you’re",
“to" and “too." Perhaps some basic spelling
lessons are in order.)
Whether Dan violated a trust, betrayed a
band or simply wrote something in good
faith, I should have known it would be too
much to expect it to be handled in a profes
sional and mature way among colleagues.
Attempting to publicly humiliate some
one in a rag you control takes quite a bit of
courage. You should all be very proud, and
I’m sure a great weight has been lifted from
your collective chests.
With heartfelt disgust,
Carol Snell
Letter #4
Dan Feedback IV
The following can in no way be con
strued as journalism, be it gonzo or other-
’ wise. I was asked by the man who wrote the
original whining story for a rebuttal to his
less-than-glowing piece on me. Although
Dennis Greenia claims the article was not
intended as a personal attack on me, I have
no other choice than to respond to it with
equal indignation and some personal com
ments to Flagpole in general.
Dear Dennis:
My initial reaction to your hatchet job on