|
Recent events involving a conservative columnist and commentator named Armstrong Williams and members of the Bush administration once more brings forth an appropriate but always controversial series of questions: Should a writer be paid to write? If a writer is paid to write, when and when is it appropriate? And should there be a limit on how much a writer can be paid for writing that is decidedly sycophantic? As a writer I come to these questions with a certain prejudice: I believe a writer should be paid for his writing, based on an inherent assumption: That the writing in question merits due payment. If a writer is willing to commit sufficient time and energy to producing quality writing he should be financially compensented for his work. At the same time, with regards to when and where it is appropriate for financial compensation, I hold a writer should not receive payment for his writing if his initial intentions were not true and honest with his probable audience. The aforementioned Armstrong Williams, for example, was not initially truthful or honest when it came to his writings regarding the educational agenda of the Bush Adminstration: "Leave No Child Behind": He wrote columns promoting this agenda, which is a worthy and noble one, now cheapened and damaged in terms of credibility and respectability because of his failure to be truthful and honest in the first. Mr. Williams, critics of his works charge, accepted monies from representatives of the Bush Adminstration to write these columns. Did he? As far as I can tell, based on superficial research, he did. Mr. Williams admits he was paid, through a company he owns, to write columns favoring this agenda, but insists that while there was a conflict of interest, there was no actually wrong-doing. Mr. Williams, it seems, has gone from being a promising columnist and commentator from the right side of the political aisle who speaks for those without a voice in public arenas to being a legal clown, determined to parse words and their meanings for his own personal, immoral gain. In doing so he has ruined and effectively destroyed his credibility and respectability as a writer. What is worse, in doing what he has done, is he has also damaged not only the credibility and respectabilty of conservative writers but writers in general: Because of his actions, his undeniable greed, Mr. Armstrong Williams has made all writers suspect with their writings: What are they really writing? How much did they get paid to write what they wrote? And what are they really saying with their writing? Freedom of Speech carries a great and mighty innate burden. Now there is an even greater burden: The burden of proof that a writer is true and honest in his intention. A burden that may never be truly lifted from the shoulders and backs of those who should not have to carry it otherwise. << Back |
 |
Effective Team Building
Calling India? india calling card at phonecardsavenue
Gewinnen Sie Neukunden mit einem Werbeartikel von uns.
(c) Copyright 2007.StanCo.info All rights reserved.