The Observation Deck

In the graphics business there is a saying, the worst trick you can play on a customer is to give them what they ask for, it doesn't figure in here, but maybe.


Placed around town on stacks of Observers, and left there.

This is an untrue statement and attacks the credibility of the Observer project, and it is doing it strictly for political gains, not to be honest.

Why? This is actually what was submitted to me, in a coffee shop with, "Hey Jim, do you think the Observer would be interested in this?"



I said, "We are open-submission, ink it and send it in."

The reply from Tom Wagner was, "Can you see if your artists can ink it up?" Sure, so I take it home, later that evening I scan it, crop it down, and send it off to Rob Masek, the guy who draws Lakewoodites, and is a full time artist in real life with real high paying clients.

98% of the people working at the Observer are volunteers with the right to say yes and no.

Two days later, Rob gets back to me with a "No, I am not interested in inking it, I have way too much going on right now, can't do it." The next time I see Tom, I tell him the artist doesn't want to do it. We talk about various options, and he asks, "Can I pay your guy to do it?" So I text Rob a message and two days later he answers, "No, I am swamped, I already did the cartoon for the last issue and it is not political." Tom was told no, the artist was not interested. He left saying he would ink it, and that was the last we heard.

The paper came out, when I read it, I saw that it was not in. I found out through Margaret that it was never submitted through the member center. For the record one more time, I do not edit the paper, or lay out the paper. Deb O'Bryan looks over the paper usually at 3am to make sure the right ads are in the paper, as it is waiting to be printed. It is printed out, and when I get the paper on Tuesday night, I finally sit down to look at, and read the paper in print form. Bret Callentine cured me of reading the paper before it was printed. Bret had a real dislike of Congressman Kucinich, and would work a slam into any article he wrote. Stuff that would make me want to ask for changes though I never did; finally I stopped reading the proofs, until after printing.

Last week I got a call from a mutual friend of Tom's saying, call him he needs help. I called Tom, asked what was going on. He wanted to submit the cartoon online, and I said, "Let's do it!" He was eating dinner I think, and he said he would later. I told him I would be up until 2am, and feel free to call I will make sure it get on, and we would get it out there. Let's be honest, this cartoon is not going to change the world, though I do find it amusing, especially knowing the players who worked it up. Is it something the Observer would not print? NO. Is it something we would be afraid to print? NO.

Tom said, people at BuildLakewood and with Summers are afraid we have lost our objectivity. Utter Bullshit, yet again.

This city deserve facts, real facts. Perhaps the best thing would have been to print this...



After all, sometimes the cruelest trick one can play on someone is to give them what they want.

.

It's not funny, clever, nor does it make a point. It looks like a bunch of talking heads with nothing important to say.

Sort of like Build Lakewood.

It's apparent from that cartoon that these people just don't want to be bothered with facts.

Facts are scary.

Why didn't the Fitzgerald "Neighborhood News" print it? It's right up their alley (back alley, that is.)

Bridget Conant wrote:Facts are scary.

Bridget

Actually, I believe they all use the term "mean spirited" for facts.


.

And now we know the rest of the story....Jim's brother Mike screwed up.

http://lakewoodobserver.com/forum/viewt ... 85#p161526

Letter to Mike O’Bryan from the creator of ““The comic the Lakewood Observer would not print”

As the debate became increasingly polarized I thought that - in its choice of its articles, “headlines” and positioning - the LO was revealing a pretty clear bias. I know that my friend Mike O’Bryan passionately disagrees. But at least with respect to their “backpage” comic I hadn’t seen anything that expressed what I felt: that given what the Mayor was dealt (the present contracts, financials, changes in medicine, demographics) the proposed plan was a reasonable attempt to make lemonade out of a lemon, notwithstanding mistakes made in rolling out that plan. I can’t draw but I drew a comic – a first for me – and sent it to Mike. He said he liked it and would get it in the LO, to my great delight. I asked if it needed to be resized or redrawn or whatever and he said it should be “inked” – it was a little rough - and then the LO could resize it to fit. He said they had a guy who would “ink” it - no problem. I said I would be happy to get it done myself but if they have someone who does it, that’s great and I offered to pay the artist for his work, (provided he didn’t modify it, of course).

The next LO came out and my comic wasn’t there. No problem, I am told – it had been or was being “inked” … I was assured that the artist did great work and that it would appear in the next edition – the last one before the election. I had also written a piece in support of Sam O’Leary and when I sent that to Mike he told me in an email that he had gotten “fired” - a joke - for not having articles sent through the proper channels (I presumed this included my comic) and he asked me to send the O’Leary piece to the editor via the Deck webpages. OK - I had never signed up for the Deck (frankly, not my cup of coffee) but I did it and sent in the O’Leary piece.
I was happy to see the O’Leary piece appear in this week’s printed edition but was very disappointed when my comic was not there. I expressed my disappointment to Mike in an e-mail (“You promised!’). He replied that it wasn’t in the printed LO because the artist had never “inked it”. Ouch. I don’t know why it wasn’t “inked” – was never told until after the print edition came out that there was any problem “inking” my comic or that it wouldn’t be printed. If I had been told their artist couldn’t do it – or wouldn’t do it - then I could have done it myself, as I had offered to do from the start.

In typical, generous, Mike O’Bryan style he helped me upload my beloved comic to the LO webpage. OK, but it was the printed edition I really wanted, so I thought, “Hey – if the LO couldn’t or wouldn’t do it (as Mike always says, “words are important”) then I’ll “ink it”, print it and distribute it myself. Just like the great and powerful LO does. I confess that it was kind of fun – I felt like Ben Franklin printing a “broadsheet” and then leaving my little comic - like Johnny Appleseed - in some of the great Lakewood joints along Detroit and Madison. I did it all myself, Mike -no conspiracy here. Depending on the location I either put it on top of the LO stack, or next to it, or between the individual LO editions. The intended message was, “HEY! - here’s something I think belonged in the LO – take a look at it too!“
Mike thinks by my (retitling) the comic, “The comic the Lakewood Observer would not print” (emphasis added) the message was that he personally had censured the printing of the comic. I don’t know why it wasn’t “inked” and therefore not printed, but I do believe that Mike O’Bryan would never personally have censured it and if that’s the message my title conveyed about Mike O’Bryan then I apologize to you, Mike, for conveying that. If it was a mis-communication with the “inking” artist, or someone else in the LO chain of publication –none of whom I know - then I think I should have been told in time to “ink” it myself. If that is what happened – mistake and not censure – and if I for some unknown reason couldn’t have been told that in time and had to play Ben Franklin again (it was fun!) then I guess I would re-title it, “The comic the LO did not publish”. If someone else – not Mike – decided the comic should not be printed then my title was frankly correct, although Mike passionately denies that this happened. Mike’s right, “words do matter”.

Just for the record, I will post this on the LO “Deck” (not my cup of coffee) and I will not engage in any subsequent exchange of replies or posts, be they positive or negative. I just don’t believe that process is either fun or helpful, especially in these times when we need real face to face conversations that bring us together – not emailed hand grenades and texted rifle shots. Toward that goal I will long for more interesting, animated and funny real conversations with you Mike – and anyone else – on this issue or anything else we care to civilly discuss in person, hopefully at the beloved Root. That is my cup of coffee.

With all due regards,

Tom Wagner

Pasquale Manno wrote: Just for the record, I will post this on the LO “Deck” (not my cup of coffee) and I will not engage in any subsequent exchange of replies or posts, be they positive or negative. I just don’t believe that process is either fun or helpful, especially in these times when we need real face to face conversations that bring us together – not emailed hand grenades and texted rifle shots. Toward that goal I will long for more interesting, animated and funny real conversations with you Mike – and anyone else – on this issue or anything else we care to civilly discuss in person, hopefully at the beloved Root. That is my cup of coffee.

With all due regards,

Tom Wagner

Pasquale

Thank you for posting, I was waiting for my good friend Dave Wagner (joke) to post it. I helped him get online last week to do so.

I have no brother, I have had coffee with him often since he was on the Charter Review, so obviously his facts about "Mike" are spot on.

You will see Tom Wagner's name very soon here on the Deck.

peace

Okay, I will admit that I am missing the point of this conflict?

Please explain why we should care about this ongoing saga.

Can we cut to the chase, please?

Thank you.

Matt

Matt,
I agree with you.