Over at HuffPo Gay Voices, Michelangelo Signorile does his post-mortem on the Chick-Fil-A battle, which didn’t exactlygo well for the pro-equality side, primarily because the pro-bigotry forces were aided by some self-inflicted wounds on our side that handed over the free-speech victim argument.
And these people are hypocrites who cared nothing about the first amendment when they went on a religious crusade against Muslims, trying to stop construction of the Islamic center near ground zero back in 2010. Now, while they crusade against gays, with millions of dollars from Chick-fil-A’s profits going to groups that promote harmful pray-away-the-gay therapies, they’re crying about the first amendment? Please.
So yes, our enemies distorted our message and reframed the story. And we allowed them to do it.
How did we allow it to happen? Because there was no coordinated effort on our side. The controversy was largely driven by blogs, social media and very loosely organized grass-roots activists, with no coordinated leadership. The city mayors and politicians calling for banning Chick-fil-A gave an opportunity for the right to reframe the story. The mayors backed off quickly after many on the left decided it wasn’t a good idea.
…The problem with the kiss-in was, again, a lack of leadership.The turnout was sparse. It didn’t have a focus, and by default it seemed to be responding to Huckabee’s re-framing of the controversy as about same-sex marriage — couples showing their love and wanting their rights. Once you grab people’s attention the messaging needs to be about the issue you want focused on: Chick-fil-A giving money to those anti-gay groups, which have fostered the very hate that has resulted in violence and murder. It surely wasn’t.
But there was one curious thing in Mike’s piece — why did HRC keep its new president, Chad Griffin, away from LGBT media during this serious opportunity and challenge to take on Chick-Fil-A’s bogus First Amendment fig leaf?
At the largest LGBT group, the Human Rights Campaign, the new president, Chad Griffin, who took over in June ( an appointment I praised), hasn’t said a word about Chick-fil-A since offering a quote responding to Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy’s anti-gay comments weeks ago.
Actually, HRC has clammed Griffin up entirely. I was told by Fred Sainz, HRC’s media flack, that Griffin has “no time to waste” doing any interviews with gay media, including with me for my SiriusXM radio program and for HuffPost Gay Voices, until two and a half months into the job (September), while he’s “trying to wrap his hands around” the job (though Griffin gave puffy interviews to the AP and the Washington Post ”Style” section).
Er, not good. I read that and was kind of baffled – what’s with the timeline on being accessible? When sh*t hits the activism fan, there needs to be a capability for nimble action. What would be the logical reason for HRC to shield Griffin from LGBT media on the Chick-Fil-A issue — we needed community leadership to re-focus the message on the real issues of the corporation’s discrimination and funding anti-gay orgs in the media.
I’m not saying this situation wasn’t a PR challenge – after all none of the LGBT organizations put together these protests, the actions formed organically through social media as Mike noted. But what if Griffin had been out front doing LGBT media (and mainstream media on the issue)? That certainly would have been a different ball game. Mike said that an interview with Griffin will happen in “coming weeks.” We’ll see.
The best thing to do at this point is to move on and for our orgs to learn how to successfully focus and harness grassroots energy. The right wing bible beaters do it quite well; they may be losing the culture war, but we don’t need to help them extend the harm caused by their bigotry.
***
Well, we do know where HRC’s energy (and $) has been focused on and letting Griffin speak to the media about– marriage equality. An announcement today that it is sinking big bucks into the state marriage equality initiatives this year. From its press release:
Today the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender civil rights organization, announced a further cash investment of $1 million in the four states facing marriage-related ballot measures in November – Maine, Maryland, Minnesota and Washington. The cash infusion brings HRC’s contributions to legislative and electoral marriage issues in the 2011-2012 cycle to $4.8 million.
“This is a tipping point year in the fight for marriage equality that requires significant investment,” said HRC President Chad Griffin. “We are committed to making sure this is the year that our opponents can no longer claim Americans will not support marriage equality at the ballot box.”
Nationally, support for marriage equality is at 54 percent according to a June 2012 CNN poll. Additionally public polls in Maine, Maryland and Washington show majorities of voters favoring marriage for committed gay and lesbian couples and polls in Minnesota also show voters there opposing the discriminatory constitutional amendment.
HRC has established a special ballot measure PAC to aid funding of all four states. Today’s $1 million contribution will be split evenly among Maine, Maryland, Minnesota and Washington.
“Bans on marriage for same-sex couples have sent the devastating message to young people that they cannot grow up to live their dreams and be full and equal citizens,” said Griffin. “This is the year we will change that.”
In Maine, voters will be asked for the first time in the country to affirmatively pass marriage for gays and lesbians at the ballot box. Voters in Maryland and Washington are being asked to affirm legislatively passed marriage equality laws. In Minnesota, voters will consider a constitutional amendment to ban gay and lesbian couples from marriage.
“All of these campaigns are winnable but they need resources to educate voters and fight back the lies from groups like the National Organization for Marriage,” said Griffin. “The country is moving in the direction of equality and a win in any of these states will show that marriage equality is quickly becoming a mainstream, American value.”




4 Comments


Alright, I’ll jump in, but this column seems to be a bit disjointed.
First, why assume the CFA events of last week were a success or a failure? If there were no defined goals, how can there be an assessment of those goals? Since I don’t consider the CFA stuff of the past few weeks a failure, I don’t feel the need to get over some feeling of a lack of accomplishment.
Moving along, what are the “asks” here?
An assigning of blame for a lack of cohesive messaging around the CFA stuff? As you said, it was a decentralized outgrowth with no one in charge. Why blame HRC or any other group for that? I’m happy to blame HRC for a lot of things for which they justly deserve blame, but if the CFA stuff wasn’t something they developed or want credit for, why draw them into it?
Often, people seem to beg online for a decentralized social change movement. Well, you got a snapshot of what such a movement can be with all the pros and cons. Conversely, if you want disciplined messaging, someone’s got to be in charge.
Then there’s the “LGBT-press-hasn’t-gotten-its-ring-kissed-from-HRC-soon-enough” theme. To which I can only reply, who the hell cares?
I’m more than willing to criticize an organization that is operating poorly — including HRC — but this CFA stuff wasn’t their mess to clean up, and I can’t bring myself to care if Griffin hasn’t had a sit down with Signorile ten weeks into his new CEO job.
I care about effective policy changes. If Griffin is working on quickly delivering on those policy changes — non-discrimination executive order comes to mind — he could never give another interview to anyone for all I care.
Back the CFA stuff. While many of us already knew of CFA’s horrible history and have been boycotting for years, the mainstream media blow up of the story was certainly educational for many in the ally community.
For that I’m grateful.
If I were to suggest where to go from here, I say prepare for the November election NOW!
All North Carolinians vote and urge your fellow citizens to vote for
Walter Dalton — Governor
Sam Ervin — Supreme Court
Linda McGee — Court of Appeals
Wanda Bryant — Court of Appeals
Cressie Thigpen — Court of Appeals
This whole CFA thing is great for Huckabee and his obese followers.
Sorry, we just couldn’t bring ourselves to drive the two hours to the nearest CFA to hang out and kiss, when we’ve spent over two decades telling people why they shouldn’t eat there.
Besides, if people want to eat chicken processed with the same chemical used to kill lice, that’s justice enough for me.
Americans need to wake up; we have THE most adulterated food supply in the world, there’s plenty of reasons to stop eating American Corporate cancer inducing shit, and I don’t particularly care to support any of the chains that sell crap to stupid people.
Why did the anti-gay haters win this battle? Because they are organized, they get their talking points together and they ALL REPEAT THE SAME SET OF TALKING POINTS over and over again.
Progressives never perform with that type of dedication.
First, we only talked about what Cathy said. Then some of us added talk about the millions donated to hate groups. But, that’s as far as most progressives took it. And, that was only part of the story. And, only telling part of the story is what allows the opposition to take control of the message and the media.
More than what Cathy said and the millions donated, Chick-Fil-A also has self-admitted anti-gay hiring practices. They have self-admitted anti-gay policies in deciding who is able to be an owner / operator of a franchise. Chick-Fil-A has a ZERO rating from HRC which means they have no policies to address discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Chick-Fil-A employs a religious test in their hiring decisions.
These points should have been brought into the discussion EVERY TIME anyone on the progressive side said anything about this controversy. You know the bigots wouldn’t have left out any talking points.
It took just a few minutes on google when this issue erupted to find all this data which wasn’t used effectively by our side.
http://www.minnpost.com/politics-policy/2012/07/chick-fil-politics-and-social-media-cautionary-tale
Few knew that founder Truett Cathy had firm opinions about the personal lives of the owners of Chick-fil-A’s 1,600 franchises and their employees. He preferred them married, and expected adherence to the company’s stated mission to “glorify God.”
“Family members of prospective operators — children, even — are frequently interviewed so Cathy and his family can learn more about job candidates and their relationships at home,” Forbes reported in 2007, when Cathy was 86.
” ‘If a man can’t manage his own life, he can’t manage a business,’ says Cathy, who says he would probably fire an employee or terminate an operator who ‘has been sinful or done something harmful to their family members.’
http://www.projectqatlanta.com/news_articles/view/chick-fil-a_president_misleads_on_gay_marriage?gid=7369
“Chick-fil-A continued over the weekend to defend itself against charges that the Atlanta-based restaurant chain is anti-gay, with its president contradicting his own family foundation about whether it accepts gay couples.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/us/30chick.html?src=twrhp&pagewanted=all
“The company’s Christian culture and its strict hiring practices, which require potential operators to discuss their marital status and civic and church involvement, have attracted controversy before, including a 2002 lawsuit brought by a Muslim restaurant owner in Houston who said he was fired because he did not pray to Jesus with other employees at a training session. The suit was settled”
If our community learns anything from this debacle, it should be to get your data, distribute your talking points and repeat them every time you say anything on the topic.
Every media interview should have included all of the above and the story of the woman fired because CFA felt she should be a stay-at-home mom or the story of the man who was fired because he was still single at age 32 (must be gay). We needed to get CFA to have to respond to questions about their actual practices, not just their ideology.
But, Signorile continues to make the mistake even in his post mortem. He’s still leaving out half of the data.
I tend to agree with timncguy on this…
The problem isn’t that the media was allowed to “frame” this as a first amendment issue, the problem is that the media was allowed to “frame” this as solely a gay issue.
Granted, it was Cathy’s stance on gay marriage and CFA’s contributions to anti-gay hate groups that sparked this media fire, but as history has well taught us, prejudice rarely exists in a bubble… the Nazis didn’t just persecute the Jewish community, the KKK didn’t just persecute African Americans, and if the Cathy’s hate the gays, the media should be asking itself what other minorities do the Cathy’s hate.
Here’s a YouTube video of the welcome ceremony at CFA WinShape’s Berry College, you know, all those “charitable” scholarships the kindly Cathy’s are giving to needy students that we kept hearing about this week… I can count on one hand how many non-whites I see in this auditorium full of freshmen and their families. It’s a sea of white just like the CFA Appreciation Day turnout.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OpNberwR7I&feature=related