The internet is a great tool – it distributes information, helps us organize…and occasionally its spreads false information quickly, without the benefit of accuracy.
That’s what’s happening now regarding SB 572 – the Leno bill to create “Harvey Milk” day.
An email alert from CRA and a post on Flashreport lists a number of Republican Assembly members as possibly supporting the bill.
The problem is – it’s not true. At least its not true in regards to the Assemblyman from the 65th District – Col. Paul Cook.
Colonel Cook voted against a similar bill last year (AB 2567) and remains opposed to the current version.
I’m frankly confused as to what led anyone to believe Col. Cook changed his position. There has been no statement, no release – in fact, no information of any kind that even the most cursory investigation would imply that Col. Cook has changed his position.
I can’t speak on behalf of everyone on the list, but I have a suspicion that some of the other names might be inaccurate as well. If other names are similarly inaccurate, then the "alert" and the blog post was a disservice to Republicans, CRA, members of the Assembly and Flashreport readers.
Again, the internet can be a great tool – websites, blogs, social marketing, email can all be useful in getting our message out. But sometimes it leads to blunders and false information.
For disclosure it should be noted that Col. Cook is a client…which of course is how I know his position…
**UPDATE**
It appears that over half of those listed definitively and openly opposed the bill, some even voted against it in committee, others voted against the bill last year. It’s entirely possible that everyone on the list opposes the bill already, and I am not aware of any information that would lead me to believe any of the members listed ever considered supporting this measure.
This of course raises the question of why was an "alert" sent out (including a news release) and why it became "blog-worthy." Especially when a cursory review of easily available information or a simple phone call would have clarified the facts.
It took me 21 seconds to find the old bill to see how members voted (check it here yourself) – you can see that Cook and Emerson voted against the bill last year…
I’ve found no information or source of any kind that either had ever considered changing their position.
It raises serious questions… Because the internet moves so quickly, these things can mushroom, especially when there is symbolism involved. That’s why we have a responsibility to ensure the veracity and accuracy of what is posted.
I’ll keep you posted…
July 9th, 2009 at 12:00 am
To Tab and others who have commented or contacted Meredith or myself — I am not sure what information the Traditional Values Coalition or the California Republican Assembly used it determining which legislators they wanted to focus on in their alerts. I suppose Meredith’s original post should have made it clear (which she did with her update) that these are their “list” — not ours. That said, it’s GREAT to hear that, frankly, TVC and CRA worried over nothing (or its starting to look that way).
I do appreciate those who have contacted us though to make it clear that they are opposing the bill. Many thousands of activists read this site daily, and it is good they they be correctly informed.
I would be sure to contact TVC and CRA — as it is their outreach efforts that were posted up on this site.
Our apologies for any angst, but understand that while this legislation is relatively minor in the scheme of things, it has become very important symbolically.
Let me close, Tab, by sharing that I have the highest regard and respect for Assemblyman Cook.
July 9th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Jon you miss the point. As a Legislative Liaison one can’t rely on second hand missives. You should have contact with the legislaors themselves, or staff, before you send out a caustic blog like she did. It’s a courtesy that is rapidly disappearing around the capitol…and being replaced by lazy blogs! I would think an apology is in order.