Hey, there! Log in / Register
Simmons College drops ads in police-union newspaper over its content
By adamg on Wed, 06/27/2012 - 5:20pm
Simmons College says if only it had known what the Boston Police Patrolmen's Association was printing in its bi-monthly newspaper, it never would have taken out ads in it. In response to a complaint about "highly offensive" content in the newspaper, the college marketing team wrote today about the full-page ad the college took out in the current issue of Pax Centurion (in addition to past full-page ads):
Simmons's sponsorship of the Police Patrolmen’s Association was intended to support the Boston Police Patrolmen’s Association Scholarship Fund, which benefits the families of Police Officers and Emergency Medical Technicians. Our hope was to support Boston's first responders through participating in this scholarship program.
Simmons was unaware of the editorial content of the Police Patrolmen's Association’s newsletter, and after careful review, will no longer advertise in this publication. We do intend, however, to continue our support of the scholarship fund through a direct donation.
While Simmons has no control over any of the editorial content of the many publications we advertise in, we regret our inclusion in this publication.
The current issue features commentary such as:
How coincidental was it that the Occupy Movement chose May 1 to stage another protest. For those of you not in the know-May 1 is the Communist 4th of July. Redistribute wealth, anarchy, upend the government, new morals, if that's not Marxism I don't know what is. Happy Birthday you rotten Commies! Maybe your candidate for squaw I mean senator, Liz Warren (your founder) can bake you a cake. I hear she has a whole cookbook full of plagiarized recipes...
Also be sure to check out the cracks about liberals and look for the joke about Egyptian men and their dead wives. It's a corker.
Oh, and look, a bit of national attention.
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Ugh
Wonder what BPD has to say about this.
LEO's openly discussing a us vs them mentality in their own association publication is a bit worrisome, if not conduct unbecoming an officer of this state. Justice is blind, but apparently this group has no problem with being ideological and bringing it to work.
I don't fault anyone for their own personal views, but this Limbaugh light stuff is dangerous. Once you get a few guys running their mouths, it empowers others to do some stupid shit thinking they're part of the gang.
Ed Davis checks in
Via a tweet - not a big fan of Pax Centurion.
While it's not nearly as
While it's not nearly as offensive, reading masscops.com gives a lot of insight into the way cops really think and behave.
I'm not going to mince words:
I'm not going to mince words: the fact that this racist, bigoted, misogynist and homophobic (I base that on what he has publicly put his name to, and I can't really see how else to take what he has written) officer may have to investigate a sex crime or a hate crime during his daily duties makes me extremely uncomfortable. That's notwithstanding the fact that his "insights" are appearing in an official Patrolmen's union paper. It's disgusting.
Agreed
And what really sucks is that we have a culture in this country where people believe that their employees, public officials, etc. are entitled to what some call "political" beliefs, but which is actually hatred with which one cannot possibly act compassionately toward all people.
In the healthcare professions, pretty much all the licensing boards have a code of ethics that say the provider can't discriminate on the basis of race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. Yet so many employers say that people are "entitled to their beliefs" and won't even say anything, let alone fire a person, who expresses really bigoted beliefs but hasn't been proven to have specifically harmed a consumer.
Expressing this kind of hatred, especially publicly and in print, should be more than enough evidence that a person isn't fit to work in the helping professions.
Homophobic... UMM WHAT?
Sorry, but I didn't notice anything homophobic about this particular article. Could you maybe provde some base for these cusations??
On Page A9, 2nd Paragraph.
"Ahmmm, Bil(L) (I notice you spell your name with only
one “L”- the correct and proper spelling –for men that is – is
with two, but I shouldn’t jump to conclusions…)"
The author also continues to address Bil as "Bil(L)" for the remainder of the article.
That strikes me as homophobic.
You Are Mistaken Kind Sir
I believe that the Officer who responded to this "Bil Lewis" and the Officer who wrote the article which is being discussed, are two different people. I was asking for proof of Officer Moccia being homophobic, which is what the user stated. Here is my two cents on the Bil/Bill argument as well, maybe Officer Carnell believed that Bil was a woman?
Correct me if I'm wrong...
But I believe that we were talking about Officer Moccia being "homophobic," not Officer Carnell responding to Bil Lewis. I again ask, can somebody PLEASE point out where Officer Moccia made a statement that was "homophobic?"
Donations.
I think I used to donate to this association but then got sick of the professional telemarketers they employee.
And their 80% take
And didn't you get sick of the 80% that the telemarketing company takes from your donation before even passing it to the association's fund?
I'm pretty sure they never had a telemarketing campaign.
Those are usually private companies which are big scams. I believe Fred Smerlas runs one of these organizations.
You're wrong.
I was just called by them last week.
No, no, no
Pete Nice is NEVER wrong about the Boston Police Department! Didn't you get the memo?
Police-call scams hardly new
Just because somebody calls up and says they're from the local police doesn't mean they are. We probably average one every six months. I've never heard any of them actually say "Boston Police Patrolmen's Association" or anything like that, usually something like "your local police."
Craig is actually wrong again....
Not the Boston Police Department, the patrolmans union.
But thats ok, I know you don't like facts to get in the way of your arguments.
Oh they will tell you that.
That they are from the Boston "patrol association", the Boston Police "association", the Boston "union of patrolmen", the Boston "police officer association",
99% of the time it is one of these groups.
Get the number Jon Bowen and look it up. Or give it to me and I'll tell you exactly who it is.
disrespectful opinions, condescending attitude & unpro demeanor
The editor of the BPPA is a conservative troll who displays disrespect for people whose point of views he disagree with. If I was an elected leader of BPPA or jut a member, I'd ask for his resignation. He has no business representing the organization with his disrespectful opinions, condescending attitude and unprofessional demeanor.
he also is hypocritical
The woman he refers to as "muffy" is a good friend of mine.
If he looked into anything more than just pictures, he would have realized she's from a rather humble background, and worked in exchange for horse-back riding lessons. Which in my book means she has already worked a lot harder than that douche ever will. I say if he likes to throw shit, let's give him a shovel to clean shit with!
March/April 2011 issue
http://www.bppa.org/pax/PAX%20MarApr%202011.pdf
Look at page B2. I wonder how long the BPPA will be leaving this archive public.
Simmons reaction was dead on-- continue to support the scholarship fund but drop the advertising in this rag.
This one upset me a bit...
"For the record: Best name ever for an attorney: Soo Hoo."
Okay, I've done business with Margaret Soohoo; she's a Boston attorney. And from what I can remember, she's extremely competent and very nice to boot. So not only is this guy, police officer Jay Moccia using thinly veiled racism, he's using thinly veiled racism toward somebody he's being paid to serve and protect. Just my two cents.
Oh, and I'm not happy with his grammar either.
Sue who?
Sorry, but I can't see anything racist about that particular comment.
HAHAHA
How is this racist? Nobody is attacking your friend, Mr. Bowen. It is just ironic that her last name sounds like the phrase "Sue Who." This is nothing more then a little bit of humor. Oh, and unless you are the editor, I don't think your comments on grammar are necessary.
In what context is this?
Was this an official column/op-ed piece, or was it a "Letter to the Editor" sort of nonsense?
If it was the former, that reflects very badly on the patrolman's association and definitely, some sort of internal sanctions are in order. If it was the latter, then the BPD should sanction the letter writer individually- as many editors often publish letters from bigots to make the bigot and his viewpoint look foolish in print.
That said, the BPD is wildly unprofessional and this doesn't surprise me a bit. Cursing at pedestrians and clubbing sports fans without provocation is not professional police behavior.
Just look for anything by James Carnell, the editor
For a decent example, find page A9 of the current issue, where he responds to some guy complaining about a previous issue:
Now he's attacking a personal friend of mine
I've known Bil Lewis for decades -- and he does in fact spell his name with one 'L'. He is a very gentle and level-headed person who did his best to keep Occupy Boston somewhat orderly, and who has had many nice things to say about the Boston Police Department's conduct during most of the Occupation. He did not deserve this vitriolic reply in any way.
Bil has been a college teacher of computer science, not a primary or secondary school teacher. So blaming him for "young idiots who don’t know history, geography, math or classical literature" is a bit rich.
This garbage isn't confined
This garbage isn't confined to just one issue, either. It goes back a long ways. Read it if you've the stomach. One article by Joe Moccia even mocks the child rape victims of Jerry Sandusky.
This is the official newsletter of the Boston Police's union. Everything printed in there is presumably chosen by the BPPA's editorial board and is meant to represent the BPPA, and by extent, the views of the members of Boston Police Department. That neither the Mayor nor Commissioner Ed Davis nor Superintendent William Evans have said anything to the contrary, even after having had this pointed out to them via social media a month ago, seems to indicate that they also endorse these views. Let's hope this time the complaints gain public traction rather than be dismissed as "commie liberal whining."
Institutionalized cultures of hatred and contempt are dangerous in any organization, but particularly so in one in which members are armed and legally empowered to commit violence against others. This doesn't exactly engender the public trust. I know I certainly won't be calling the BPD for any reason any time soon.
Patrol union
People have to remember that this is a patrolmans union, not a BPD union. These guys hate Davis, the City, the Mayor, the governor, or anyone else who takes away money and benefits from the union.
(They obviously also hate liberals, commies, and pinkos.)
Brain...cramping...
...they hate the people who....are...defending...the existence...of unions....and ..the benefits..they're complaining...about losing....>gaaak< choking ...on ignorance ... and hypocrisy....
THANK you!
I couldn't find an articulate way to express the same impression. Okay, you're not totally articulate either. I guess there is no way to articulately point out the sheer idiocy involved....
It should be noted...
That Deval Patrick isn't the biggest union supporter when it comes to certain issues. He wants to save taxpayers money by forcing unions into state health care systems like the GIC. Good for taxpayers, bad for public employees.
Devilish Deval
Why that should be noted, I don't know, but as long as we're noting things like this, Patrick was also a corporate lawyer for Coca-Cola - a corporation with the nasty habit of contracting with paramilitaries who murder union leaders in places like Colombia.
Patrick may have come from humble beginnings but from Milton Academy on his collars have not exactly been blue. He's a wealthy, corporate-culture defending kinda guy (like some other ground-breaking African-American politician you might be able to name), so the idea that he may not be in total lock-step with the unions is not a surprise - he's never been part of one.
The hypocrisy of blue collar workers (quite literally in the case of many law enforcement officers) who directly benefit from their unions' clout and negotiating power and yet parrot the right-wing corporate talking points of "unions bad...make growth go away..hulk smash" is a more mind-blowing hypocrisy and/or steaming pile of ignorance than a politician talking out both sides of his mouth (far from hypocrisy, I think that's the definition of a politician).
Well, if this asshole's so
Well, if this asshole's so proud to be anti-Communism and anti-Gubmint, let's revoke his taxpayer-funded pension.
Contact the other companies that sponsor this rag
Unbelievable. Muslims, "Jamaica Plain cop-hating liberals", Native Americans, Obama, Governor Patrick ("racial huckster"), atheists ("pagans"), "local multicultural activist types", and even soccer moms are the subject of ridicule and abuse.
For what it's worth, here are the other sponsors/donors who have taken out ad space in the May/June issue of the Boston police union's paper:
Stop and Shop's response
I contacted Stop and Shop and got the following response (and permission to post it):
Thank you for your recent email regarding the Boston Police Patrolmena**s
Association (BPPA) newsletter. By placement of our ad in the newsletter we
are not endorsing any of the editorial content. We appreciate your
sharing your feedback with us and have shared it with our management for
their information and consideration.
Thanks again for calling this to our attention so we could follow-up.
Sincerely,
Deborah Riley
Consumer Affairs Supervisor
Ref: 927335
Simmons and the community. Library and Information Studies.
Key people at Simmons College Graduate School of Library and Information Studies squelched a more affordable library and information studies degree program at University of Massachusetts Boston and at Northeastern University. The program at Simmons isn't on a par with University at Albany http://albany.edu/cci Simmons' information studies graduate program hasn't cooperated with nearby universities' computer science programs. And at Simmons the tuition is very high, limited financial assistance.
um
bigger fish to fry on this post Zak...
Did you even read the main post?
Sure.
Did you intend for that to be relevant, or were you just lying in wait for any mention of Simmons?
The Archives/Public History program....
The Archives/Public History program at Umass Boston was not slated to have the technical requirements that the LIS degree at Simmons has. For example, there was not a focus on cataloging, or description. It's already very difficult to get a job in Archives - this would have put out more candidates, but without the accredidation from the ALA that so many institutions require. Mind you, there is still a lot wrong wtih GSLIS, but it's accredited, at least.
ooh! oooh!
Library Science Fight! Library Science Fight!! It's a dewey decimal smackdown!!
(I'm sure there's some real controversial issues here, but reading this is like listening to people talk about season 3 of some show that's really popular ... and I don't watch.... eh?)
I know of a burlesque...
I know of a burlesque performer who performs under the name "Dewey Decimator." It's awesome. So this argument is no where near as exciting as the Dewey Decimator, unless you have a stake in it. But then again, Dewey Decimator is awesome.
Freedom of Speech? Freedom of the Press?
Like it or not, a police officer never ceases to be a citizen. All of the writers and their material in the Pax Centurion are constitutionally protected. The writers, as members of the union, also enjoy the protection of strong labor laws that restrain management from interfering with legal, union activity, like the newsletter. I thought liberals favored union rights over management, or is that only when the union has typical, far-left, Democrat leaning leadership?
Finally, a joke about Soo Hoo (sounds like sue who?) being a great name for a lawyer, is deemed racist? Please. There's much worse on Leno, Letterman, Maher, Stewart etc. each night. Simmons can spend its money the way they see fit. The union can print what they want in their (internal) newsletter. Our military, consiting of hundreds of thousands of police officers (if not more) over the years, fought hard to protect the rights of Simmons and the union. If you don't like the internal union newsletter, don't read it.
which wars of the past 30
which wars of the past 30 years have been fought for my rights? the right to oil doesnt count
Wahhh "1st Amendment!"
Anytime controversial views are criticized people always cry that the first amendment protects such speech and the printing of such views. No shit.
The thing is that the same First Amendment protects others' right to criticize these views and people. And it is people's prerogative to exercise their First Amendment right to put pressure on the organization sanctioning such speech and to urge sponsors to withdraw financial support.
If you choose to exercise First Amendment rights, the Constitution does not exempt you from criticism or shield you from my First Amendment rights to condemn what you said. The First Amendment does not shield you from me organizing a boycott of your newspaper or TV show if you express views I find offensive.
Free speech has consequences, like it or not.
Of course he's free to say
Of course he's free to say whatever he wants. He's not, however, free from reproach for what he says.
Godwin'd
Fine I'll do it.
So O-FISH-L if this guy was a white supremacist and via his first amendment rights let us know his views on races, and extreme hatred for particular ones, it's AOK for him to be a Boston Police Officer?
As said above, you have the right to say anything you want without the government censoring you. But you have no right or protection against criticism or consequences of your speech, especially from your employer; be it the city of Boston, or Fidelity, or Bob's pizza truck.
Fairness, integrity and good judgment are all part of the job description this guy is in. Espousing obviously racists views and hatred towards peoples and political persuasions is at direct odds to their public position of power, and the citizens and taxpayers this douche serves.
Oh they have lots of rights anon2
And lots of protection from their union, civil service, and various other recent case laws which protect public workers right to speak about various issues.
And civil service workers don't serve anyone. You serve them.
Right, but
Do you not see why the general public might feel less than convinced that their city patrolmen are actually unbiasedly enforcing the law when this is their official newsletter's point of view?
Right but,
I wasn't really talking about that. But keep throwing in topics that you want to include about what other people are tyring to say or not say. It's not really working.
But my point is larger than this one instance
Everyone has a right to have offensive opinions. However, my point is that when the patrolman's association decides that they want to publicly and proudly profess this level of ignorance, disrespect, hatred, and bigotry towards the people they are sworn to protect, I think it is reasonable for those same people to be skeptical of this police force.
This seems to be the common issue you and I have: I am skeptical, you believe that they can do no wrong. But issues like this highlight WHY I and many others are skeptical. Totally apropos.
Thats fine, I can see your point.
But you add comments like that into my conversations which don't involve that issue. Did I ever defend this publication here? Did I ever say I agree with the content of this paper? Did I ever say you should feel a certain way about the Boston Police?
And then you say I believe they can do no wrong. Can you point out anywhere on this website where I have defended wrong doings? If you take a close look at what I write, you will find out that I merely explain how things are done in the law enforcement world. The Boston OUIL case is a clear example how you and others have really no clue how things work.
You could have criticized the original officers report, if you saw that report and knew that no alchohol was mentioned, and I think you could even listen to the attorney on her comment on that as well. If you go back and look, my entire point was about the other investigation and how and why it needs to be done before charges can be filed. You simply called that investigation "lax" which was a baseless accusation.
Rolls Eyes
So ... is your Police motto "Protect and Serve Yourself" now?
Of course it is
Any civil service/union job is. Is that too hard to comprehend?
Massachusetts != world
Yes, it is. That certainly isn't the civil service culture that I grew up with.
Also, it isn't going to be the wave of the future, either. People expect respect, competence, and professional behavior from those they hire to do a job - and civil service isn't any different.
Don't even try to play the "but you can't take your money away if we act like spoiled brats" card, either. Why do you think taxpayers have defunded so much bureacracy already, even in MA? Killing funding is a crude tool, perhaps counterproductive, but people will use it if they see arrogance, stupidity, and entitlement.
Yeah right.
You mean the police department can't even hire qualified people in the first place! How do expect them to change once they get the job? And yes civil service is very different. A restuarant can fire a waiter if the waiter is rude to a customer. A police department can't fire an officer if the officer is rude to a customer. This is because of civil service.
And don't bring up the Oregon card here Swirly. I've worked out there (the west coast). There are more federal investigations of police abuse, brutality, corruption etc that you will ever see in Boston.
More effective cover ups, you mean
In other words, they use the unions and the system to prevent investigations and firings for cause more effectively out here.
But, hey, if you liked prop 2 1/2 and want more of the same ... keep it up.
I had to laugh at that one swirly
Especially after working in California.. California is the birthplace of bogus union lawsuits for municipal firings. The police culture there is 10000x worse than it could ever be here. The department of justice would also laugh at your comment. If you only knew where most of their workload is these days
Sure he does
but as a police officer he has compromised himself by writing this. What happens when this cop gets into a situation in the line of duty involving a woman, minority, homosexual orNative American (which he still thinks are Indians)? He has automatically comprised himself in that he is no longer impartial. What defense attorney wouldn't love to get his hands on this article if this officer was on the stand.
Never gets old.
Man, I will never get tired of people who work in law enforcement who are pig-ignorant of what the First Amendment means. In this case, militantly pig-ignorant, as I've read at least three other threads here where someone explained this to him like he was five years old.
Bonus points for conflating the military with the municipal police force, too. Any other unaffiliated groups you want to lump in there to try to mitigate this while you're at it?
Keep on championing our rights for us, FISH.
As we all know, cops
This got my attention because it implies that local cops have to work the "2" jobs. Apparently Officer Moccia forgot that police are not owed or obligated to work detail assignments. If ever there was a sense of entitlement by anyone it's found in here.
Later he used the phrase "turban tops." Hard to not see that as racist.
Being a publication of local cops it makes local cops look bad.
It got my attention because
It got my attention because those cops working construction details get billed out at 33+ an hour, with a 4 hour minimum (and an 8 hour minimum for any job exceeding 4 hours)
I'm pretty sure that cops want to work ot/detail... there is no need for them to receive benefits and retirement because it is the SAME JOB they already receive those benefits for. And as someone else said, it is voluntary.
I'm not sure why people are getting upset about this, though... cops being ignorant and racist is nothing new. The best we can do is try to avoid them as much as possible since they essentially have free reign to abuse their power in any way they please. For every state trooper who gets fired for driving down memorial the wrong way, there are hundreds more getting wasted on duty, discharging their firearms in city limits for entertainment, planting drugs, stealing money, assaulting citizens, using unnecessary force for the fun of it, etc.
Just kidding, all cops are really nice and do their job right
Disinfectant by Sunlight
Now we know how it is that all those high school bullies that never grew up still manage to make a living in the grownup world.
I think
That article regarding fallen Cop's sums up JP rather well.
Funny
If not for Adam, I'd think your almost maniacal jealousy of JP sums up Rozzie pretty well.
As I read through the
As I read through the comments on this article, I am more convinced than ever that the art of critical thinking has disappeared from our society.
Institution A advertises in a newsletter. A newsletter that, as anyone with half a brain can figure out after reading the cover page, is completely editorial in nature. This is not a newspaper or standard media outlet wherein reporters are supposed to be unbiased and equal about every item they cover; this is a soapbox for various individuals to blither on about whatever comes into their minds at the time. As an advertiser, you obviously know this going in. No business is going to purchase ad space in a publication without first determining the nature of said publication, and if they do, they deserve whatever negative exposure they get as a result of their stupidity and bad decision-making.
Institution A, later on down the line, decides that the content of the newsletter in which they purchase ad space is not something with which they agree, or is too salty for their taste, or they don't like the grammar and spelling, or whatever reason they choose; and for that reason they decide to pull their advertising. This is, America being a free country, their right and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. HOWEVER. There is one aspect of this process that is completely self-defeating and proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the person in charge of this process is a hypocrite of the first water.
IF: you do not agree with the content of a newsletter in which you advertise
IF: you choose to pull your advertising from said newsletter, so as to no longer support said content
THEN: Why issue a press release that calls MORE attention to the very content you are decrying, ensuring that MORE people are going to be exposed to it?
"This content is evil and bad and nasty and horrible! EVERYBODY READ IT!!"
It's almost like Institution A has a pinhead at the helm who greatly enjoys a good game of one-upmanship. Not content to make and carry out a decision based on one's (or one's company's) personal morals, one then feels the need to publicize this decision? Which again, is fine, this being America and everyone having the freedom to state their opinion and all that. But here's the part that really makes me shake my head and lament the future of our society: from no point of view, from no angle of consideration, by no stretch of the imagination and by no logical reason, is there any point to this action whatsoever other than "Look how righteous we are! US GOOD, THEM BAD!"
In short, the only point to this press release, and this story in fact, is to paint oneself in a positive light and slam the people with whom you disagree. The EXACT tactic that Institution A is claiming as the reason why they're withdrawing their advertising.
Welcome to hypocrisy, ladies and gentlemen. Pull your collective heads out of your collective backsides and learn to think and maybe, just maybe, our society won't devolve into a morass of stupidity and hopelessness.
Nice theory, if only it matched the facts in this case
As far as I know, Simmons didn't issue a press release. Some alum sent them a Facebook message asking why they were advertising in the newsletter, the marketing department took a look, gasped, and replied to the alum she was right and they were out of there.
You can't credit/blame Simmons for somebody else noticing that and then tweeting about it, which brought it to the attention of a blogger who thought it warranted a post - a blogger who thinks the more you expose stuff like this the better because otherwise it just festers and gets worse and worse.
But anywho ...
Accountability
is a very scary word for some people.
The less children doing grown up jobs, the better.
Alternative reality
Here's an alternative explanation. Lots of local corporations (and some national ones with a Boston presence) have never heard of Pax Centurion, much less read it. But they do, on the other hand, contribute to a fund, managed by the union, that provides scholarships for kids of police officers, etc. Someone then calls them up and says, "for your contribution, you can have a free ad in our newsletter, want one?" and then someone at the corporate end says "sure."