Holzhauer Dislikes Ad Policy

To: Somebody With A Clue

Can you explain to me and your readers, (1) why ads discussing the tragic yet controversial, possibly even negative, view that Agent Orange is a killer (see Journal Sentinel article June 10, 2003 – Tie vote keeps Agent Orange case alive) are OK, while (2) ads discussing the PUBLIC RECORD of an ELECTED PUBLIC SERVANT are not?

Agent orange is an issue that is undecided and shot thru and thru with opinion. A Public Servant’s Public Record is fact. YOU ARE A COMMUNITY NEWSPAPER. You should be Community Advocates. Why won’t you do your job?

Kurt R. Holzhauer.

Note to our readers: The references to the ads in Mr. Holzhauer’s letter are to an ad we ran (Riverwest Currents May 2003 – Vietnam Veterans Against the War. The text said: Stop Re-Exposing Agent Orange Vets –STOP SPRAYING PESTICIDES!) and an ad we refused to run criticizing Alderman Mike D’Amato. We expressed our concern to Mr. Holzhauer about potential libel issues, and we were happy to run a letter from Mr. Holzhauer (April 2003) containing his unedited criticisms.

Publisher’s Response: Simply put, we reserve the right to reject any ad.

In reference to the ads Mr. Holzhauer questions, I see a difference between issues and individuals. Pesticide use or misuse is certainly an issue. Alderman D’Amato’s voting record is an issue. D’Amato was on the Common Council with Rosa Cameron and Jeff Pawlinski and is on the Council with Paul Henningsen. D’Amato (along with numerous other city officials as well as residents of his district) supported certain developments by New Land Enterprises. D’Amato’s public voting record is an issue but the fact that he happens to know this person or that is not an issue.

Holzhauer’s focus on D’Amato’s associations in the ad smelled of an attempt at ascribing guilt by merely describing a relationship (i.e. since D’Amato knows or works with this guy, he is therefore guilty of whatever the other guy is accused of doing, whether that be an alderman or developer.)

Let me guess, but I bet the real reason for Mr. Holzhauer’s anger is the condo development next to the home (the Charles B. Whitnall homestead) he owns on Locust Street in Whitnall Knoll. I can understand his anger over this encroaching, too-tall development, close to a historical landmark of the neighborhood, city, and county. “Somebody with a clue” might know better who his allies are and how to bring up an issue without creating a smear campaign. Alas, it is too late to stop this building that rises 60 feet from the ground in what the developer is calling Gordon Knoll north of Gordon Park.

But if Mr. Holzhauer wants to buy ads he is more than welcome, as long as they are issue oriented. Alderman D’Amato is running again for his Third District Council seat. The expanded Third District will encompass much more of Riverwest. So far as I know, he is unopposed.

Riverwest Currents - Volume 2 - Issue 7 - July 2003