The tug of war for funding Moda Center renovations has taken a new, albeit unsurprising, turn. A local coalition in favor of paying for the arena upgrades from public coffers has recruited online influencers to publicly declare support for the project and encourage others to do so. Comedian Ian Karmel, writer Ashtyn Butuso, Deadstock Coffee founder Ian Williams, and shoe store owner Troy Douglass have all been compensated to back the endeavor on their social media feeds. The information comes from a report
by Alissa Gary of The Oregonian.
Gary details the basics:
“I believe there’s a very real chance the Portland Trail Blazers will leave Portland if we don’t get the Moda Center renovated,” [Karmel] said in the video, before directing fans to learn more at the lobbyist group’s website.
Karmel is one of four people who were paid to post videos on social media under the hashtag “#warcpartner,” referring to We Are Rip City, a coalition of local businesses and organizations pushing for the city to commit public dollars to the estimated $600 million renovation.
The payment was described in the article as a “standard creator fee”. Karmel said he was “donating” his compensation because he believed in the cause and wanted people to believe he was “serious in this”.
Back in February, before any of this started, we published an article detailing the reasoning and methodology behind the arguments likely to be made in the debate, wholly distinct from actually arguing whether the renovation project is necessary or should be funded with public dollars. In other words, we talked about how people would try to influence others as they fought to get their own way.
In one section of that piece, we detailed three tactics likely to come into play: claims of certainty, exaggeration/overstatement of “facts”, and stoking fear that the team would leave if the arena wasn’t fixed up. It shouldn’t be shocking that lobbyists would compensate influencers to drum up support in exactly these ways. It still doesn’t make it very comfortable for people looking to hash out real solutions, seeking clear information and a relatively open field in which to process it.
We’ll let you debate the ethics and palatability of all of this in the comments section. As Managing Editor of the site, I just want to offer a couple of affirmations and/or boundaries.
- Blazer’s Edge is not accepting, and will not accept, compensation for our space, our words, or our viewpoints. Nobody can claim to be unbiased, but if we say something, it’s because we chose to say it, not because someone paid us to take a certain angle. We want to create space for ideas and discussion, not narrow down discussion to a predetermined point.
- Things get trickier when it comes to discussion in the comments. We understand that many people come to Blazer’s Edge to talk about these issues. That inevitably includes people who come with an agenda, to influence or lobby. Some of those might have a vested interest in doing so. That’s permissible, the way it would be in any reasonably-public discussion. In a way, lobbyists can be seen as “experts” on a certain viewpoint. Hearing them is part of the discourse. We draw the line at a couple places, though. First, you can’t shout down other commenters, use blatant disinformation, or employ “troll” tactics to bully the conversation. Second, if it becomes apparent that all you’re doing is lobbying people here, that you have no interest in contributing to the greater community but are just using the site as a vehicle to blow your own trumpet, we’re going to raise an eyebrow at that. There’s leeway and gray area, but in the end, we’re all here to participate in the community, not to raise our voice above it at the community’s expense.
In any case, here’s looking forward to the days when this is all resolved.
