Saturday, 19 December 2015


John Freeman

Recently, on JOHN FREEMAN's FACEBOOK page,
he made the following comment:

This was in reference to my throwaway remark about some-
one having "a face you'd never get tired of punching".  As any-
one with an ounce of sense knows, this is a humorous expression in-
tended to convey that someone has an irritating quality about their
demeanour, and is a convenient way of dismissing them as an
impertinent, provocative little gobsh*te.

Note how, in just one short paragraph, he endeavours to por-
tray me as aggressive ("threat of physical violence"), obsessional
("berating current creators and their work"), dishonest ("frequent
rewrites of his blog posts"), and actually warns his followers about
my 'Babe of the Day' feature, as 'though I'm a perverted purveyor
of pornography deserving of an 'alert'.

Mr. Freeman contacted me and, in my response to him, I
conveyed my displeasure about the way he had maligned my
character.  Mr. Freeman eventually pulled his post and then apolo-
gised for his remarks, but I believe I'm entitled to wonder if it was
merely for the purpose of protecting himself from the possibility of
legal redress.  Especially as he has permitted to stand a comment
(from someone he has previously endorsed) which echoes the
very sentiments he apologized for.

Also, for one who seemingly prides himself on what he calls
(in an email to me) "proper journalistic behaviour", here are
examples which indicate how he fails to live up to his aspirations.
In the above screengrab, he states that"he (me) tries to justify" the
"face" comment.  Inaccurate.  I simply pointed out that his interpreta-
tion of my remark and its intent was mistaken, which is not quite the
same thing.  He also says I'd "complained" that he never links to
any of my posts.  Again, not so.  I merely observed the fact as
a seeming indication of a bias against me.

Finally, it's worth noting that no one ever said I "deserved
cancer" - the actual quote was that "cancer was too good" for
me.  In other words, I deserved something worse - if such an ill-
ness actually exists.  Such a disconcerting inability to grasp and
report what was actually said hardly inspires any confidence
in me as to his journalistic competence, if I'm honest.

It gives me no pleasure to do this post.  Mr. Freeman was a
MARVEL U.K. editor who supplied me with some occasional
lettering work back in my freelance days, and there were never
any problems between us.  However, when someone maligns me, I
respond with neither fear nor favour, and I believe I have cause to
wonder about the sincerity of his apology in light of him allowing the
presence of a comment which repeats the very "crimes" he himself
has previously accused me of - in direct reply to his "apology"
too.  The phrase "having his cake and eating it" springs to
mind.  If I'm suspicious, is it any wonder?

Were Mr. Freeman to remove the offending comment on
his FB page, it would go some way in assuaging my doubt on
the matter.  However, he has steadfastly refused to do so.

You can draw your own conclusions as to why.


Mr. Freeman has now responded to this post by saying
that if I don't remove it, he will be consulting lawyers.  He
has also indicated that he will advise the photographer of the
photo accompanying my report that I do not have permission to
use it, and that I will then be charged £100 per day for its use.
I wonder how he knows in what way the photographer will
  respond in advance of actually being informed? 


Phil said...

I don't know about people. He makes a comment. You don't agree that's fine. You have him make a correction that should be the end of it. What the big deal? That you mention it here? Are you that powerful? Have you said anything not true? Has he heard of the Streisand effect?

Kid said...

Phil, re-reading your comment I see that it was ME who didn't didn't quite grasp what YOU were saying. I thought you were questioning my writing about this, but now I see you were asking if my doing so was what he was objecting to. I suspect he regrets his apology in light of remarks from his friends, hence his subsequent reaction.

Paul McScotty- Muir said...

Forgetting the ongoing saga that forms the basis of this "story" i.e the state of the comic industry etc , as its been done to death, reincarnated and done to death again (for the record I see both sides without "sitting on the fence" as noted in previous replies)

Re the "offensive" comment issue basically (and imho) you should not really have added that, the situation was inevitable that someone was going to raise this very issue and take you to task on it.The fact is you typed those words, the fact ALSO is that (again imho) you meant them in the way most folk say that phrase ie a throw away tongue in cheek comment. However, the second I read that sentence Kid I knew someone would take offence (and to be fair Phil he had every right it was aimed at him) similarly I knew someone would take it out of context( to be fair again, I think Phil, being from Belfast (Glasgow / Belfast pretty similar in the way we talk) should have maybe known the way it was meant,

I have every respect for John (Freemans) and just because "we" know the way it was meant to be taken does not mean he did BUT if you explained that to him I think he should have taken it into account and given you the benefit of any doubt he had. The cancer comment was "filth" I'v watched a loved family member die of that (as I am sure most folk have) its a disgusting remark to make over comics (and actually I admire your restraint on that one Kid) - GET A GRIP!

Kid said...

I'm not quite sure who you're telling to get a grip, McS, but even if it's aimed at me, you're entitled to your opinion and have expressed it in an interesting way. However, as for my remark, you can see the way it was meant (and I believe most people can), but the fact is, simply because it was ME who said it, seems to automatically bestow upon any comment I make a different, more sinister interpretation than was intended.

That's not helped by the fact that one of Freeman's friends (you know who I mean - he has an untruth about me as a permanent fixture of his blog's home page) has gone out of his way to portray me as an aggressive troublemaker, and there have been previous incidents when Freeman has demonstrated (on his site) that he subscribes to this point of view. Also, PB's original post clearly included me as one of the targets he was aiming at. It should be remembered that if he hadn't tried to show off to his pals, and restricted himself to dealing with the topic of comics, I wouldn't have felt obliged to address the issue of his silliness (some might say vindictiveness) in ascribing ridiculous motivations to those he was side-swiping.

I no longer have any respect for Freeman, because his emails to me contain many examples of a clear bias against me (despite him starting and finishing them in what seems like cordial terms. How someone can start an email with 'hope you're keeping well' and finish it with 'with very best wishes', but basically accuse me of being an aggressive, dishonest b*st*rd - and be unaware of the dichotomy - is astounding in its temerity and obtuseness.

Also, once his apology was issued, his manner towards me changed abruptly, leading me to ponder whether he only issued it because he had perhaps realized he had overstepped the mark in respect to his comments about me, and was only interested in avoiding any potential legal repercussions (not that I remember indicating such) or maintaining the appearance of 'journalistic' impartiality.

Friends of mine find it simply astounding that I attract such a level of attention and hostility from some people, merely for expressing an opinion on comics. I'd say that they certainly need to get a grip - and grow up, too!

Paul McScotty- Muir said...

"Get a grip" was solely indented to the lowlife that said that "cancer was too good for you". Out of all the unsavoury items I've read on this topic that is by far the most foul and having nursed someone through that awful disease and watch them fade away into nothingness, I personally find it sickening (and about comics as well "fer f***'s sake"!)

I agree that that is how I read your remark / comment as well but as I don't know the other people here or read their blogs (well sometime Johns "Down the Tubes") enough to comment on their motives for interpreting it I just give them the benefit of the doubt (maybe they took it the wrong way, maybe they were using it - I honestly don't know) I also find all this as baffling as well Kid.

Kid said...

Well, it's admirable that you want to give the other guy(s) a fair shake (oo-er, missus, there I go again), but I've noticed that certain people who know other people seem predisposed to interpret just about anything I write in the worst possible way. From previous experience on JF's site, I know he seems only too ready to see me in a bad light. I've terminated my membership of his site and told him to remove his link to my blog, on account of not wanting to be perceived as being associated with dtt in any way. Perhaps that'll pop on someone's blog, claiming I've been banned.


Having now reviewed my emails, I see that I DID say that I would pursue 'with the full rigour of the law' scurrilous suggestions regarding myself, but this was prompted by a comment from someone else, not JF himself.

Joe S. Walker said...

I don't think you need to apologise or back down to someone who repeats a lie.

Kid said...

And I won't be, Joe - you can be assured of that.

Mr Straightman said...

"Scantily clad ladies in risque poses"? Is this man trapped in 1956 or something?

Kid said...

What gets me is that I'm sure I've seen pages of art on his site (or ones he's linked to) which have illustrations of female characters who are far more scantily clad (if that's not a contradiction in terms) and in even more risque poses than the pics on this blog. He obviously had an agenda.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...