‘Boston’ Magazine Threatens MassNews With Libel Lawsuit

‘Boston’ Magazine Threatens MassNews With Libel Lawsuit

Must Be Feeling ‘Extreme Pressure’ Says MassNews Publisher

December 17, 2001

Boston magazine threatened MassNews with a libel lawsuit last Friday afternoon.

In a letter from Hill & Barlow, the magazine demanded that MassNews remove a Sighting from its December issue with the headline, “Boston Magazine is Leader in Molestation.”

However, instead of obeying their demand to remove the article, Atty. J. Edward Pawlick, Publisher of MassNews, increased the pressure by printing the lawyer’s letter and his response on the website today.

“This lawyer cannot know all the facts of the case,” Pawlick said, “or he would not have written a letter such as this. There is no way that Boston magazine can suppress the discussion of an issue that is so important to our society. They must be feeling extreme pressure from somewhere or else they would not have made this belligerent attack. Maybe the owners in Philadelphia have finally discovered what is going on up here.”

Pawlick Not Concerned

The letter from Hill & Barlow was threatening in tone but Pawlick did not appear concerned.

“I am delighted that Boston magazine has become concerned about its reputation now that we have made people aware of the magazine’s defense of the molestation of children,” Pawlick wrote the law firm. “It is only right that the magazine be worried. This is a very serious matter that affects not only our children but the whole society.”

Pawlick then said that since the magazine had obviously not told the lawyer about the three reasons for the Sightings article, he would outline them for him:

“1) In its December 2000 issue, [Boston magazine had] a long defense of the infamous Fistgate molestation.

“2) In the May 2001 issue, there was a long, ‘intellectual’ defense of the North American Man/Boy Love Association, the members of which believe that the word ‘molestation’ should be dropped because they are ‘helping boys’ when they have sex with them.

“3) A Senior Writer for the magazine is now advertising for ‘homosexual’ children 14 and under so that he can interview and write about them.”

Lawyer’s Letter Was Threatening

In the letter from Hill & Barlow, Atty. Robert A. Bertsche, “demanded” that MassNews follow their instructions.

“This firm represents Metro Corp., owner of Boston Magazine. I am writing to demand that Massachusetts News immediately remove from its website, its print edition, and from all other publications, in print or on the internet, the article headlined ‘Boston Magazine is Leader in Molestation.’ Your failure to do so today will risk substantial liability for defamation.”

He obviously did not know all the facts because he wrote that he could “only imagine’ that the Sighting resulted only from the NAMBLA article in the May 2001 issue of the magazine.

He did not realize he was writing to a lawyer when he said, “As I am confident your lawyer will advise you, there is no defense applicable to such publication. Your having published and posted this item renders you liable to Boston Magazine in damages.”

The attorney ended his letter with this demand:

“On behalf of Boston Magazine, I demand that you remove this article from your website and from all other publications, and that you do so by 5:00 p.m. today. Please contact me by the end of the day, or have your lawyer do so, to assure me that such steps have been taken. Should you fail to do so, my client will have no choice but to consider alternative remedies and to demand monetary damages and other relief. I look forward to hearing from you or your lawyer by 5:00 p.m. today.”

Libel Action Against Boston Magazine

In his reply letter, Pawlick told the Hill & Barlow lawyer he should be aware that MassNews has a claim for libel against Boston magazine for saying in its December 2000 issue that MassNews is “stridently anti-gay.” That comment “was written solely for the intent of demeaning us,” Pawlick said.

He continued, “The statement was false and was meant to show that we have animus toward homosexuals. The words ‘anti-gay’ are commonly used to denote hostility toward persons. It was used by your client to indicate that we are individuals who have anger and hatred toward people who practice the homosexual lifestyle. A minimum attempt at research by the magazine would have indicated immediately that we do not have such animus. We do have grave problems with the lifestyle as do most people, but we have no animus whatsoever against the individuals who have fallen into it.”

Pawlick finished his letter with a request “for suggestions on getting this discussion into a serious one about the issues.”