Greenberg Meltdown

Koga previously wrote about Jill Greenberg’s current “End Times” exhibit being promoted via the striking billboard at Melrose and Highland.

The exhibit’s controversial content has generated a fair amount of dialogue, but apparently not the kind for which Greenberg was hoping. As reported by Cory Doctorow on Boing Boing, get a load of photographers’ rights activist Thomas Hawk’s account of the overboard response Greenberg and her husband have had to his decidedly no-holds-barred criticism of Greenberg’s methods:

First she tries to discredit me as an insane person with personal problems who she doesn’t even think has kids (even though in my blog post about her I clearly state I’ve got four children, have photos of my four children up on flickr and elsewhere on my blog etc.) She tells this to a professional publication American Photo (whom I’ve asked for a retraction from and who never contacted me to verify her claims even though they pulled quotes from my same post that referenced that I had four kids).

Next, Jill tracks down my employer, an unrelated third party who has absolutely zero to do with my personal views and opinions and tries to apply pressure to get me to pull my post. She literally calls my boss this morning who has absolutely zero to do with any of my blogging. (By the way Jill, I blog from my own laptop on my own time). The last company who thought that they could intimidate me by involving my employer, an unrelated third party, went by the name PriceRitePhoto. I don’t think they are in business anymore but feel free to Google them to read the story.

And then her husband tells me that in his opinion I’m committing libel. I’m committing libel for having an opinion that what Jill is doing to these kids constitutes abuse. That to emotionally work these kids up is abusive. My opinion Robert Green. He goes on to tell me that if I want to discuss this further that I get a lawyer.

3 Replies to “Greenberg Meltdown”

  1. Unsure what to make of Hawk’s accusations of Jill calling his work place, et al, but if Jill’s tactics to get the kids to cry are as Hawk describes… then I totally agree with him that it’s abuse.
    Making a kid cry so you can “make art” and “sell prints” is disgusting. The best comparison I could make this to are the videographers in Britain who tape them and they’re friends slapping or punching complete strangers just to see the reaction.
    Jill may not be physically abusing the kids, but psychological abuse on a kid can be just as bad. One might argue that it won’t harm a kid “that bad”, but that Jill apparently has made a habit of this tactic more than implicates her as having a pattern of abusing children.

  2. Interesting. While the Green Greenbergs think it’s ok to call me a “crazy asshole with a blog” and that they think that I’m “insane,” and while Green can use an example on his blog likening me to a child molester, my calling her sick and that I think what she’s done constitutes abuse is considered libel by them. By the way an individual identifying himself as a pediatrician on my flickrstream said he thought what she did was abuse by the way.

    An artist should understand that letting others speak their mind on *a personal weblog* ought to be a fundamental right even when the opinion reflects negatively on them.

    I am not threatening to sue the Green Greenbergs nor should they be threatening to sue me.

    Further, Ms. Greenberg is a public figure. By putting a billboard up in the middle of L.A. she is making herself a public figure. Public figures are allowed to be criticized. If everyone who called George Bush an asshole or a prick or a liar of murderer were able to pursue libel it would be one strange world.

    As an artist most of all Ms. Greenberg should understand the importance of allowing others an opportunity to speak their opinion even when, god forbid, it conflicts with her own twisted view of the world.

    By the way, her trying to intimidate me by going to an unrelated third party and trying to apply pressure has only backfired on her. Boing Boing picking up on the story today has ensured that even more people will be aware of her poor behavior. The ensuing links to my blog by others and the extra attention she has garnered herself will only ensure that my story linking to her name on Google has that much more staying power.

    In fact today’s post on my reaction to her attempt to take a low road and try to have me censored or intimidate me by legal threats has resulted in more traffic being driven to the stories of her abuse than anything else she’s done yet.

    While there will always be a lawyer willing to take any case (it has been said that you could find a lawyer to sue a ham sandwich), should Ms. Greenberg speak with an actual reputable lawyer she will quickly learn that someone speaking their opinion and yes, even printing it on a blog, is something that is protected by our first ammendment. And also that she in making herself a public figure on this matter is held up to an even higher allowable degree of criticism.

Comments are closed.