OK.
Here's the progression:
1) This is the original Spectator article by Danielle Wong in which Festival of Friends Overlord Loren Lieberman was asked how much he personally earns from the festival. Lieberman refused to disclose a figure. “That’s a disgusting question and the answer to it is: extremely little,” he said, adding staff salaries account for less than 5 per cent of the operating budget.
2) This is the subsequent editorial by Paul Berton entitled 'Sometimes, a salary is our -and your- business'.
3) This is followup The Hamiltonian article asking its readers if Mr. Lieberman's comment was reasonable, entitled 'Disgusting?', along with all the responses. (Including no small number of mine.)
4) This is the 'Final Word' from Mr. Lieberman, entitled 'Lieberman and the Last Word'.
Phhttt.
Bleurgh.
And then some.
Read his long-form response. Go on; it won't take you long. I'll wait.
*taps foot patiently*
Done? Good.
Clearly the man feels defensive about so much of the stuff that's been bandied about regarding the Festival.
Now, I wasn't there. So I can't comment on how it went off.
However, I have a pretty good idea of how much effort it used to take to pull it all together years ago because a) my best friend was involved back in the 80s, and b) in 1986, I did pre-production on a documentary about the Festival, so I don't need convincing that an enormous amount of blood, sweat and tears were surrendered in bringing off the 2011 edition in Ancaster.
But very little of what Mr. Lieberman chose to use his soapbox time for is germane to the brouhaha.
For my two cents, he shouldn't have to defend what he's being paid. It's ludicrous to suggest that an event such as the Festival of Friends shouldn't have personnel such as Mr. Lieberman drawing a salary. This isn't 1976 and we're not in Gage Park anymore, Toto. Professionalism costs, and I'm sure Mr. Lieberman is worth every penny he was paid.
But my opinion about the issue remains the same: a simple 'That's not a relevant question' would have sufficed.
4) This is the 'Final Word' from Mr. Lieberman, entitled 'Lieberman and the Last Word'.
Phhttt.
Bleurgh.
And then some.
Read his long-form response. Go on; it won't take you long. I'll wait.
*taps foot patiently*
Done? Good.
Clearly the man feels defensive about so much of the stuff that's been bandied about regarding the Festival.
Now, I wasn't there. So I can't comment on how it went off.
However, I have a pretty good idea of how much effort it used to take to pull it all together years ago because a) my best friend was involved back in the 80s, and b) in 1986, I did pre-production on a documentary about the Festival, so I don't need convincing that an enormous amount of blood, sweat and tears were surrendered in bringing off the 2011 edition in Ancaster.
But very little of what Mr. Lieberman chose to use his soapbox time for is germane to the brouhaha.
For my two cents, he shouldn't have to defend what he's being paid. It's ludicrous to suggest that an event such as the Festival of Friends shouldn't have personnel such as Mr. Lieberman drawing a salary. This isn't 1976 and we're not in Gage Park anymore, Toto. Professionalism costs, and I'm sure Mr. Lieberman is worth every penny he was paid.
But my opinion about the issue remains the same: a simple 'That's not a relevant question' would have sufficed.
