Interview

Interview: Willie Thompson

Willie Thompson, a UO sociology major and former member of the Insurgent editorial collective, is a critic of animal research at this university and others. Aaron K. Breniman talked with him about the Insurgent controversy.

Oregon Commentator: How long have you been involved with the Insurgent?
Willie Thompson: About three and a half years.

OC: So you would say that in your three and a half years with the Insurgent you have a pretty clear idea of what the publication is about?
WT: Yeah. Yeah.

OC: What is the goal of the Insurgent? What are you trying to promote or do here on campus?
WT: I think most generally to provide a forum for the expression of ideas to advocate a society that is free from oppression based on race, class, gender, sexual orientation and free from the threat of ecological collapse. And we try to keep it really broad, so that it is not really ideological…ideologically focused. That can range from anything from Nader supporters to black-clad anarchal stuff or whatever.

OC: Traditionally, what stance has the Insurgent taken on animal research?
WT: Editorially, I don't believe we've came out either way since I've been working on it. We've had an article about the vivisection that has gone on on campus. We've reported on various SETA demonstrations, but editorially we're fairly neutral, we just kind of like to put out the ideas that other people have. That's pretty much what the Insurgent is, we like to keep it as a space for people to express their ideas and editorially we kind of stay more or less--not neutral--but not claim one way or another. Not explicitly come out with an editorial viewpoint.

OC: What is the Insurgent's collective?
WT: Well we don't have an editor, so it's just a group; the folks who work on the paper the most. They form the collective and make the decisions all together.

OC: Let's discuss some of the background that went into the running of the ALF - Animal Liberation Front - primer and what prompted the group to print it..
WT: The ALF, well, it's impossible for them to approach us, because they are an underground, anonymous organization. So we decided to [print the article]; we printed an eight-page insert on animal liberation, which is a pretty timely issue, considering animals rights is always a big issue, and the ALF especially, since the raids have been going on. The ELF - Earth Liberation Front - has been in the news quite a bit lately. We thought it was a timely issue. We thought our readers would be interested in it; and so we printed an eight-page animal liberation insert, which included the ALF primer as well as other article about veganism, the vivisection article, we had one on sexism and vegetarianism. So it was a mix of stuff, which the ALF primer was part.

OC: So the vivisection information and what is going on here on campus was included in the primer? It wasn't on an opposite page?
WT: It was an eight page - I don't want to get too technical - but it was an eight-page insert, and the middle four pages were the ALF primer and the vivisection article happened to be on the facing page of the last page of the primer. So if you opened it up they would be on facing pages, but it wasn't part of the ALF primer, specifically.

OC: What type of discussions occurred among the collective regarding the primer?
WT: Uhmm. I think the spirit in which it was printed - what we finally decided was - that since the m-stream media when covering the ALF mostly describes the actions, but doesn't really go into the specifics of the group, they mostly just call them terrorists and write it off as that. So, we decided it would be of benefit to our readers for them to read exactly what they're all about. We figured the primer - printed in full - would be a good way to do that, so people would know exactly where the ALF is coming from, what their ideas are about animal liberation and the way to go about achieving that.

OC: Was this information that was all previously printed, or that you just gathered and put together from other information?
WT: It was somewhere on the Internet. I don't remember what Web site, because I wasn't the one who actually downloaded it. There's animal liberation.net and various other ones. We just downloaded the text.

OC: Am I correct that the professor information was obtained from a SETA handbook?
WT: Yeah. We reprinted it. It was initially printed in a SETA pamphlet; that's where we got most of the information. Uhmm. (long pause) Yeah.

OC: Did you have any consultation with SETA prior to publication?
WT: No. We work in the same office together, so it's not like they didn't know.

OC: What was the motivation - the goal - as the collective saw, in listing the researchers' personal information?
WT: Well, as it says right above - there's a little paragraph introducing it - it was basically to facilitate communication between students. We said contact or e-mail or write the professors, tell them what you think about their research or ask them questions about their research. And most likely, since vivisection is such a controversial topic, I'm sure the researchers would appreciate people talking to them about their research, asking them questions. Since it is such a polarizing subject. There is a lot of misinformation on both sides. Both of animal rights activists and activists of researchers. So we wanted to provide the means by which to communicate with them; to offer our readers a forum to talk to them.

OC: Was there much discussion about should we print the researchers home addresses, home numbers?
WT: I mean it was proposed and we talked about it. I think we, at the time, we thought it was appropriate because we distribute in the community as well as on campus, so we're kind of a half-and-half paper. They are community members as well as campus people, so we decided to offer as many avenues of communication as possible for people. And that was why we decided to do that.

OC: Where there any concerns that were brought about prior to publication that you guys discussed? Did you look at it all like, 'Hey, maybe we shouldn't be doing this?' Or was it printed more in the spirit that not much will come out of this?
WT: Yeah, uhmm. Not too much. I was fairly surprised that it became such a - I mean I wasn't surprised because it seems logical, but we didn't think that it would turn into a huge deal. Other groups on campus, SETA especially, and other groups talk about the ALF and have discussed vivisection. Like the E-LAW conference, the environmental conference every year, they always have stuff on animal liberation, the ALF, the ELF. We were thinking 'Well, other groups do it, we might as well offer our readers that information.' So, I'm not surprised that people have concerns; I wasn't anticipating all the hubbub exactly.

OC: How do you feel about the recent PFC decision to approve your budget, but place it in a holding account?
WT: I understand why they did that. I think they…(10 second pause)…it's the worse case scenario for us. We're happy our budget got passed. I understand there are legal issues involved. They have to do their job and keep themselves safe from any repercussions. They don't want to make poor decisions. So I think they exercised caution, which, considering all the publicity and case in point, I think it was appropriate for them to do that.

OC: So who has the power over the Insurgent's 2001-2002 budget currently in the holding account?
WT: Jay Breslow or the Student Senate. As far as I understand - and I'm not an expert on this stuff - they can take it out of the holding account at any time and give it to us. The ball right now is in the administration's court. At this point we're kind of waiting to see what the ramifications of this will be. And also not just with respect to state laws, but also the Student Conduct Code. I heard a rumor that we went against University policy.

OC: By promoting/condoning violence?
WT: I'm not sure exactly; I heard that phrase used. I tried to speak to Melinda Grier and she wouldn't speak to me. She said since Jay is her client, she shouldn't speak to me about it. I think she is Jay's legal counsel.

OC: Do you think the PFC made the right decision in what they did?
WT: They did pass our budget, but they just put it in a holding account. Had they not passed our budget, I think they would have not done their job. Because of the legal issues involved, I think they have fulfilled their duties. The holding account is just exercising caution. I think it is almost impossible to deny the Insurgent as a program - for all that we do in training people how to work on publications and offering the publication - that we do contribute to the culture and physical development of students.

OC: Did you expect this level of media attention?
WT: No. Rarely in the past has the Insurgent been mentioned in the mainstream media. I was surprised. It's kind of unfortunate that the budget was happening at the same time as this. I'm not sure that it would have generated as much press activity if the budget issue wasn't at the exact same time.

OC: Was that issue ever brought up prior to publication?
WT: No. It was about he same time, but we didn't know it was going to be an issue. Then everything just came down all together and we were like 'Oh, Shit. Our budget hearing is coming up. That's going to be a mess.' So we had no foresight on that one.

OC: Do you think that the collective would make the same decision again, knowing how this has played out thus far?
WT: (10 second pause)I don't think we made an error in judgement. We think that both printing the ALF primer and the information about how to contact the professors was appropriate. Uhmm. In light of this, I think we'll be more cautious in the way we present things. Not necessarily in content, but the way - I think it was a little bit unfortunate that we didn't think about how the ALF primer and the vivisection were right next to each other. We might look at our layout next time. As far as content, we talked about it last night, and we're all agreed that both things were appropriate to print. Because it was an animal liberation insert, if you're talking about animal liberation and animal rights issues, it makes sense to bring up the ALF and it makes sense to bring up the professors. We could have done nothing about the UO, but it made sense that it's going on here; there are conflicts here. We don't regret the content. Maybe we'll be more cautious in the future, but probably not too much more.

Aaron K. Breniman, a senior majoring in Journalism, is a staff writer for the Oregon Commentator