But by the time Flavin's toes started to feel the chill, the magazine had already gone to press. Multiple sources confirm that he called the printer and told them to destroy all the printed copies. With times lean as they are for nonprofits (and perhaps for Worldwatch in particular, as it tries to shore up funding after the 2001 ouster of well-known founder Lester Brown), Flavin apparently figured he'd rather pulp thousands of dollars worth of printed magazines than ruffle a funder's feathers.
That didn't sit well with Ayres, and a bit of kerfuffle ensued. In the end, it seems, Ayres won the battle -- the magazine went out, the article made its splash -- but lost the war. We hear that Ayres, now in his mid-60s, will be taking retirement at the end of the year. Seems he was edging toward the door anyway, thought likely to make his departure in the next year, but this little episode helped push forward the time frame.
Oh, the irony. One thing Chapin's article did particularly well was show how green groups are so beholden to their funding sources that they take great pains to avoid rocking the wrong boats.
(The public fracas over the article -- though not the behind-the-scenes drama -- made The Washington Post today.)
UPDATE: Ed Ayres says I got a key fact wrong in this item, and, well, he should know. In a comment below, he notes: "My retirement, which is effective November 30, has nothing to do with the firestorm resulting from Mac Chapin's 'Challenge to Conservationists' in the November/December issue. I gave two months' notice of my forthcoming retirement in a meeting I had with the Worldwatch president, Chris Flavin, on September 30 -- long before he saw the article." My apologies to Ed for this error.
And, lest this point be lost in the shuffle, World Watch did publish Marc Chapin's hard-hitting article, for which it should be commended. The piece continues to generate much-needed discussion in the conservation community, and anyone who hasn't read it yet should get cracking.
Comments View as Flat
Tom Turner Posted 7:26 am
23 Nov 2004
Worldwatch
Fascinating and depressing. Ed Ayres is a great guy and a fine editor. Chris Flavin should be embarassed. But I want to know more about Les Brown's departure. He was ousted? How did that come down? He's still doing his think, more power too him. What happened in 2001? Anyone know?
Tom Turner
Permalink
cbloom Posted 1:59 pm
23 Nov 2004
Ford Foundation, Kathryn Fuller
No wonder the environment will never get better. You guys are worried about Bush but the BIG worry is people like Kathryn Fuller, the Ford Foundation and everyone else that is only really interested in global trade and global big bucks. The environmental movement, just like the immigration/population movement, has to come to grips with the amount of money and power that is the enemy.
Permalink
tbrennan Posted 11:15 pm
23 Nov 2004
Lester's whereabouts
After leaving Worldwatch, Lester Brown set up the Earth Policy Institute where he continues to do outstanding work. You can learn more at www.earth-policy.org
Permalink
Ed Ayres Posted 3:31 am
26 Nov 2004
Worldwatch Kerfuffle
The item "Worldwatch Kerfuffle" (Nov. 23), which suggests that I was forced into "fleeing the coop" as editor of World Watch magazine, contains serious distortions. My retirement, which is effective November 30, has nothing to do with the firestorm resulting from Mac Chapin's "Challenge to Conservationists" in the November/December issue. I gave two months' notice of my forthcoming retirement in a meeting I had with the Worldwatch president, Chris Flavin, on September 30--long before he saw the article. And regardless whether anyone at Worldwatch Institute may later have had "cold feet" about publishing this piece, I think we all agreed in the end that it was the right thing to do. If we had capitulated to the pressure put on us by one of the organizations examined by Chapin, which got hold of a pre-publication draft of the article and made a not-very-subtle attempt to have us kill it, Lisa Hymas might have had reason to speak of the "irony" of Worldwatch being intimidated by fear of offending its funders--but we did not kill it. The "big three" international conservation organizations are all squirming now, but they are also taking the issues raised by the article to heart. Ultimately, their missions and ours are in accord. The interdependent causes of biodiversity conservation and indigenous rights and livelihoods will get a great boost from the debate this article has stimulated, and it's a shame to see that prospect clouded by irresponsible rumor-mongering, especially in such a reputable forum as Grist.
Ed Ayres
Editor, World Watch
Permalink