Fedblog


The Washington Post is reporting this morning that Yosi Sergant, a public relations specialist, has resigned from the National Endowment for the Arts after organizing a conference call that seemed to inappropriately recruit artists to create works specifically in support of Obama administration policies. This seems unfortunate for several reasons. First, the whole narrative perpetuates the exhausting and unproductive Glenn-Beck-Versus-the-Obama-administration dynamic that ignited over Van Jones and at this point seems destined never to burn itself out. Second, and more importantly, the debate continues the politicization of the NEA. That politicization has worked in many directions, whether it's complaints that the NEA is supporting inappropriate or obscene work, etc.

But I think it's equally counter to the NEA's mission to try to commission explicitly political work. Some artists make political art. Some don't. The NEA should be giving out grants based on need and merit, and nothing else. I think it's dangerous to tie financial incentives to art's politics and political message, not simply for the government, but for the artistic integrity of the artists seeking the grants. Whether Sergant's actions violated the Hatch Act is one thing. But it also seems like he took a step in the direction of bad artistic policy.

COMMENTS


  • this is a clear violation of the hatch act and any funds that broke the law should be returned

  • It is about time that someone was held accountable and did the right thing. Mr. Sergant did the honorable thing and resigned because of his inappropriate actions. Kudos to Mr. Sergant for being man enough to acknowledge his errors.

    The Obama administration is unfortunately continuing their multi-faceted attempts to defend and push for their self-serving and extremely liberal and socialist agenda in as many areas as they can.

    Ms. Rosenberg, it appears you have been misled - this issue has absolutely nothing to do with Mr. Beck. This issue is legally, and more importantly, morally wrong - period. The NEA has no business trying to improperly influence artists.

    I expect more of folks representing themselves as journalists.

  • Hi Alyssa. It seems like you haven't researched this story very deeply. There was no financial incentive involved in this episode at all. There was no offer of money, and no money exchanged. The NEA wasn't trying to commission any kind of work at all. Individual artists aren't even eligible for NEA grants.

Post a Comment

By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although GovExec does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.

*
*
*
(you may use HTML tags for style)




*

ABOUT THIS BLOG


Government Executive Editor in Chief Tom Shoop, along with other editors and staff correspondents, take a fresh look at news affecting the management and operations of the federal bureaucracy.

SEARCH THIS BLOG


Archives


2011 |  2010 |  2009 |  2008 |  2007 |  2006 |  2005 |  2004