Somebody from California apparently wrote the top part, but somebody from Texas came back and put them on their asses at the bottom. And whoever that was, GOD BLESS YOU!
CALIFORNIA:
- I can wear sandals all year long
- I go to the Beach - not "down to the shore"
-Our chicks are WAYYYY hotter than yours. Well...Miami can hang.
- I say "like" and "for sure" and "right on" and "dude" and "totally" and "peace out" and "chill" and "tight" and "bro" and I say them often
- I know what real cheese & avocados taste like
-Everyone smokes weed and its no big deal
-We'll roll up 40 deep when something goes down.
-I live next door to Mexicans, but we call them American's!
-All the porn you watch is made here, cause we're better and thats how it is
- I don't get snowdays off because theres only snow in Mammoth, Tahoe, Shasta, and Big Bear
- I know 65 mph really means 100
- When someone cuts me off, they get the horn and the finger and high speed chase cuz we dont fuck around on the road
- The drinking age is 21 but everyone starts at 14 (legally 18 if you live close enough to the border)
- My governor can kick your governors ass
- I can go out at midnight
-You judge people based on what area code they live in, and when asked where you're from, you give your area code
- I might get looked at funny by locals when I'm on vacation in their state, but when they find out I'm from California I turn into a Greek GOD
- We don't stop at stop signs... we do a "california roll"
No cop no stop baby!
- I can get fresh and REAL Mexican food 24 hours a day
- All the TV shows you "other" states watch get filmed here
- We're the Golden State. Not the Cheese State. Not the Garden State.....GOLDEN!!!
- We have In-N-Out (Arizona and Vegas are lucky we share that with them)
- I have the most representation in the House of Representatives, which means MY opinion means more than yours, which means I'm better than you [geez.... hahaha]
- The best athletes come from here
___________________________________________________
TEXAS:
Ahem... So.. Um.. yeah... I read this, and thought I would reply...
Hey... California listen up... Texas is where its at!
- I too can wear sandals all year long... plus I can put on boots to stomp your toes and I won't even stick out.
- You may be able to go to the "beach" instead of the "shore"... but can you go to the drive thru "Beer Barn?" What now surfer boy?
- You're chicks aren't way hotter than ours... they are almost equal... and thats only due to silicone, saline, botox, lasers and hair dye... We have the real ones and they can beat yours up.
- We're taught to say "Yes Sir" and "Yes Ma'am" and respect our elders because of it. We also say "Howdy" and "fixin" and "Yall" are pretty much recognized right away anywhere in the world :) We're famous. And not becauseof that fake ass "bro-ho" "so-cal" shit that yall think makes you "Famous", fuckers.
- You may know what real cheese and avocados taste like... but I know what 100% Grade A Angus Beef tastes like. Who wants avocados and cheese when you can have steak and potatoes?
- Haha... who do you think grows the weed and sells it to you?
- Why roll 40 deep when something goes down if 5 corn fed country boys can get the job done...
- I live next door to americans, but we call them mexicans
- About your Porn.... 3 words... "Debbie Does Dallas"... You can brag about it now, but we started it
- Why would you brag about not getting snow days off?
- We're smart enought to know 65mph means 65, but our speed limit is 70.
- - When someone cuts me off, they get run over by my big ass truck, then I give them the finger and tell them to go back to california.
- The drinking age is 21, but if you aren't chasin the beer by 1 yr old... you're behind.
- Yeah, Well my governor became the President of the United States... yours isn't even eligible.
- You can go out at midnight? Thats nice, I haven't even come home by then.
- Ok... you said,"You judge people based on what area code they live in, and when asked where you're from, you give your area code" and as hard as I try I have no idea what you're talking about... I think you're watching too much tv.
- Yeah, you'll definitely get looked at funny when you come to visit but we have another name for you pretty boys, and its not greek, its french.
- Of course you don't stop at stop signs... none of you can drive.
- You can pick up Real mexican food 24 hours a day huh... well I can swing by home depot and pick up 24 Real mexicans anytime of day. Can you say catering?
- All the tv shows get filmed there... but where does your favorite poker game come from? Texas Hold'em anyone?
- You can keep your golden state... We're the Lone Star State...the one and only!!
- Do I have to remind you about the drive thru Beer Barn again? Does In-N-Out serve alcohol? (Oh and did I mention Dr. Pepper was created in Texas?)
- You guys have the best athletes huh?... Eight words... Lance Armstrong and The University of Texas at Austin
-Every thing's bigger in TEXAS
Though I could mention MICHAEL JOHNSON - Olympic Sprinter, World record holder in 200m and 400m, 5 Olympic Gold medals, 9 time World Champion (born Dallas, Tx)
Oh and remind me again who won the Rose Bowl between USC and Texas????? I believe it was the LONGHORNS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- Football is a religion, not a sport
- In Texas, football means football, not soccer.
- 90% of football "movies" you guys are making are about Texas Football.
-Varsity Blues, filmed in Georgetown, Tx - Friday Night Lights, filmed in Odessa, Tx - Necessary Roughness, filmed in San Marcos, Texas; We Are Marshall- Marshall, Tx,
- Texas is the only state that can still separate to become its own country. The only way California's gonna accomplish that is if another earthquake comes along and you guys sink into the ocean. Can you say Atlantis.... hahaha
Come on Texans Show Your Colors! Repost!
And as the Great Sam Houston once said "Texas could survive without the United States, but the United States could not survive without Texas"
IF YOU'RE TEXAN N PROUD RE POST as "SCREW YOU WE'RE FROM TEXAS!!!!
Sunday, June 17, 2007
Thursday, June 14, 2007
a PLAY in play on stage for all world to see......
WRITINGS....
The logic used by the modern educational system has, as its premise, the assimilation of the student towards predetermined facts taught in a predetermined manner. This logic does not encourage, instill, nor nurture individual creative development. The environment of the public education system stifles creativity. We are not educating individuals � we are herding young minds into slaughterhouses of dry ideas. This piece, the Enter Attainment System, is a visual representation of what I feel my educational experience has been. The title is a play-on-words of the household entertainment system. I believe that the environment of public school and the after-school activity of watching T.V. are deadening the capacity of our imaginations. This �educational observation unit� monitors the �student� behind a protective cage and guides them through three simultaneously broadcasted subjects. It has an image in front of one screen that shows a male figure pouring a gallon of milk over his face. The image is a double exposure and behind the figure is a portrait image of the male drenched in milk. This signifies that this is a flood of information. The lens behind the cage is the nipple of one brass breast. The breast symbolizes maternal nurturing, yet by placing a lens where the nipple existed gives this body part a more ominous feel, as if the entertainment industry is raising America�s youth. Where the public school system falls short in providing a genuine education for our children, I feel the problem is propagated by people who feel that mass media will pick up the slack. I call this the Enter Attainment System because it is a mockery of those Americans who choose to sit in front of a television and be subjugated to an overindulgence of stimuli, in order to gloss over the fact that they are ignoring their own personal search for enlightenment, because watching an episode of The Bachelor is a quick fix for filling the void.
CLASS WAR LIMO
On the outside, this piece has a romantic and relaxing visual appearance. The aesthetic value that I incorporate fluctuates between complexity and simplicity. The complex mechanical drive of the object is a marriage between bicycle pedals, gears and wheels from a motorcycle�s front and rear end. The front shocks serve as chain tensioners for the direct drive peddle operation, and the gears are used to create a torque advantage to move the piece. The structure of this sculpture is a series of minimalized lines that serve the integral function of a supporting framework. This frame allows a ten-foot tall unicycle to PUSH a rider in a Lazy Boy. The antiquated wheels that are on either side of the Lazy Boy are representational of the historic tradition of �free rides� that are sought and gained by wealth and power. The fact that the chair swivels from side to side but not enough to see the driver is intended to be a subtlety that shows the lack of recognition between those that ride and those that PUSH. The rider sits on an old tractor seat that is elevated above the plush luxury of the red velvet Lazy Boy. This expresses an admiration and acknowledgement that I have for the plight of the blue-collar worker. In this specific artwork, what is outwardly an enjoyable visual experience is, becomes a clarified perspective on the relationship between two different classes, blue-collar and white-collar. The marimba is placed for the use of the driver because music has traditionally been a form of public expression from the lower class. I think of blues artists and jazz musicians from the1920s to the 1950s and I feel that the marimba, for a solo instrument, expresses a wildly organic tone that fully completes what I consider to be the main argument of this piece. Is it better to PUSH and play the songs of your soul or is it better to sit back and enjoy the ride?
THE SPITBALL PAINTING MACHINE
Through this mechanism, I am establishing a connection between myself, the artist, and the participating audience. I often think of life as a walk down the length of a diving board. As I continue through life, ideas fall out of my head and land in front of me, joining an already-present mountain of conceptions that occupy the space between me and the unavoidable end of the board. These dreams are being constantly PUSHED ever closer to the eventual edge, a metaphorical death. The diving board, because of its definite limit, commands me to choose which ideas stay as concepts and which become actualized. The actualized ideas become art-of-facts that exclaim the victories of my intention. It is because I have to choose, because I cannot create all my ideas into art, that I experience great anxiety. A truly original idea is almost impossible to generate, but an even larger impossibility is the transformation of these ideas into reality. I wish to awaken a sense of panic in people as they acknowledge an inevitable end; it is this panic of ephemeral-ness that urges people to turn ideas into realities. There comes a point on every person�s diving board that when crossed, their mountain of dreams starts falling into the metaphorical filing cabinet that death forever seals. People must continue to personally fulfill their dreams. It is of the highest importance for me to bring inspiring art to people. This is an opportunity for you, the audience, to participate in creating your own art-of-fact. Behind the frame is a straw dispenser. One per customer, please. Underneath is a trashcan that has PUSH written on it. Here is where the person puts ten dollars (and if you think that $10 is too much to pay to an artist after everything I�ve been through (four studio changes, living in a junkyard with a redneck retard named Jerry for Christ�s sake, and not to mention the fact I still live in a school bus with no heat, the incessant formidable flooding, the cost of equipment and materials, and how I lived off nothing but cheese and bread for four years) then you can go to hell for all I care) and receives a signed piece of blank paper from me, Sean Pace. One of the housewives will place the paper on the diving board behind the waterfall of ink. The hand that comes from under filing cabinet holds a receiver for the straw. From this point the participant will remove the paper from the straw and make a spitball to place inside the straw. Then the participant will load and place the straw in the receiver and then pull the fountain release lever while blowing the spitball through the sheet of black ink to make a co-created piece of artwork. The childish act of using a spitball reconnects people back to the roots of their youth. Because of this, people become more receptive to new information and possibly find new creative perspectives that allow for inspiration to flow.
UNDER FURTHER SCRUTINY THE WORLD IS STILL QUITE FLAT
Not so long ago, in the Western world, the Pope was considered to be infallible. He was the closest human connection to God a person could get. Through the words of the Pope came the understanding and the reason for life. Entire countries and societies were based around what he and the Catholic Church sanctioned. Then a few �mad scientists� came along and changed everything. Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, Tycho Brahe and Sir Issac Newton put into words the natural laws of physics, confirmed by mathematics. In other words, the work of these men challenged the validity of the Catholic Church and its paradigms. These scientists, at one time or another, were all deemed unorthodox and sacrilegious, and no one took them seriously at first. Now our entire worldview is based on their principles. These scientists, in their own right, were artists as well. Art, in its most intrinsic form, is communication. It is a dialogue between the artist and the rest of the world. It is an attempt at expressing emotion, at documenting history, at experimenting and researching problems and solutions for the future, and sharing with people a very fluid and dynamic exchange of ideas. Most iconoclastic notions, at their inception, are perceived as ridiculous. The world was not round, nor did it revolve around the sun. Evolution was preposterous and so is the idea of life on other planets. Perhaps this is the essential role of any true artist � to PUSH the envelope, to PUSH the limits of preordained rhetoric, to PUSH people to think differently. The world was flat until a group of heretics proved that our planet is indeed spherical. By constricting our views of what �good art� is, we are denying the accomplishments of other paradigm-shifters that preceded us. In other words, the art I make is not classical art. It does not fall into the category of �home decorum.� It may not match the couch in your living room, but I urge you to tear down your Rembrandt, put on your wall an object that speaks of higher ideas and is a representation of strong vision.
DECONSTRUCTION OF A PIANO LESSON
This piece is an upright piano that has been cut in half and attached to a rolling stand that allows it to pivot and bounce when the people interact by jumping up and down on a five- foot-tall pogo stick attached to a piston that distributes the force of jumping to the piano. This piece takes apart the ideas of Sigmund Freud relating the Id, Ego and Superego to the respective qualities of Young Student, Teacher, and Sheet Music. The interactive participant is able to understand that by attaching a pogo stick to this piano is the only way to play it. I have subtracted the ego (teacher) and the Super Ego (Sheet Music) and made a direct connection that allows the power and drive of the Id to be free as it makes music. Even the greatest of Pianists must resort to the raw energy of the Id to play with this device. Young and old alike take the position of youth as they jump up and down on this fascinating machine. In some ways, I refer to it as a fountain of youth, because to play it, one must regress to the childhood action of playing on a pogo stick. It is in this regression that the audience is invited to revisit the joy of playing without judgment.
The logic used by the modern educational system has, as its premise, the assimilation of the student towards predetermined facts taught in a predetermined manner. This logic does not encourage, instill, nor nurture individual creative development. The environment of the public education system stifles creativity. We are not educating individuals � we are herding young minds into slaughterhouses of dry ideas. This piece, the Enter Attainment System, is a visual representation of what I feel my educational experience has been. The title is a play-on-words of the household entertainment system. I believe that the environment of public school and the after-school activity of watching T.V. are deadening the capacity of our imaginations. This �educational observation unit� monitors the �student� behind a protective cage and guides them through three simultaneously broadcasted subjects. It has an image in front of one screen that shows a male figure pouring a gallon of milk over his face. The image is a double exposure and behind the figure is a portrait image of the male drenched in milk. This signifies that this is a flood of information. The lens behind the cage is the nipple of one brass breast. The breast symbolizes maternal nurturing, yet by placing a lens where the nipple existed gives this body part a more ominous feel, as if the entertainment industry is raising America�s youth. Where the public school system falls short in providing a genuine education for our children, I feel the problem is propagated by people who feel that mass media will pick up the slack. I call this the Enter Attainment System because it is a mockery of those Americans who choose to sit in front of a television and be subjugated to an overindulgence of stimuli, in order to gloss over the fact that they are ignoring their own personal search for enlightenment, because watching an episode of The Bachelor is a quick fix for filling the void.
CLASS WAR LIMO
On the outside, this piece has a romantic and relaxing visual appearance. The aesthetic value that I incorporate fluctuates between complexity and simplicity. The complex mechanical drive of the object is a marriage between bicycle pedals, gears and wheels from a motorcycle�s front and rear end. The front shocks serve as chain tensioners for the direct drive peddle operation, and the gears are used to create a torque advantage to move the piece. The structure of this sculpture is a series of minimalized lines that serve the integral function of a supporting framework. This frame allows a ten-foot tall unicycle to PUSH a rider in a Lazy Boy. The antiquated wheels that are on either side of the Lazy Boy are representational of the historic tradition of �free rides� that are sought and gained by wealth and power. The fact that the chair swivels from side to side but not enough to see the driver is intended to be a subtlety that shows the lack of recognition between those that ride and those that PUSH. The rider sits on an old tractor seat that is elevated above the plush luxury of the red velvet Lazy Boy. This expresses an admiration and acknowledgement that I have for the plight of the blue-collar worker. In this specific artwork, what is outwardly an enjoyable visual experience is, becomes a clarified perspective on the relationship between two different classes, blue-collar and white-collar. The marimba is placed for the use of the driver because music has traditionally been a form of public expression from the lower class. I think of blues artists and jazz musicians from the1920s to the 1950s and I feel that the marimba, for a solo instrument, expresses a wildly organic tone that fully completes what I consider to be the main argument of this piece. Is it better to PUSH and play the songs of your soul or is it better to sit back and enjoy the ride?
THE SPITBALL PAINTING MACHINE
Through this mechanism, I am establishing a connection between myself, the artist, and the participating audience. I often think of life as a walk down the length of a diving board. As I continue through life, ideas fall out of my head and land in front of me, joining an already-present mountain of conceptions that occupy the space between me and the unavoidable end of the board. These dreams are being constantly PUSHED ever closer to the eventual edge, a metaphorical death. The diving board, because of its definite limit, commands me to choose which ideas stay as concepts and which become actualized. The actualized ideas become art-of-facts that exclaim the victories of my intention. It is because I have to choose, because I cannot create all my ideas into art, that I experience great anxiety. A truly original idea is almost impossible to generate, but an even larger impossibility is the transformation of these ideas into reality. I wish to awaken a sense of panic in people as they acknowledge an inevitable end; it is this panic of ephemeral-ness that urges people to turn ideas into realities. There comes a point on every person�s diving board that when crossed, their mountain of dreams starts falling into the metaphorical filing cabinet that death forever seals. People must continue to personally fulfill their dreams. It is of the highest importance for me to bring inspiring art to people. This is an opportunity for you, the audience, to participate in creating your own art-of-fact. Behind the frame is a straw dispenser. One per customer, please. Underneath is a trashcan that has PUSH written on it. Here is where the person puts ten dollars (and if you think that $10 is too much to pay to an artist after everything I�ve been through (four studio changes, living in a junkyard with a redneck retard named Jerry for Christ�s sake, and not to mention the fact I still live in a school bus with no heat, the incessant formidable flooding, the cost of equipment and materials, and how I lived off nothing but cheese and bread for four years) then you can go to hell for all I care) and receives a signed piece of blank paper from me, Sean Pace. One of the housewives will place the paper on the diving board behind the waterfall of ink. The hand that comes from under filing cabinet holds a receiver for the straw. From this point the participant will remove the paper from the straw and make a spitball to place inside the straw. Then the participant will load and place the straw in the receiver and then pull the fountain release lever while blowing the spitball through the sheet of black ink to make a co-created piece of artwork. The childish act of using a spitball reconnects people back to the roots of their youth. Because of this, people become more receptive to new information and possibly find new creative perspectives that allow for inspiration to flow.
UNDER FURTHER SCRUTINY THE WORLD IS STILL QUITE FLAT
Not so long ago, in the Western world, the Pope was considered to be infallible. He was the closest human connection to God a person could get. Through the words of the Pope came the understanding and the reason for life. Entire countries and societies were based around what he and the Catholic Church sanctioned. Then a few �mad scientists� came along and changed everything. Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, Tycho Brahe and Sir Issac Newton put into words the natural laws of physics, confirmed by mathematics. In other words, the work of these men challenged the validity of the Catholic Church and its paradigms. These scientists, at one time or another, were all deemed unorthodox and sacrilegious, and no one took them seriously at first. Now our entire worldview is based on their principles. These scientists, in their own right, were artists as well. Art, in its most intrinsic form, is communication. It is a dialogue between the artist and the rest of the world. It is an attempt at expressing emotion, at documenting history, at experimenting and researching problems and solutions for the future, and sharing with people a very fluid and dynamic exchange of ideas. Most iconoclastic notions, at their inception, are perceived as ridiculous. The world was not round, nor did it revolve around the sun. Evolution was preposterous and so is the idea of life on other planets. Perhaps this is the essential role of any true artist � to PUSH the envelope, to PUSH the limits of preordained rhetoric, to PUSH people to think differently. The world was flat until a group of heretics proved that our planet is indeed spherical. By constricting our views of what �good art� is, we are denying the accomplishments of other paradigm-shifters that preceded us. In other words, the art I make is not classical art. It does not fall into the category of �home decorum.� It may not match the couch in your living room, but I urge you to tear down your Rembrandt, put on your wall an object that speaks of higher ideas and is a representation of strong vision.
DECONSTRUCTION OF A PIANO LESSON
This piece is an upright piano that has been cut in half and attached to a rolling stand that allows it to pivot and bounce when the people interact by jumping up and down on a five- foot-tall pogo stick attached to a piston that distributes the force of jumping to the piano. This piece takes apart the ideas of Sigmund Freud relating the Id, Ego and Superego to the respective qualities of Young Student, Teacher, and Sheet Music. The interactive participant is able to understand that by attaching a pogo stick to this piano is the only way to play it. I have subtracted the ego (teacher) and the Super Ego (Sheet Music) and made a direct connection that allows the power and drive of the Id to be free as it makes music. Even the greatest of Pianists must resort to the raw energy of the Id to play with this device. Young and old alike take the position of youth as they jump up and down on this fascinating machine. In some ways, I refer to it as a fountain of youth, because to play it, one must regress to the childhood action of playing on a pogo stick. It is in this regression that the audience is invited to revisit the joy of playing without judgment.
THis is from a PLAY in play on stage for all world to see......
SEAN PACE
HOME ........ART.......RESUME........PRESS........LINKS .......CONTACT
WRITINGS....
::ENTER ATTAINMENT SYSTEM::
The logic used by the modern educational system has, as its premise, the assimilation of the student towards predetermined facts taught in a predetermined manner. This logic does not encourage, instill, nor nurture individual creative development. The environment of the public education system stifles creativity. We are not educating individuals � we are herding young minds into slaughterhouses of dry ideas. This piece, the Enter Attainment System, is a visual representation of what I feel my educational experience has been. The title is a play-on-words of the household entertainment system. I believe that the environment of public school and the after-school activity of watching T.V. are deadening the capacity of our imaginations. This �educational observation unit� monitors the �student� behind a protective cage and guides them through three simultaneously broadcasted subjects. It has an image in front of one screen that shows a male figure pouring a gallon of milk over his face. The image is a double exposure and behind the figure is a portrait image of the male drenched in milk. This signifies that this is a flood of information. The lens behind the cage is the nipple of one brass breast. The breast symbolizes maternal nurturing, yet by placing a lens where the nipple existed gives this body part a more ominous feel, as if the entertainment industry is raising America�s youth. Where the public school system falls short in providing a genuine education for our children, I feel the problem is propagated by people who feel that mass media will pick up the slack. I call this the Enter Attainment System because it is a mockery of those Americans who choose to sit in front of a television and be subjugated to an overindulgence of stimuli, in order to gloss over the fact that they are ignoring their own personal search for enlightenment, because watching an episode of The Bachelor is a quick fix for filling the void.
CLASS WAR LIMO
On the outside, this piece has a romantic and relaxing visual appearance. The aesthetic value that I incorporate fluctuates between complexity and simplicity. The complex mechanical drive of the object is a marriage between bicycle pedals, gears and wheels from a motorcycle�s front and rear end. The front shocks serve as chain tensioners for the direct drive peddle operation, and the gears are used to create a torque advantage to move the piece. The structure of this sculpture is a series of minimalized lines that serve the integral function of a supporting framework. This frame allows a ten-foot tall unicycle to PUSH a rider in a Lazy Boy. The antiquated wheels that are on either side of the Lazy Boy are representational of the historic tradition of �free rides� that are sought and gained by wealth and power. The fact that the chair swivels from side to side but not enough to see the driver is intended to be a subtlety that shows the lack of recognition between those that ride and those that PUSH. The rider sits on an old tractor seat that is elevated above the plush luxury of the red velvet Lazy Boy. This expresses an admiration and acknowledgement that I have for the plight of the blue-collar worker. In this specific artwork, what is outwardly an enjoyable visual experience is, becomes a clarified perspective on the relationship between two different classes, blue-collar and white-collar. The marimba is placed for the use of the driver because music has traditionally been a form of public expression from the lower class. I think of blues artists and jazz musicians from the1920s to the 1950s and I feel that the marimba, for a solo instrument, expresses a wildly organic tone that fully completes what I consider to be the main argument of this piece. Is it better to PUSH and play the songs of your soul or is it better to sit back and enjoy the ride?
THE SPITBALL PAINTING MACHINE
Through this mechanism, I am establishing a connection between myself, the artist, and the participating audience. I often think of life as a walk down the length of a diving board. As I continue through life, ideas fall out of my head and land in front of me, joining an already-present mountain of conceptions that occupy the space between me and the unavoidable end of the board. These dreams are being constantly PUSHED ever closer to the eventual edge, a metaphorical death. The diving board, because of its definite limit, commands me to choose which ideas stay as concepts and which become actualized. The actualized ideas become art-of-facts that exclaim the victories of my intention. It is because I have to choose, because I cannot create all my ideas into art, that I experience great anxiety. A truly original idea is almost impossible to generate, but an even larger impossibility is the transformation of these ideas into reality. I wish to awaken a sense of panic in people as they acknowledge an inevitable end; it is this panic of ephemeral-ness that urges people to turn ideas into realities. There comes a point on every person�s diving board that when crossed, their mountain of dreams starts falling into the metaphorical filing cabinet that death forever seals. People must continue to personally fulfill their dreams. It is of the highest importance for me to bring inspiring art to people. This is an opportunity for you, the audience, to participate in creating your own art-of-fact. Behind the frame is a straw dispenser. One per customer, please. Underneath is a trashcan that has PUSH written on it. Here is where the person puts ten dollars (and if you think that $10 is too much to pay to an artist after everything I�ve been through (four studio changes, living in a junkyard with a redneck retard named Jerry for Christ�s sake, and not to mention the fact I still live in a school bus with no heat, the incessant formidable flooding, the cost of equipment and materials, and how I lived off nothing but cheese and bread for four years) then you can go to hell for all I care) and receives a signed piece of blank paper from me, Sean Pace. One of the housewives will place the paper on the diving board behind the waterfall of ink. The hand that comes from under filing cabinet holds a receiver for the straw. From this point the participant will remove the paper from the straw and make a spitball to place inside the straw. Then the participant will load and place the straw in the receiver and then pull the fountain release lever while blowing the spitball through the sheet of black ink to make a co-created piece of artwork. The childish act of using a spitball reconnects people back to the roots of their youth. Because of this, people become more receptive to new information and possibly find new creative perspectives that allow for inspiration to flow.
UNDER FURTHER SCRUTINY THE WORLD IS STILL QUITE FLAT
Not so long ago, in the Western world, the Pope was considered to be infallible. He was the closest human connection to God a person could get. Through the words of the Pope came the understanding and the reason for life. Entire countries and societies were based around what he and the Catholic Church sanctioned. Then a few �mad scientists� came along and changed everything. Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, Tycho Brahe and Sir Issac Newton put into words the natural laws of physics, confirmed by mathematics. In other words, the work of these men challenged the validity of the Catholic Church and its paradigms. These scientists, at one time or another, were all deemed unorthodox and sacrilegious, and no one took them seriously at first. Now our entire worldview is based on their principles. These scientists, in their own right, were artists as well. Art, in its most intrinsic form, is communication. It is a dialogue between the artist and the rest of the world. It is an attempt at expressing emotion, at documenting history, at experimenting and researching problems and solutions for the future, and sharing with people a very fluid and dynamic exchange of ideas. Most iconoclastic notions, at their inception, are perceived as ridiculous. The world was not round, nor did it revolve around the sun. Evolution was preposterous and so is the idea of life on other planets. Perhaps this is the essential role of any true artist � to PUSH the envelope, to PUSH the limits of preordained rhetoric, to PUSH people to think differently. The world was flat until a group of heretics proved that our planet is indeed spherical. By constricting our views of what �good art� is, we are denying the accomplishments of other paradigm-shifters that preceded us. In other words, the art I make is not classical art. It does not fall into the category of �home decorum.� It may not match the couch in your living room, but I urge you to tear down your Rembrandt, put on your wall an object that speaks of higher ideas and is a representation of strong vision.
DECONSTRUCTION OF A PIANO LESSON
This piece is an upright piano that has been cut in half and attached to a rolling stand that allows it to pivot and bounce when the people interact by jumping up and down on a five- foot-tall pogo stick attached to a piston that distributes the force of jumping to the piano. This piece takes apart the ideas of Sigmund Freud relating the Id, Ego and Superego to the respective qualities of Young Student, Teacher, and Sheet Music. The interactive participant is able to understand that by attaching a pogo stick to this piano is the only way to play it. I have subtracted the ego (teacher) and the Super Ego (Sheet Music) and made a direct connection that allows the power and drive of the Id to be free as it makes music. Even the greatest of Pianists must resort to the raw energy of the Id to play with this device. Young and old alike take the position of youth as they jump up and down on this fascinating machine. In some ways, I refer to it as a fountain of youth, because to play it, one must regress to the childhood action of playing on a pogo stick. It is in this regression that the audience is invited to revisit the joy of playing without judgment.
HOME ........ART.......RESUME........PRESS........LINKS .......CONTACT
WRITINGS....
::ENTER ATTAINMENT SYSTEM::
The logic used by the modern educational system has, as its premise, the assimilation of the student towards predetermined facts taught in a predetermined manner. This logic does not encourage, instill, nor nurture individual creative development. The environment of the public education system stifles creativity. We are not educating individuals � we are herding young minds into slaughterhouses of dry ideas. This piece, the Enter Attainment System, is a visual representation of what I feel my educational experience has been. The title is a play-on-words of the household entertainment system. I believe that the environment of public school and the after-school activity of watching T.V. are deadening the capacity of our imaginations. This �educational observation unit� monitors the �student� behind a protective cage and guides them through three simultaneously broadcasted subjects. It has an image in front of one screen that shows a male figure pouring a gallon of milk over his face. The image is a double exposure and behind the figure is a portrait image of the male drenched in milk. This signifies that this is a flood of information. The lens behind the cage is the nipple of one brass breast. The breast symbolizes maternal nurturing, yet by placing a lens where the nipple existed gives this body part a more ominous feel, as if the entertainment industry is raising America�s youth. Where the public school system falls short in providing a genuine education for our children, I feel the problem is propagated by people who feel that mass media will pick up the slack. I call this the Enter Attainment System because it is a mockery of those Americans who choose to sit in front of a television and be subjugated to an overindulgence of stimuli, in order to gloss over the fact that they are ignoring their own personal search for enlightenment, because watching an episode of The Bachelor is a quick fix for filling the void.
CLASS WAR LIMO
On the outside, this piece has a romantic and relaxing visual appearance. The aesthetic value that I incorporate fluctuates between complexity and simplicity. The complex mechanical drive of the object is a marriage between bicycle pedals, gears and wheels from a motorcycle�s front and rear end. The front shocks serve as chain tensioners for the direct drive peddle operation, and the gears are used to create a torque advantage to move the piece. The structure of this sculpture is a series of minimalized lines that serve the integral function of a supporting framework. This frame allows a ten-foot tall unicycle to PUSH a rider in a Lazy Boy. The antiquated wheels that are on either side of the Lazy Boy are representational of the historic tradition of �free rides� that are sought and gained by wealth and power. The fact that the chair swivels from side to side but not enough to see the driver is intended to be a subtlety that shows the lack of recognition between those that ride and those that PUSH. The rider sits on an old tractor seat that is elevated above the plush luxury of the red velvet Lazy Boy. This expresses an admiration and acknowledgement that I have for the plight of the blue-collar worker. In this specific artwork, what is outwardly an enjoyable visual experience is, becomes a clarified perspective on the relationship between two different classes, blue-collar and white-collar. The marimba is placed for the use of the driver because music has traditionally been a form of public expression from the lower class. I think of blues artists and jazz musicians from the1920s to the 1950s and I feel that the marimba, for a solo instrument, expresses a wildly organic tone that fully completes what I consider to be the main argument of this piece. Is it better to PUSH and play the songs of your soul or is it better to sit back and enjoy the ride?
THE SPITBALL PAINTING MACHINE
Through this mechanism, I am establishing a connection between myself, the artist, and the participating audience. I often think of life as a walk down the length of a diving board. As I continue through life, ideas fall out of my head and land in front of me, joining an already-present mountain of conceptions that occupy the space between me and the unavoidable end of the board. These dreams are being constantly PUSHED ever closer to the eventual edge, a metaphorical death. The diving board, because of its definite limit, commands me to choose which ideas stay as concepts and which become actualized. The actualized ideas become art-of-facts that exclaim the victories of my intention. It is because I have to choose, because I cannot create all my ideas into art, that I experience great anxiety. A truly original idea is almost impossible to generate, but an even larger impossibility is the transformation of these ideas into reality. I wish to awaken a sense of panic in people as they acknowledge an inevitable end; it is this panic of ephemeral-ness that urges people to turn ideas into realities. There comes a point on every person�s diving board that when crossed, their mountain of dreams starts falling into the metaphorical filing cabinet that death forever seals. People must continue to personally fulfill their dreams. It is of the highest importance for me to bring inspiring art to people. This is an opportunity for you, the audience, to participate in creating your own art-of-fact. Behind the frame is a straw dispenser. One per customer, please. Underneath is a trashcan that has PUSH written on it. Here is where the person puts ten dollars (and if you think that $10 is too much to pay to an artist after everything I�ve been through (four studio changes, living in a junkyard with a redneck retard named Jerry for Christ�s sake, and not to mention the fact I still live in a school bus with no heat, the incessant formidable flooding, the cost of equipment and materials, and how I lived off nothing but cheese and bread for four years) then you can go to hell for all I care) and receives a signed piece of blank paper from me, Sean Pace. One of the housewives will place the paper on the diving board behind the waterfall of ink. The hand that comes from under filing cabinet holds a receiver for the straw. From this point the participant will remove the paper from the straw and make a spitball to place inside the straw. Then the participant will load and place the straw in the receiver and then pull the fountain release lever while blowing the spitball through the sheet of black ink to make a co-created piece of artwork. The childish act of using a spitball reconnects people back to the roots of their youth. Because of this, people become more receptive to new information and possibly find new creative perspectives that allow for inspiration to flow.
UNDER FURTHER SCRUTINY THE WORLD IS STILL QUITE FLAT
Not so long ago, in the Western world, the Pope was considered to be infallible. He was the closest human connection to God a person could get. Through the words of the Pope came the understanding and the reason for life. Entire countries and societies were based around what he and the Catholic Church sanctioned. Then a few �mad scientists� came along and changed everything. Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, Tycho Brahe and Sir Issac Newton put into words the natural laws of physics, confirmed by mathematics. In other words, the work of these men challenged the validity of the Catholic Church and its paradigms. These scientists, at one time or another, were all deemed unorthodox and sacrilegious, and no one took them seriously at first. Now our entire worldview is based on their principles. These scientists, in their own right, were artists as well. Art, in its most intrinsic form, is communication. It is a dialogue between the artist and the rest of the world. It is an attempt at expressing emotion, at documenting history, at experimenting and researching problems and solutions for the future, and sharing with people a very fluid and dynamic exchange of ideas. Most iconoclastic notions, at their inception, are perceived as ridiculous. The world was not round, nor did it revolve around the sun. Evolution was preposterous and so is the idea of life on other planets. Perhaps this is the essential role of any true artist � to PUSH the envelope, to PUSH the limits of preordained rhetoric, to PUSH people to think differently. The world was flat until a group of heretics proved that our planet is indeed spherical. By constricting our views of what �good art� is, we are denying the accomplishments of other paradigm-shifters that preceded us. In other words, the art I make is not classical art. It does not fall into the category of �home decorum.� It may not match the couch in your living room, but I urge you to tear down your Rembrandt, put on your wall an object that speaks of higher ideas and is a representation of strong vision.
DECONSTRUCTION OF A PIANO LESSON
This piece is an upright piano that has been cut in half and attached to a rolling stand that allows it to pivot and bounce when the people interact by jumping up and down on a five- foot-tall pogo stick attached to a piston that distributes the force of jumping to the piano. This piece takes apart the ideas of Sigmund Freud relating the Id, Ego and Superego to the respective qualities of Young Student, Teacher, and Sheet Music. The interactive participant is able to understand that by attaching a pogo stick to this piano is the only way to play it. I have subtracted the ego (teacher) and the Super Ego (Sheet Music) and made a direct connection that allows the power and drive of the Id to be free as it makes music. Even the greatest of Pianists must resort to the raw energy of the Id to play with this device. Young and old alike take the position of youth as they jump up and down on this fascinating machine. In some ways, I refer to it as a fountain of youth, because to play it, one must regress to the childhood action of playing on a pogo stick. It is in this regression that the audience is invited to revisit the joy of playing without judgment.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
personal jurisdiction is made by your advocate.....I have a dream........MLK...Thank GOD almighty we r free at last..............
ed: January 3, 2003
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-2340
(CA-00-86)
Stanley K. Young,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
New Haven Advocate, et al.,
Defendants - Appellants.
O R D E R
The court amends its opinion filed December 13, 2002, as
follows:
On page 8, first paragraph, line 3 -- the word “Advocate’s” is
corrected to read “Courant’s.”
For the Court - By Direction
/s/ Patricia S. Connor
Clerk
Page 2
PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444447
STANLEY K. YOUNG,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
NEW HAVEN ADVOCATE; GAIL
THOMPSON; CAMILLE JACKSON;
HARTFORD COURANT; BRIAN TOOLAN;
AMY PAGNOZZI,
Defendants-Appellants,
and
MICHAEL LAWLOR; CAROLYN NAH;
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE
ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE;
CONNECTICUT POST; RICK SAWYERS;
KEN DIXON,
No. 01-2340
Defendants.
ADVANCE PUBLICATIONS,
INCORPORATED; AMERICAN SOCIETY OF
NEWSPAPER EDITORS; ASSOCIATED
PRESS; ASSOCIATION OF ALTERNATIVE
NEWSWEEKLIES; BELO CORPORATION;
BLOOMBERG, L.P.; CENTER FOR
DEMOCRACY & TECHNOLOGY; DAILY
NEWS, L.P.; DOW JONES AND
COMPANY, INCORPORATED; EL DIA,
INCORPORATED; THE E. W. SCRIPPS
COMPANY; THE HEARST CORPORATION;
INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS AND
EDITORS, INCORPORATED; MAGAZINE
PUBLISHERS OF AMERICA;
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444448
Page 3
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444447
THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY;
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
BROADCASTERS; NEWSLETTER &
ELECTRONIC PUBLISHERS ASSOCIATION;
NEWSPAPER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA;
THE NEW YORK TIMES; ONLINE NEWS
ASSOCIATION; THE RADIO-TELEVISION
NEWS DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION; THE
REPORTERS COMMITTEE FOR
FREEDOM OF THE PRESS; SOCIETY OF
PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS; VILLAGE
VOICE MEDIA, INCORPORATED; THE
WASHINGTON POST COMPANY; ZIFF
DAVIS MEDIA, INCORPORATED,
Amici Supporting Appellants.
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444448
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Virginia, at Big Stone Gap.
Glen M. Williams, Senior District Judge.
(CA-00-86)
Argued: June 3, 2002
Decided: December 13, 2002
Before MICHAEL and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and
Bobby R. BALDOCK, Senior Circuit Judge of the
United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit,
sitting by designation.
____________________________________________________________
Reversed by published opinion. Judge Michael wrote the opinion, in
which Judge Gregory and Senior Judge Baldock joined.
____________________________________________________________
2
Page 4
COUNSEL
ARGUED: Robert Douglass Lystad, BAKER & HOSTETLER,
L.L.P., Washington, D.C., for Appellants. Robert Stuart Collins,
FLEMING & COLLINS, P.C., Norton, Virginia, for Appellee. ON
BRIEF: Bruce W. Sanford, Bruce D. Brown, BAKER &
HOSTETLER, L.L.P., Washington, D.C.; Wade W. Massie, PENN,
STUART & ESKRIDGE, Abington, Virginia; Stephanie S. Abrutyn,
TRIBUNE COMPANY, New York, New York, for Appellants. Rob-
ert M. O'Neil, THOMAS JEFFERSON CENTER FOR THE PRO-
TECTION OF FREE EXPRESSION, Charlottesville, Virginia;
George Rutherglen, UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA LAW SCHOOL,
Charlottesville, Virginia, for Amici Curiae.
____________________________________________________________
OPINION
MICHAEL, Circuit Judge:
The question in this appeal is whether two Connecticut newspapers
and certain of their staff (sometimes, the "newspaper defendants")
subjected themselves to personal jurisdiction in Virginia by posting
on the Internet news articles that, in the context of discussing the
State of Connecticut's policy of housing its prisoners in Virginia insti-
tutions, allegedly defamed the warden of a Virginia prison. Our recent
decision in ALS Scan, Inc. v. Digital Service Consultants, Inc., 293
F.3d 707 (4th Cir. 2002), supplies the standard for determining a
court's authority to exercise personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state
person who places information on the Internet. Applying that stan-
dard, we hold that a court in Virginia cannot constitutionally exercise
jurisdiction over the Connecticut-based newspaper defendants
because they did not manifest an intent to aim their websites or the
posted articles at a Virginia audience. Accordingly, we reverse the
district court's order denying the defendants' motion to dismiss for
lack of personal jurisdiction.
I.
Sometime in the late 1990s the State of Connecticut was faced with
substantial overcrowding in its maximum security prisons. To allevi-
3
Page 5
ate the problem, Connecticut contracted with the Commonwealth of
Virginia to house Connecticut prisoners in Virginia's correctional
facilities. Beginning in late 1999 Connecticut transferred about 500
prisoners, mostly African-American and Hispanic, to the Wallens
Ridge State Prison, a "supermax" facility in Big Stone Gap, Virginia.
The plaintiff, Stanley Young, is the warden at Wallens Ridge. Con-
necticut's arrangement to incarcerate a sizeable number of its offend-
ers in Virginia prisons provoked considerable public debate in
Connecticut. Several Connecticut legislators openly criticized the pol-
icy, and there were demonstrations against it at the state capitol in
Hartford.
Connecticut newspapers, including defendants the New Haven
Advocate (the Advocate) and the Hartford Courant (the Courant),
began reporting on the controversy. On March 30, 2000, the Advocate
published a news article, written by one of its reporters, defendant
Camille Jackson, about the transfer of Connecticut inmates to Wallens
Ridge. The article discussed the allegedly harsh conditions at the Vir-
ginia prison and pointed out that the long trip to southwestern Vir-
ginia made visits by prisoners' families difficult or impossible. In the
middle of her lengthy article, Jackson mentioned a class action that
inmates transferred from Connecticut had filed against Warden
Young and the Connecticut Commissioner of Corrections. The
inmates alleged a lack of proper hygiene and medical care and the
denial of religious privileges at Wallens Ridge. Finally, a paragraph
at the end of the article reported that a Connecticut state senator had
expressed concern about the presence of Confederate Civil War mem-
orabilia in Warden Young's office. At about the same time the Cou-
rant published three columns, written by defendant-reporter Amy
Pagnozzi, questioning the practice of relocating Connecticut inmates
to Virginia prisons. The columns reported on letters written home by
inmates who alleged cruelty by prison guards. In one column
Pagnozzi called Wallens Ridge a "cut-rate gulag." Warden Young
was not mentioned in any of the Pagnozzi columns.
On May 12, 2000, Warden Young sued the two newspapers, their
editors (Gail Thompson and Brian Toolan), and the two reporters for
libel in a diversity action filed in the Western District of Virginia. He
claimed that the newspapers' articles imply that he "is a racist who
advocates racism" and that he "encourages abuse of inmates by the
4
Page 6
guards" at Wallens Ridge. Young alleged that the newspapers circu-
lated the allegedly defamatory articles throughout the world by post-
ing them on their Internet websites.
The newspaper defendants filed motions to dismiss the complaint
under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2) on the ground that the
district court lacked personal jurisdiction over them. In support of the
motions the editor and reporter from each newspaper provided decla-
rations establishing the following undisputed facts. The Advocate is
a free newspaper published once a week in New Haven, Connecticut.
It is distributed in New Haven and the surrounding area, and some of
its content is published on the Internet. The Advocate has a small
number of subscribers, and none of them are in Virginia. The Courant
is published daily in Hartford, Connecticut. The newspaper is distrib-
uted in and around Hartford, and some of its content is published on
the Internet. When the articles in question were published, the Cou-
rant had eight mail subscribers in Virginia. Neither newspaper solicits
subscriptions from Virginia residents. No one from either newspaper,
not even the reporters, traveled to Virginia to work on the articles
about Connecticut's prisoner transfer policy. The two reporters, Jack-
son of the Advocate and Pagnozzi of the Courant, made a few tele-
phone calls into Virginia to gather some information for the articles.
Both interviewed by telephone a spokesman for the Virginia Depart-
ment of Corrections. All other interviews were done with people
located in Connecticut. The two reporters wrote their articles in Con-
necticut. The individual defendants (the reporters and editors) do not
have any traditional contacts with the Commonwealth of Virginia.
They do not live in Virginia, solicit any business there, or have any
assets or business relationships there. The newspapers do not have
offices or employees in Virginia, and they do not regularly solicit or
do business in Virginia. Finally, the newspapers do not derive any
substantial revenue from goods used or services rendered in Virginia.
In responding to the declarations of the editors and reporters, War-
den Young pointed out that the newspapers posted the allegedly
defamatory articles on Internet websites that were accessible to Vir-
ginia residents. In addition, Young provided copies of assorted print-
outs from the newspapers' websites. For the Advocate, Young
submitted eleven pages from newhavenadvocate.com and new-
massmedia.com for January 26, 2001. The two pages from newha-
5
Page 7
venadvocate.com are the Advocate's homepage, which includes links
to articles about the "Best of New Haven" and New Haven's park
police. The nine pages from newmassmedia.com, a website main-
tained by the publishers of the Advocate, consist of classified adver-
tising from that week's newspapers and instructions on how to submit
a classified ad. The listings include advertisements for real estate rent-
als in New Haven and Guilford, Connecticut, for roommates wanted
and tattoo services offered in Hamden, Connecticut, and for a bassist
needed by a band in West Haven, Connecticut. For the Courant,
Young provided nine pages from hartfordcourant.com and ctnow.com
for January 26, 2001. The hartfordcourant.com homepage character-
izes the website as a "source of news and entertainment in and about
Connecticut." A page soliciting advertising in the Courant refers to
"exposure for your message in this market" in the "best medium in the
state to deliver your advertising message." The pages from
ctnow.com, a website produced by the Courant, provide news stories
from that day's edition of the Courant, weather reports for Hartford
and New Haven, Connecticut, and links to sites for the University of
Connecticut and Connecticut state government. The website promotes
its online advertising as a "source for jobs in Connecticut." The web-
site printouts provided for January 26, 2001, do not have any content
with a connection to readers in Virginia.
The district court denied the newspaper defendants' motions to dis-
miss, concluding that it could exercise personal jurisdiction over them
under Virginia's long-arm statute, Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-328(A)(3),
because "the defendants' Connecticut-based Internet activities consti-
tuted an act leading to an injury to the plaintiff in Virginia." The dis-
trict court also held that the defendants' Internet activities were
sufficient to satisfy the requirements of constitutional due process.
With our permission the newspaper defendants are taking this inter-
locutory appeal. The facts relating to jurisdiction are undisputed, and
the district court's decision that it has personal jurisdiction over these
defendants presents a legal question that we review de novo. See
Christian Sci. Bd. of Dirs. of the First Church of Christ, Scientist v.
Nolan, 259 F.3d 209, 215 (4th Cir. 2001).
6
Page 8
II.
A.
A federal court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a defendant
in the manner provided by state law. See ESAB Group, Inc. v. Cen-
tricut, Inc., 126 F.3d 617, 622 (4th Cir. 1997); Fed. R. Civ. P.
4(k)(1)(A). Because Virginia's long-arm statute extends personal
jurisdiction to the extent permitted by the Due Process Clause, see
English & Smith v. Metzger, 901 F.2d 36, 38 (4th Cir. 1990), "the
statutory inquiry necessarily merges with the constitutional inquiry,
and the two inquiries essentially become one." Stover v. O'Connell
Assocs., Inc., 84 F.3d 132, 135-36 (4th Cir. 1996). The question, then,
is whether the defendant has sufficient "minimum contacts with [the
forum] such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend `tradi-
tional notions of fair play and substantial justice.'" Int'l Shoe Co. v.
Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316 (1945) (quoting Milliken v. Meyer,
311 U.S. 457, 463 (1940)). A court may assume power over an out-
of-state defendant either by a proper "finding [of] specific jurisdiction
based on conduct connected to the suit or by [a proper] finding [of]
general jurisdiction." ALS Scan, Inc. v. Digital Serv. Consultants, Inc.,
293 F.3d 707, 711 (4th Cir. 2002). Warden Young argues only for
specific jurisdiction, so we limit our discussion accordingly. When a
defendant's contacts with the forum state "are also the basis for the
suit, those contacts may establish specific jurisdiction." Id. at 712. In
determining whether specific jurisdiction exists, we traditionally ask
(1) whether the defendant purposefully availed itself of the privileges
of conducting activities in the forum state, (2) whether the plaintiff's
claim arises out of the defendant's forum-related activities, and (3)
"whether the exercise of personal jurisdiction over the defendant
would be constitutionally reasonable." Id. at 712. See also Christian
Sci. Bd., 259 F.3d at 216. The plaintiff, of course, has the burden to
establish that personal jurisdiction exists over the out-of-state defen-
dant. Young v. FDIC, 103 F.3d 1180, 1191 (4th Cir. 1997).
B.
We turn to whether the district court can exercise specific jurisdic-
tion over the newspaper defendants, namely, the two newspapers, the
two editors, and the two reporters. To begin with, we can put aside
7
Page 9
the few Virginia contacts that are not Internet based because Warden
Young does not rely on them. Thus, Young does not claim that the
reporters' few telephone calls into Virginia or the Courant’s eight
Virginia subscribers are sufficient to establish personal jurisdiction
over those defendants. Nor did the district court rely on these tradi-
tional contacts.
Warden Young argues that the district court has specific personal
jurisdiction over the newspaper defendants (hereafter, the "newspa-
pers") because of the following contacts between them and Virginia:
(1) the newspapers, knowing that Young was a Virginia resident,
intentionally discussed and defamed him in their articles, (2) the
newspapers posted the articles on their websites, which were accessi-
ble in Virginia, and (3) the primary effects of the defamatory state-
ments on Young's reputation were felt in Virginia. Young emphasizes
that he is not arguing that jurisdiction is proper in any location where
defamatory Internet content can be accessed, which would be any-
where in the world. Rather, Young argues that personal jurisdiction
is proper in Virginia because the newspapers understood that their
defamatory articles, which were available to Virginia residents on the
Internet, would expose Young to public hatred, contempt, and ridicule
in Virginia, where he lived and worked. As the district court put it,
"[t]he defendants were all well aware of the fact that the plaintiff was
employed as a warden within the Virginia correctional system and
resided in Virginia," and they "also should have been aware that any
harm suffered by Young from the circulation of these articles on the
Internet would primarily occur in Virginia."
Young frames his argument in a way that makes one thing clear:
if the newspapers' contacts with Virginia were sufficient to establish
personal jurisdiction, those contacts arose solely from the newspa-
pers' Internet-based activities. Recently, in ALS Scan we discussed
the challenges presented in applying traditional jurisdictional princi-
ples to decide when "an out-of-state citizen, through electronic con-
tacts, has conceptually `entered' the State via the Internet for
jurisdictional purposes." ALS Scan, 293 F.3d at 713. There, we held
that "specific jurisdiction in the Internet context may be based only
on an out-of-state person's Internet activity directed at [the forum
state] and causing injury that gives rise to a potential claim cognizable
in [that state]." Id. at 714. We noted that this standard for determining
8
Page 10
specific jurisdiction based on Internet contacts is consistent with the
one used by the Supreme Court in Calder v. Jones, 465 U.S. 783
(1984). ALS Scan, 293 F.3d at 714. Calder, though not an Internet
case, has particular relevance here because it deals with personal
jurisdiction in the context of a libel suit. In Calder a California actress
brought suit there against, among others, two Floridians, a reporter
and an editor who wrote and edited in Florida a National Enquirer
article claiming that the actress had a problem with alcohol. The
Supreme Court held that California had jurisdiction over the Florida
residents because "California [was] the focal point both of the story
and of the harm suffered." Calder, 465 U.S. at 789. The writers' "ac-
tions were expressly aimed at California," the Court said, "[a]nd they
knew that the brunt of [the potentially devastating] injury would be
felt by [the actress] in the State in which she lives and works and in
which the National Enquirer has its largest circulation," 600,000 cop-
ies. Calder, 465 U.S. at 789-90.
Warden Young argues that Calder requires a finding of jurisdiction
in this case simply because the newspapers posted articles on their
Internet websites that discussed the warden and his Virginia prison,
and he would feel the effects of any libel in Virginia, where he lives
and works. Calder does not sweep that broadly, as we have recog-
nized. For example, in ESAB Group, Inc. v. Centricut, Inc., 126 F.3d
617, 625-26 (4th Cir. 1997), we emphasized how important it is in
light of Calder to look at whether the defendant has expressly aimed
or directed its conduct toward the forum state. We said that
"[a]lthough the place that the plaintiff feels the alleged injury is
plainly relevant to the [jurisdictional] inquiry, it must ultimately be
accompanied by the defendant's own [sufficient minimum] contacts
with the state if jurisdiction . . . is to be upheld." Id. at 626. We thus
had no trouble in concluding in ALS Scan that application of Calder
in the Internet context requires proof that the out-of-state defendant's
Internet activity is expressly targeted at or directed to the forum state.
ALS Scan, 293 F.3d at 714. In ALS Scan we went on to adapt the tra-
ditional standard (set out in part II.A., supra ) for establishing specific
jurisdiction so that it makes sense in the Internet context. We "con-
clude[d] that a State may, consistent with due process, exercise judi-
cial power over a person outside of the State when that person (1)
directs electronic activity into the State, (2) with the manifested intent
of engaging in business or other interactions within the State, and (3)
9
Page 11
that activity creates, in a person within the State, a potential cause of
action cognizable in the State's courts." ALS Scan, 293 F.3d at 714.
When the Internet activity is, as here, the posting of news articles
on a website, the ALS Scan test works more smoothly when parts one
and two of the test are considered together. We thus ask whether the
newspapers manifested an intent to direct their website content —
which included certain articles discussing conditions in a Virginia
prison — to a Virginia audience. As we recognized in ALS Scan, "a
person's act of placing information on the Internet" is not sufficient
by itself to "subject[ ] that person to personal jurisdiction in each
State in which the information is accessed." Id. at 712. Otherwise, a
"person placing information on the Internet would be subject to per-
sonal jurisdiction in every State," and the traditional due process prin-
ciples governing a State's jurisdiction over persons outside of its
borders would be subverted. Id.See also GTE New Media Servs. Inc.
v. Bellsouth Corp., 199 F.3d 1343, 1350 (D.C. Cir. 2000). Thus, the
fact that the newspapers' websites could be accessed anywhere,
including Virginia, does not by itself demonstrate that the newspapers
were intentionally directing their website content to a Virginia audi-
ence. Something more than posting and accessibility is needed to "in-
dicate that the [newspapers] purposefully (albeit electronically)
directed [their] activity in a substantial way to the forum state," Vir-
ginia. Panavision Int'l, L.P. v. Toeppen, 141 F.3d 1316, 1321 (9th
Cir. 1998) (quotation omitted). The newspapers must, through the
Internet postings, manifest an intent to target and focus on Virginia
readers.
We therefore turn to the pages from the newspapers' websites that
Warden Young placed in the record, and we examine their general
thrust and content. The overall content of both websites is decidedly
local, and neither newspaper's website contains advertisements aimed
at a Virginia audience. For example, the website that distributes the
Courant, ctnow.com, provides access to local (Connecticut) weather
and traffic information and links to websites for the University of
Connecticut and Connecticut state government. The Advocate's web-
site features stories focusing on New Haven, such as one entitled
"The Best of New Haven." In sum, it appears that these newspapers
maintain their websites to serve local readers in Connecticut, to
expand the reach of their papers within their local markets, and to
10
Page 12
provide their local markets with a place for classified ads. The web-
sites are not designed to attract or serve a Virginia audience.
We also examine the specific articles Young complains about to
determine whether they were posted on the Internet with the intent to
target a Virginia audience. The articles included discussions about the
allegedly harsh conditions at the Wallens Ridge prison, where Young
was warden. One article mentioned Young by name and quoted a
Connecticut state senator who reported that Young had Confederate
Civil War memorabilia in his office. The focus of the articles, how-
ever, was the Connecticut prisoner transfer policy and its impact on
the transferred prisoners and their families back home in Connecticut.
The articles reported on and encouraged a public debate in Connecti-
cut about whether the transfer policy was sound or practical for that
state and its citizens. Connecticut, not Virginia, was the focal point
of the articles. Cf. Griffis v. Luban, 646 N.W.2d 527, 536 (Minn.
2002) ("The mere fact that [the defendant, who posted allegedly
defamatory statements about the plaintiff on the Internet] knew that
[the plaintiff] resided and worked in Alabama is not sufficient to
extend personal jurisdiction over [the defendant] in Alabama, because
that knowledge does not demonstrate targeting of Alabama as the
focal point of the . . . statements.").
The facts in this case establish that the newspapers' websites, as
well as the articles in question, were aimed at a Connecticut audience.
The newspapers did not post materials on the Internet with the mani-
fest intent of targeting Virginia readers. Accordingly, the newspapers
could not have "reasonably anticipate[d] being haled into court [in
Virginia] to answer for the truth of the statements made in their arti-
cle[s]." Calder, 465 U.S. at 790 (quotation omitted). In sum, the
newspapers do not have sufficient Internet contacts with Virginia to
permit the district court to exercise specific jurisdiction over them.*
____________________________________________________________
* Because the newspapers did not intentionally direct Internet activity
to Virginia, and jurisdiction fails on that ground, we have no need to
explore the last part of the ALS Scan inquiry, that is, whether the chal-
lenged conduct created a cause of action in Virginia. See ALS Scan, 293
F.3d at 714.
11
Page 13
We reverse the order of the district court denying the motions to
dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction made by the New Haven
Advocate, Gail Thompson (its editor), and Camille Jackson (its
reporter) and by the Hartford Courant, Brian Toolan (its editor), and
Amy Pagnozzi (its reporter).
REVERSED
12
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-2340
(CA-00-86)
Stanley K. Young,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
New Haven Advocate, et al.,
Defendants - Appellants.
O R D E R
The court amends its opinion filed December 13, 2002, as
follows:
On page 8, first paragraph, line 3 -- the word “Advocate’s” is
corrected to read “Courant’s.”
For the Court - By Direction
/s/ Patricia S. Connor
Clerk
Page 2
PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444447
STANLEY K. YOUNG,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
NEW HAVEN ADVOCATE; GAIL
THOMPSON; CAMILLE JACKSON;
HARTFORD COURANT; BRIAN TOOLAN;
AMY PAGNOZZI,
Defendants-Appellants,
and
MICHAEL LAWLOR; CAROLYN NAH;
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE
ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE;
CONNECTICUT POST; RICK SAWYERS;
KEN DIXON,
No. 01-2340
Defendants.
ADVANCE PUBLICATIONS,
INCORPORATED; AMERICAN SOCIETY OF
NEWSPAPER EDITORS; ASSOCIATED
PRESS; ASSOCIATION OF ALTERNATIVE
NEWSWEEKLIES; BELO CORPORATION;
BLOOMBERG, L.P.; CENTER FOR
DEMOCRACY & TECHNOLOGY; DAILY
NEWS, L.P.; DOW JONES AND
COMPANY, INCORPORATED; EL DIA,
INCORPORATED; THE E. W. SCRIPPS
COMPANY; THE HEARST CORPORATION;
INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS AND
EDITORS, INCORPORATED; MAGAZINE
PUBLISHERS OF AMERICA;
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444448
Page 3
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444447
THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY;
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
BROADCASTERS; NEWSLETTER &
ELECTRONIC PUBLISHERS ASSOCIATION;
NEWSPAPER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA;
THE NEW YORK TIMES; ONLINE NEWS
ASSOCIATION; THE RADIO-TELEVISION
NEWS DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION; THE
REPORTERS COMMITTEE FOR
FREEDOM OF THE PRESS; SOCIETY OF
PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS; VILLAGE
VOICE MEDIA, INCORPORATED; THE
WASHINGTON POST COMPANY; ZIFF
DAVIS MEDIA, INCORPORATED,
Amici Supporting Appellants.
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444448
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Virginia, at Big Stone Gap.
Glen M. Williams, Senior District Judge.
(CA-00-86)
Argued: June 3, 2002
Decided: December 13, 2002
Before MICHAEL and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and
Bobby R. BALDOCK, Senior Circuit Judge of the
United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit,
sitting by designation.
____________________________________________________________
Reversed by published opinion. Judge Michael wrote the opinion, in
which Judge Gregory and Senior Judge Baldock joined.
____________________________________________________________
2
Page 4
COUNSEL
ARGUED: Robert Douglass Lystad, BAKER & HOSTETLER,
L.L.P., Washington, D.C., for Appellants. Robert Stuart Collins,
FLEMING & COLLINS, P.C., Norton, Virginia, for Appellee. ON
BRIEF: Bruce W. Sanford, Bruce D. Brown, BAKER &
HOSTETLER, L.L.P., Washington, D.C.; Wade W. Massie, PENN,
STUART & ESKRIDGE, Abington, Virginia; Stephanie S. Abrutyn,
TRIBUNE COMPANY, New York, New York, for Appellants. Rob-
ert M. O'Neil, THOMAS JEFFERSON CENTER FOR THE PRO-
TECTION OF FREE EXPRESSION, Charlottesville, Virginia;
George Rutherglen, UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA LAW SCHOOL,
Charlottesville, Virginia, for Amici Curiae.
____________________________________________________________
OPINION
MICHAEL, Circuit Judge:
The question in this appeal is whether two Connecticut newspapers
and certain of their staff (sometimes, the "newspaper defendants")
subjected themselves to personal jurisdiction in Virginia by posting
on the Internet news articles that, in the context of discussing the
State of Connecticut's policy of housing its prisoners in Virginia insti-
tutions, allegedly defamed the warden of a Virginia prison. Our recent
decision in ALS Scan, Inc. v. Digital Service Consultants, Inc., 293
F.3d 707 (4th Cir. 2002), supplies the standard for determining a
court's authority to exercise personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state
person who places information on the Internet. Applying that stan-
dard, we hold that a court in Virginia cannot constitutionally exercise
jurisdiction over the Connecticut-based newspaper defendants
because they did not manifest an intent to aim their websites or the
posted articles at a Virginia audience. Accordingly, we reverse the
district court's order denying the defendants' motion to dismiss for
lack of personal jurisdiction.
I.
Sometime in the late 1990s the State of Connecticut was faced with
substantial overcrowding in its maximum security prisons. To allevi-
3
Page 5
ate the problem, Connecticut contracted with the Commonwealth of
Virginia to house Connecticut prisoners in Virginia's correctional
facilities. Beginning in late 1999 Connecticut transferred about 500
prisoners, mostly African-American and Hispanic, to the Wallens
Ridge State Prison, a "supermax" facility in Big Stone Gap, Virginia.
The plaintiff, Stanley Young, is the warden at Wallens Ridge. Con-
necticut's arrangement to incarcerate a sizeable number of its offend-
ers in Virginia prisons provoked considerable public debate in
Connecticut. Several Connecticut legislators openly criticized the pol-
icy, and there were demonstrations against it at the state capitol in
Hartford.
Connecticut newspapers, including defendants the New Haven
Advocate (the Advocate) and the Hartford Courant (the Courant),
began reporting on the controversy. On March 30, 2000, the Advocate
published a news article, written by one of its reporters, defendant
Camille Jackson, about the transfer of Connecticut inmates to Wallens
Ridge. The article discussed the allegedly harsh conditions at the Vir-
ginia prison and pointed out that the long trip to southwestern Vir-
ginia made visits by prisoners' families difficult or impossible. In the
middle of her lengthy article, Jackson mentioned a class action that
inmates transferred from Connecticut had filed against Warden
Young and the Connecticut Commissioner of Corrections. The
inmates alleged a lack of proper hygiene and medical care and the
denial of religious privileges at Wallens Ridge. Finally, a paragraph
at the end of the article reported that a Connecticut state senator had
expressed concern about the presence of Confederate Civil War mem-
orabilia in Warden Young's office. At about the same time the Cou-
rant published three columns, written by defendant-reporter Amy
Pagnozzi, questioning the practice of relocating Connecticut inmates
to Virginia prisons. The columns reported on letters written home by
inmates who alleged cruelty by prison guards. In one column
Pagnozzi called Wallens Ridge a "cut-rate gulag." Warden Young
was not mentioned in any of the Pagnozzi columns.
On May 12, 2000, Warden Young sued the two newspapers, their
editors (Gail Thompson and Brian Toolan), and the two reporters for
libel in a diversity action filed in the Western District of Virginia. He
claimed that the newspapers' articles imply that he "is a racist who
advocates racism" and that he "encourages abuse of inmates by the
4
Page 6
guards" at Wallens Ridge. Young alleged that the newspapers circu-
lated the allegedly defamatory articles throughout the world by post-
ing them on their Internet websites.
The newspaper defendants filed motions to dismiss the complaint
under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2) on the ground that the
district court lacked personal jurisdiction over them. In support of the
motions the editor and reporter from each newspaper provided decla-
rations establishing the following undisputed facts. The Advocate is
a free newspaper published once a week in New Haven, Connecticut.
It is distributed in New Haven and the surrounding area, and some of
its content is published on the Internet. The Advocate has a small
number of subscribers, and none of them are in Virginia. The Courant
is published daily in Hartford, Connecticut. The newspaper is distrib-
uted in and around Hartford, and some of its content is published on
the Internet. When the articles in question were published, the Cou-
rant had eight mail subscribers in Virginia. Neither newspaper solicits
subscriptions from Virginia residents. No one from either newspaper,
not even the reporters, traveled to Virginia to work on the articles
about Connecticut's prisoner transfer policy. The two reporters, Jack-
son of the Advocate and Pagnozzi of the Courant, made a few tele-
phone calls into Virginia to gather some information for the articles.
Both interviewed by telephone a spokesman for the Virginia Depart-
ment of Corrections. All other interviews were done with people
located in Connecticut. The two reporters wrote their articles in Con-
necticut. The individual defendants (the reporters and editors) do not
have any traditional contacts with the Commonwealth of Virginia.
They do not live in Virginia, solicit any business there, or have any
assets or business relationships there. The newspapers do not have
offices or employees in Virginia, and they do not regularly solicit or
do business in Virginia. Finally, the newspapers do not derive any
substantial revenue from goods used or services rendered in Virginia.
In responding to the declarations of the editors and reporters, War-
den Young pointed out that the newspapers posted the allegedly
defamatory articles on Internet websites that were accessible to Vir-
ginia residents. In addition, Young provided copies of assorted print-
outs from the newspapers' websites. For the Advocate, Young
submitted eleven pages from newhavenadvocate.com and new-
massmedia.com for January 26, 2001. The two pages from newha-
5
Page 7
venadvocate.com are the Advocate's homepage, which includes links
to articles about the "Best of New Haven" and New Haven's park
police. The nine pages from newmassmedia.com, a website main-
tained by the publishers of the Advocate, consist of classified adver-
tising from that week's newspapers and instructions on how to submit
a classified ad. The listings include advertisements for real estate rent-
als in New Haven and Guilford, Connecticut, for roommates wanted
and tattoo services offered in Hamden, Connecticut, and for a bassist
needed by a band in West Haven, Connecticut. For the Courant,
Young provided nine pages from hartfordcourant.com and ctnow.com
for January 26, 2001. The hartfordcourant.com homepage character-
izes the website as a "source of news and entertainment in and about
Connecticut." A page soliciting advertising in the Courant refers to
"exposure for your message in this market" in the "best medium in the
state to deliver your advertising message." The pages from
ctnow.com, a website produced by the Courant, provide news stories
from that day's edition of the Courant, weather reports for Hartford
and New Haven, Connecticut, and links to sites for the University of
Connecticut and Connecticut state government. The website promotes
its online advertising as a "source for jobs in Connecticut." The web-
site printouts provided for January 26, 2001, do not have any content
with a connection to readers in Virginia.
The district court denied the newspaper defendants' motions to dis-
miss, concluding that it could exercise personal jurisdiction over them
under Virginia's long-arm statute, Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-328(A)(3),
because "the defendants' Connecticut-based Internet activities consti-
tuted an act leading to an injury to the plaintiff in Virginia." The dis-
trict court also held that the defendants' Internet activities were
sufficient to satisfy the requirements of constitutional due process.
With our permission the newspaper defendants are taking this inter-
locutory appeal. The facts relating to jurisdiction are undisputed, and
the district court's decision that it has personal jurisdiction over these
defendants presents a legal question that we review de novo. See
Christian Sci. Bd. of Dirs. of the First Church of Christ, Scientist v.
Nolan, 259 F.3d 209, 215 (4th Cir. 2001).
6
Page 8
II.
A.
A federal court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a defendant
in the manner provided by state law. See ESAB Group, Inc. v. Cen-
tricut, Inc., 126 F.3d 617, 622 (4th Cir. 1997); Fed. R. Civ. P.
4(k)(1)(A). Because Virginia's long-arm statute extends personal
jurisdiction to the extent permitted by the Due Process Clause, see
English & Smith v. Metzger, 901 F.2d 36, 38 (4th Cir. 1990), "the
statutory inquiry necessarily merges with the constitutional inquiry,
and the two inquiries essentially become one." Stover v. O'Connell
Assocs., Inc., 84 F.3d 132, 135-36 (4th Cir. 1996). The question, then,
is whether the defendant has sufficient "minimum contacts with [the
forum] such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend `tradi-
tional notions of fair play and substantial justice.'" Int'l Shoe Co. v.
Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316 (1945) (quoting Milliken v. Meyer,
311 U.S. 457, 463 (1940)). A court may assume power over an out-
of-state defendant either by a proper "finding [of] specific jurisdiction
based on conduct connected to the suit or by [a proper] finding [of]
general jurisdiction." ALS Scan, Inc. v. Digital Serv. Consultants, Inc.,
293 F.3d 707, 711 (4th Cir. 2002). Warden Young argues only for
specific jurisdiction, so we limit our discussion accordingly. When a
defendant's contacts with the forum state "are also the basis for the
suit, those contacts may establish specific jurisdiction." Id. at 712. In
determining whether specific jurisdiction exists, we traditionally ask
(1) whether the defendant purposefully availed itself of the privileges
of conducting activities in the forum state, (2) whether the plaintiff's
claim arises out of the defendant's forum-related activities, and (3)
"whether the exercise of personal jurisdiction over the defendant
would be constitutionally reasonable." Id. at 712. See also Christian
Sci. Bd., 259 F.3d at 216. The plaintiff, of course, has the burden to
establish that personal jurisdiction exists over the out-of-state defen-
dant. Young v. FDIC, 103 F.3d 1180, 1191 (4th Cir. 1997).
B.
We turn to whether the district court can exercise specific jurisdic-
tion over the newspaper defendants, namely, the two newspapers, the
two editors, and the two reporters. To begin with, we can put aside
7
Page 9
the few Virginia contacts that are not Internet based because Warden
Young does not rely on them. Thus, Young does not claim that the
reporters' few telephone calls into Virginia or the Courant’s eight
Virginia subscribers are sufficient to establish personal jurisdiction
over those defendants. Nor did the district court rely on these tradi-
tional contacts.
Warden Young argues that the district court has specific personal
jurisdiction over the newspaper defendants (hereafter, the "newspa-
pers") because of the following contacts between them and Virginia:
(1) the newspapers, knowing that Young was a Virginia resident,
intentionally discussed and defamed him in their articles, (2) the
newspapers posted the articles on their websites, which were accessi-
ble in Virginia, and (3) the primary effects of the defamatory state-
ments on Young's reputation were felt in Virginia. Young emphasizes
that he is not arguing that jurisdiction is proper in any location where
defamatory Internet content can be accessed, which would be any-
where in the world. Rather, Young argues that personal jurisdiction
is proper in Virginia because the newspapers understood that their
defamatory articles, which were available to Virginia residents on the
Internet, would expose Young to public hatred, contempt, and ridicule
in Virginia, where he lived and worked. As the district court put it,
"[t]he defendants were all well aware of the fact that the plaintiff was
employed as a warden within the Virginia correctional system and
resided in Virginia," and they "also should have been aware that any
harm suffered by Young from the circulation of these articles on the
Internet would primarily occur in Virginia."
Young frames his argument in a way that makes one thing clear:
if the newspapers' contacts with Virginia were sufficient to establish
personal jurisdiction, those contacts arose solely from the newspa-
pers' Internet-based activities. Recently, in ALS Scan we discussed
the challenges presented in applying traditional jurisdictional princi-
ples to decide when "an out-of-state citizen, through electronic con-
tacts, has conceptually `entered' the State via the Internet for
jurisdictional purposes." ALS Scan, 293 F.3d at 713. There, we held
that "specific jurisdiction in the Internet context may be based only
on an out-of-state person's Internet activity directed at [the forum
state] and causing injury that gives rise to a potential claim cognizable
in [that state]." Id. at 714. We noted that this standard for determining
8
Page 10
specific jurisdiction based on Internet contacts is consistent with the
one used by the Supreme Court in Calder v. Jones, 465 U.S. 783
(1984). ALS Scan, 293 F.3d at 714. Calder, though not an Internet
case, has particular relevance here because it deals with personal
jurisdiction in the context of a libel suit. In Calder a California actress
brought suit there against, among others, two Floridians, a reporter
and an editor who wrote and edited in Florida a National Enquirer
article claiming that the actress had a problem with alcohol. The
Supreme Court held that California had jurisdiction over the Florida
residents because "California [was] the focal point both of the story
and of the harm suffered." Calder, 465 U.S. at 789. The writers' "ac-
tions were expressly aimed at California," the Court said, "[a]nd they
knew that the brunt of [the potentially devastating] injury would be
felt by [the actress] in the State in which she lives and works and in
which the National Enquirer has its largest circulation," 600,000 cop-
ies. Calder, 465 U.S. at 789-90.
Warden Young argues that Calder requires a finding of jurisdiction
in this case simply because the newspapers posted articles on their
Internet websites that discussed the warden and his Virginia prison,
and he would feel the effects of any libel in Virginia, where he lives
and works. Calder does not sweep that broadly, as we have recog-
nized. For example, in ESAB Group, Inc. v. Centricut, Inc., 126 F.3d
617, 625-26 (4th Cir. 1997), we emphasized how important it is in
light of Calder to look at whether the defendant has expressly aimed
or directed its conduct toward the forum state. We said that
"[a]lthough the place that the plaintiff feels the alleged injury is
plainly relevant to the [jurisdictional] inquiry, it must ultimately be
accompanied by the defendant's own [sufficient minimum] contacts
with the state if jurisdiction . . . is to be upheld." Id. at 626. We thus
had no trouble in concluding in ALS Scan that application of Calder
in the Internet context requires proof that the out-of-state defendant's
Internet activity is expressly targeted at or directed to the forum state.
ALS Scan, 293 F.3d at 714. In ALS Scan we went on to adapt the tra-
ditional standard (set out in part II.A., supra ) for establishing specific
jurisdiction so that it makes sense in the Internet context. We "con-
clude[d] that a State may, consistent with due process, exercise judi-
cial power over a person outside of the State when that person (1)
directs electronic activity into the State, (2) with the manifested intent
of engaging in business or other interactions within the State, and (3)
9
Page 11
that activity creates, in a person within the State, a potential cause of
action cognizable in the State's courts." ALS Scan, 293 F.3d at 714.
When the Internet activity is, as here, the posting of news articles
on a website, the ALS Scan test works more smoothly when parts one
and two of the test are considered together. We thus ask whether the
newspapers manifested an intent to direct their website content —
which included certain articles discussing conditions in a Virginia
prison — to a Virginia audience. As we recognized in ALS Scan, "a
person's act of placing information on the Internet" is not sufficient
by itself to "subject[ ] that person to personal jurisdiction in each
State in which the information is accessed." Id. at 712. Otherwise, a
"person placing information on the Internet would be subject to per-
sonal jurisdiction in every State," and the traditional due process prin-
ciples governing a State's jurisdiction over persons outside of its
borders would be subverted. Id.See also GTE New Media Servs. Inc.
v. Bellsouth Corp., 199 F.3d 1343, 1350 (D.C. Cir. 2000). Thus, the
fact that the newspapers' websites could be accessed anywhere,
including Virginia, does not by itself demonstrate that the newspapers
were intentionally directing their website content to a Virginia audi-
ence. Something more than posting and accessibility is needed to "in-
dicate that the [newspapers] purposefully (albeit electronically)
directed [their] activity in a substantial way to the forum state," Vir-
ginia. Panavision Int'l, L.P. v. Toeppen, 141 F.3d 1316, 1321 (9th
Cir. 1998) (quotation omitted). The newspapers must, through the
Internet postings, manifest an intent to target and focus on Virginia
readers.
We therefore turn to the pages from the newspapers' websites that
Warden Young placed in the record, and we examine their general
thrust and content. The overall content of both websites is decidedly
local, and neither newspaper's website contains advertisements aimed
at a Virginia audience. For example, the website that distributes the
Courant, ctnow.com, provides access to local (Connecticut) weather
and traffic information and links to websites for the University of
Connecticut and Connecticut state government. The Advocate's web-
site features stories focusing on New Haven, such as one entitled
"The Best of New Haven." In sum, it appears that these newspapers
maintain their websites to serve local readers in Connecticut, to
expand the reach of their papers within their local markets, and to
10
Page 12
provide their local markets with a place for classified ads. The web-
sites are not designed to attract or serve a Virginia audience.
We also examine the specific articles Young complains about to
determine whether they were posted on the Internet with the intent to
target a Virginia audience. The articles included discussions about the
allegedly harsh conditions at the Wallens Ridge prison, where Young
was warden. One article mentioned Young by name and quoted a
Connecticut state senator who reported that Young had Confederate
Civil War memorabilia in his office. The focus of the articles, how-
ever, was the Connecticut prisoner transfer policy and its impact on
the transferred prisoners and their families back home in Connecticut.
The articles reported on and encouraged a public debate in Connecti-
cut about whether the transfer policy was sound or practical for that
state and its citizens. Connecticut, not Virginia, was the focal point
of the articles. Cf. Griffis v. Luban, 646 N.W.2d 527, 536 (Minn.
2002) ("The mere fact that [the defendant, who posted allegedly
defamatory statements about the plaintiff on the Internet] knew that
[the plaintiff] resided and worked in Alabama is not sufficient to
extend personal jurisdiction over [the defendant] in Alabama, because
that knowledge does not demonstrate targeting of Alabama as the
focal point of the . . . statements.").
The facts in this case establish that the newspapers' websites, as
well as the articles in question, were aimed at a Connecticut audience.
The newspapers did not post materials on the Internet with the mani-
fest intent of targeting Virginia readers. Accordingly, the newspapers
could not have "reasonably anticipate[d] being haled into court [in
Virginia] to answer for the truth of the statements made in their arti-
cle[s]." Calder, 465 U.S. at 790 (quotation omitted). In sum, the
newspapers do not have sufficient Internet contacts with Virginia to
permit the district court to exercise specific jurisdiction over them.*
____________________________________________________________
* Because the newspapers did not intentionally direct Internet activity
to Virginia, and jurisdiction fails on that ground, we have no need to
explore the last part of the ALS Scan inquiry, that is, whether the chal-
lenged conduct created a cause of action in Virginia. See ALS Scan, 293
F.3d at 714.
11
Page 13
We reverse the order of the district court denying the motions to
dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction made by the New Haven
Advocate, Gail Thompson (its editor), and Camille Jackson (its
reporter) and by the Hartford Courant, Brian Toolan (its editor), and
Amy Pagnozzi (its reporter).
REVERSED
12
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)