I’ve watched Katie’s video on what is happening quite carefully.

Videos like this concern me, because they are sometimes full of drama, and serve to rally people to a cause, but often times offer little of substance, and indeed can be misleading or downright deceitful. This both serves to inflame tensions in situations which should be de-escalated, and to marginalize people with legitimate problems.

Since there’s so much in the video, I think it serves to go through it claim by claim.

“I work for Patheos”
I don’t think who you work for matters in this issue.
For some reason, you seem to make a very big point of it, and seem to be making it essential. This feels to me very much like an appeal to authority, and or an attempt to quell opposition by intimidation.
Since you have decided for whatever reason to insert it into this issue, I feel it must be addressed.
To the best of my knowledge, you are a blogger. Your blog is hosted on Patheos. They host over 450 blogs.
Patheos lists 58 Employees. You are not listed among them.
While your Linked In Profile does say you are a Columnist at Patheos, I can not find where you are said to be in their employ. All I can find is your blog, which that I can tell does not hold a senior place among the others.
Indeed that I can tell most of your work is prefaced with “This is for entertainment only- and the views expressed… are the opinions of Katie Joy”
Can you assist me with this? If this is going to be central to your video, I’d like clarity here.

“(I’ve been at patheos for a year and a half, writer for 5 years, and) I’ve never in my life dealt with the kind of crap that I’ve had to… That I’m going to talk with you about right now”
This is a dramatic claim, and I’d like to highlight it. I’ll be returning to it.

“Because of my affiliation with Kyle, I’ve become the center of an attack”
I do not believe it is your affiliation that resulted in the “attack”.

Katie claims she knew nothing, and that “there was WAY more to the story”. Both can not be true.

“He and his partner… their partnership dissolved… of which I knew nothing, I knew nothing about it”
I’ll be getting back to this claim.

“I have said nothing publicly about it (the dissolution)… in weeks”
This is an interesting point. You seemed to say “nothing about it” and then tacked on “In weeks” a second later. Because indeed you have spoken about it, a key fact you seem to have forgotten. You repeat this later, and again tack on “In weeks” suggesting that you’re well aware you did indeed comment on it. Quite strongly, in fact.

“It’s none of my business”
Agreed. But if you insert yourself into it, or defend one side, elevate the position of a side, speak for or represent a side, you’ve made it your business.
You can not engage in it, then later pretend you did not engage, and wonder why people think you’re involved.
You’ve irrefutably involved yourself into this. More on that presently.

“People affiliated with (Steve) have taken the time and effort to create a Gmail account with my brand… my name”
As a journalist, I hope you understand the importance of being precise and clear. This is a staggering accusation.
While indeed it is irrefutable that the creators of these accounts are for Steve’s position, I see no evidence that they are affiliated with Steve. They may well be. However, they may also not.
Do you have any evidence that they are affiliated with Steve whatsoever?

“My image… is federally copyrighted… and owned by Pathos”
All works are automatically considered copyrighted, and protected by copyright law, when they are made. All copyrights are recognized at the federal level. The word “federally copyrighted” is meaningless in any legal sense that I am aware of.

“They’re saying it’s a comedy or parody… it’s not a parody twitter account”
False. They claimed “Commentary” and parody, not comedy. And they are indeed engaged in commentary, and can use your image under fair use for that purpose.
Am I misunderstanding the Fair Use exemptions? Am I misunderstanding “commentary?”

“They are engaged in defamation”
More on this later.

“Sharing things that I might say online”
I’ve no idea how to parse this sentence. It seems to me that things are either said or not said, unless these are Schrodinger comments.

“Stealing my logo is copyright infringement… and I have an entire legal team…”
I believe you said earlier it belongs to Patheos, not you.
Further, it’s not theft if it falls under fair use.
Lastly, since this dispute arose from actions you took outside of your connection with Patheo’s, I question whether they’d bring their legal team in. They’ve 450 blogs to cover. I suspect they’re cautious with the disputes they engage in. Even an employee may not get legal representation from Patheos, and again I’m not convinced you’re an employee.

“You would have no way to know that this account is not me.”
That I can tell it speaks about “Katie” in the third person. Very few people speak about themselves negatively and in the third person. I don’t think any court would acknowledge possible confusion here and find this statement indefensible.

“They are reaching out to business partners of mine… pretending to be me.”
This is unacceptable. This is never acceptable. I stand shoulder to shoulder with you in condemning this kind of action. I know for a fact Steve will too.

  1. Do you know that the owner of this twitter account did these things.
  2. Can you support your prior claim that this is an affiliate of Steve?

Regardless, I condemn it in the strongest possible way, and if I had any knowledge which would assist in determining who had done that, I would hand it over.
As it stands, I do not.

“(they are trying to) dox (me)”
Doxing is “search for and publish private or identifying information about (a particular individual) on the Internet, typically with malicious intent.” Nothing you’ve claimed in this video falls under that category. You already are identified, and no private information has been released to my knowledge.
I am profoundly concerned. As a journalist and advocate, I would expect more precision from you in matters such as this.

“If I was targeted… because you think I’m weak… or because I’m a woman”
This is a profound straw man. I see no evidence of this, and others have been attacked on both sides of this issue. No idea why you’re inserting gender into this. You’ve engaged in this issue and mad claims on behalf of one side against the other.
Disingenuous, at best, to insert dubious and underhanded claims of possible sexism.

“This is my brand (and I protect it)”
Yes, and when you speak, you represent yourself and your brand. If you say things that are unsubstantiated or take sides in a dispute, there will be benefits and consequences. Protecting your brand isn’t just reacting to attacks, it’s being careful what you say in the first place.

“I will show you who’s following this page… I know who you are and what you are doing.”

  1. In your own screenshot the Twitter account refers to “Katie Paulson, aka ‘Without a Crystal Bal’” in the third person and with a negative opinion. Nobody could possibly think this was you. This undermines your prior claim.
  2. “They have blocked me, so I can’t even respond to them”
    Perhaps. Care to open up the comments section of your YouTube video so I may post my response?

“They’ve created other accounts… in the likeness of other people associated with Kyle.”
Yes, this does start to smack of Harassment, and I’d be opposed to it. I was unable to interpret your screenshot so as to see if that is the case”

“They say I state opinion as fact”
I believe I’ve sufficiently demonstrated here enough times where this has happened to substantiate such a claim.

“Here are the people following that person”
I must say this smacks an awful lot of the “Doxing” that you’re upset about. How is this different from what you claim they are doing? Why show this information, if it’s not to illicit some kind of retaliation against them.
This is profoundly troubling.

“(this account has) commented on things Steve McRea says”
1) Yes. And in the third person. Claims that they’re pretending to be you is utterly indefensible.
2) A lot of people comment on what Steve says. Clearly this account supports Steve. That it’s affiliated with him is another matter.

“I know nothing about the funding that’s going on between these two people”
My advice, then, is to not claim that you do.

Katie claims she’s not involved. Yet she seems to have deliberately engaged, in a hostile way, against Steve, interrogating him.

“I am literally not involved in any of this”
That is 100% false. You’ve made claims on behalf, either directly or indirectly, for Kyle against Steve. This statement is a lie. You involved yourself.

“Bullying and harassing… contacting my business partners (is unacceptable)”
Agreed. Both are unacceptable.
Not a big fan of suggesting to people that you can bring a multi-billion dollar corporation down on their head for what you personally consider to be a violation of fair use, come to that.

“Somebody from that email and from that twitter account contacted (my associates) pretending to be me”
At this point, I’m having difficulty saying I’d take anything you say at face value. At a minimum it seems to me you are misrepresenting yourself, your involvement, and Steve McRae. Worse the only evidence you give here that this happened is hearsay.

“Twitter is not going to take this seriously”
I agree. I suspect that’s because nothing you’ve demonstrated here is illegal.
I must concur. It seems you’re presenting a great many opinions as facts.

“(please consider) what it is when you’re taking your personal, online fights, and impacting people’s lives”
Agreed. Did you publicly repeat, as fact, claims that Steve McRae was attempting to defraud the VA, claims you had not verified?
Do you believe these claims might have an impact in McRae’s life?

“That’s Doxing”
No. It is not.

“I can file a police report against any of you”
You can. DM me, and I’ll give you may name, phone number, and address for service. But I was not even aware of this account until I saw your video.
But file away. I couldn’t be less impressed with these threats.

“My brand is more important than a petty argument on YouTube”
My advice, then, is don’t jump into those petty arguments.

“None of (my success with various media companies” would be possible unless I was doing my due diligence as a blogger”
1) No. Plenty of frauds have made it to the highest levels of magazines and media. This is an argument from authority.
2) I’ve no experience with your prior work. Here, in this instance, however, you appear not to have lived up to the standards you are claiming.

“I’ve had anti-vaxers who are 20x more unstable than you guys do the craziest shit to me”
Okay, which is it. Is this the worst you’ve ever had as you’ve claimed several times (as I noted above), or is this nothing compared to what you’ve been through?
I’m sorry, this feels like a deliberate escalation of the drama and talking out both sides of your mouth.

“This could go to a federal lawsuit”
No, it could not.

“They’re impersonating me”
No, this twitter account is not impersonating you.

“They’re not parodying me. This is Doxing”
This is commentary, and they’re within the law. If there’s doxing here, you’ve failed to demonstrate it.

I’m becoming less and less convinced you know what these words mean, or that you’ve a rudimentary understanding of the law is it applies to copyright.

“I’ve never doxed anyone, never tried to do a blast”
By you own definitions, You literally did it 5 minutes ago in the video and showed everyone who follows the account.
Further, I was in one of the clips you showed. I did a post, Steve commented on the post, and this account retweeted it.
By the way you showed it, your viewers might easily assume I follow the account, because I can be seen in the retweet.
Yet I do not know of this account, and never even heard of it till your video.
By your definition, you have doxed me (unless there’s a double standard here).

Katie accuses Steve of fraud. She also claims not to have chosen a side, and to know nothing about the financials. The anger towards her now, she claims, is because she’s a woman.

“I know nothing about where the money is going”
Then why did you claim as fact you knew Steve was going to get paid. You can not make claims you know where the money is going, and then get upset when people hold you to those claims. Further, claiming you do not now nor did you ever know what you claimed strikes me as a staggering blow to your credibility.

One of the claims you’ve made here must be false.

I can only speak for myself, but I must say, at this point you have absolutely no journalistic integrity at this point. Integrity would be to come out and admit you took sides, you shouldn’t have, apologize, and walk away. Instead you appear to me to be rewriting history and massively escalating the drama of what is admittedly inappropriate behavior.

“Steve made comments to me that were inappropriate comments”
Perhaps. First, I see no evidence, secondly this is a downgrade of your prior charge that you were sexually harassed. Which claim is accurate? Why have you changed it?

“Women (in this industry are harassed) by men”
By women too, and sometimes for sexist reasons, sometimes it’s real. Lets deal with the issues, not cry sexism. I think there are legit complaints, and this is looking like a game of three card monte, where the issues are being hidden or re-directed.

It is possible for men to have litigate complaints against a woman.

“Steve told me Rape Culture doesn’t exist”
1) Is saying this, by your standard, doxing? If so, how? If not, why is someone else repeating your statements doxing? I’d like to understand your standard better.
2) This is indeed a difficult statement to swallow. Was there a context? You’ve asked for a forum to reply to charges… Will you let Steve reply to this? You’ve closed your comments.

“So we’re going to make all these accounts to destroy her financially”
1) You’re now explicitly implying Steve is responsible for this. Do you have any evidence whatsoever supporting this claim
2) You’re suggesting too that this is because you were a rape victim. This is a STAGGERING claim. There are legitimate complaints against statements you’ve made in the past, but you’re denying you made them, and saying this is happening because you’re a victim of rape.

Do I understand your argument correctly?

“All I said was I don’t like him”
That’s not remotely close to all you said. You accused him of fraud and sexual harassment. You also spoke on behalf of Kyle, saying Steve would get every penny.

“People go into the live chat and say nasty things about me”
The comments you describe are unacceptable and unproductive. You have every right to be upset.
I will not engage in that kind of behavior. I have called your integrity into question, but that is a factual matter I believe I can (and indeed have) supported. You’ve said you’re happy to respond to legitimate complaints and criticisms. I believe I’ve levied a few here, and would like to discuss these with you.

And when Chesire Viq entered the chat to ask a question about your dubious claims, you directly accused her of being involved in this, with no evidence.

 

 

Conclusion
Katie was a host on a number of NonSequitor episodes. When the split happened, she inserted herself into the dispute. She told Steve, on behalf of Kyle, that he would get all his money. When Steve was incredulous, she said that Kyle had tried to pay him, and accused Steve of Fraud and later of Sexual Harassment. Now that is is apparent that Kyle has spent the money, and that he was mismanaging the finances, she claims that this was none of her business, she did not involve herself, and she does not now nor did she ever know anything about the finances or say anything negative towards Steve. She claims that this backlash may be because she’s a woman. She is threatening all involved (and who follow a particular twitter account) with legal action for harassment and copyright infringement.

 

2
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
2 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
2 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
2 Comment authors
SteveCheshireviq Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Steve
Member

I approve. All of it. Thank you for summarizing this very effectively and succinctly.

Cheshireviq
Member

Looks great. I really like the format grin