Gay marriage
May. 21st, 2004 05:26 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Yay!
My article on the Gay Marriage Celebration was published:
http://www.lasvegasmercury.com/2004/MERC-May-20-Thu-2004/23904048.html
My article on the Gay Marriage Celebration was published:
http://www.lasvegasmercury.com/2004/MERC-May-20-Thu-2004/23904048.html
no subject
Date: 2004-05-21 02:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-21 02:51 pm (UTC)(why did they have to use the pics of the ugly ladies?!?!?)
no subject
Date: 2004-05-21 03:29 pm (UTC)congratulations jef!
no subject
Date: 2004-05-22 07:39 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-22 09:31 am (UTC)but true......they do look amazingly happy i think that where the true beauty comes in.
gay marriage is good.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-22 10:35 am (UTC)Those chicks are positively BEAMING. :)
no subject
Date: 2004-05-22 03:18 pm (UTC)I would have gone with the "yay!" picture if I were the editor. I loved that one.
-Barb, who's a little homesick.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-22 04:12 pm (UTC)I think the editor probably thought that it didn't really reflect the actual happenings. I mean, it could have been anyone, anywhere holding up a sign that said "YAY!"
no subject
Date: 2004-05-24 07:36 am (UTC)I agree about the "yay" picture, but I understand why they went with the one they did. The "yay" one (which I have as my wallpaper at work) could be anywhere, but the one they chose has the place and time right there on a homemade hat. A newspaperman's dream, I suppose.
How d'ya like my spider face icon?
what's with this anonymouse crap?
Date: 2004-05-24 08:33 am (UTC)One of the pictures that didn't run was of the same idiots, who shall never receive donuts, protesting a high school production of the Laramie Project. They had some of the same damn signs.
Anyway, I see a lot of "why the hell did they do it that way" comments, and I was finally in a position to answer.
Now if you'll all excuse me, I'm off to have another horrible procedure inflicted up my nostrils. Ciao.