Paul Levy Speaks Out Barnes Foundation, Art Of The Steal Review Flap
On Monday, we passed along an item the originally ran on Gawker, which accused Inky film critic Carrie Rickey of failing to disclose a possible conflict of interest when she reviewed The Art Of The Steal, the controversial new documentary about the Barnes Foundation‘s move from Merion to its future home on the Benjamin Franklin Parkway (a drawing of which is pictured at right). Her conflict was said to be that her husband was Paul Levy, President & CEO of the Center City District, and given any presumed dinner table conversations between the two over the years, she was bound to have some kind of perspective on the matter; and the charge was that she’d be favorable to the move because hey, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
Since then, we’ve been in touch with both Levy and Rickey, who maintain that no conflict of interest whatsoever exists. (Gawker has since ran a retraction of sorts, and we’ve updated our original post, feeling heartily sorry for ever trusting Gawker’s fact-checking skills.) But in an issue already laden with controversy, it’s been interesting to see the ways in which Barnes controversy sparks out almost wherever the issue touches down. We were lucky enough in the process of all of this to talk with Levy (and Rickey, though she declined to go on the record) about the Center City District’s place in the battle over the Barnes. He was frank with us in his assertion that the CCD never lobbied in any way to have the Barnes moved downtown. By his count, he says, the CCD never would have had any authority to do so anyway. But this isn’t to say that what happens on the Parkway doesn’t have some bearing on what the CCD does.
“Part of the problem,” said Levy, “is seeing this only through the frame of the Barnes issue. In my professional capacity, I have been an advocate for more development on the Benjamin Franklin Parkway in Philadelphia, long before the issue of the Barnes location ever came up. My organization has released two plans for improving the Parkway – one in 1999 and one in 2003 – both proposing filling in unfinished pieces of a cultural district created in the City Beautiful era 1907-1917.”
Levy went on to explain the CCD’s overall role: “The CCD is a downtown management organization that seeks to improve and animate public spaces. On the Parkway we’ve installed new information panels, directional signs and pedestrian light fixtures; illuminated the facades of cultural institutions and sculptures, renovated two parks, built a café and are working on a new environmental education park for children. As advocates for filling in empty spaces on the Parkway so there is more pedestrian activity, we suggested new residential development (hasn’t happened), a new Calder family museum (didn’t happen) and were publicly supportive of the Barnes Foundation when it announced its move. But neither I nor anyone on my staff had any role at all (let alone any authority) to recommend, lobby or cause the Barnes Foundation, its board, or local foundations to decide to move to the Parkway.”
Ultimately, though, whether the Barnes was moved here or not has no real effect on Center City District’s bottom line anyway. “The CCD is supported by assessments on taxable real estate,” he said, “and the Barnes is tax-exempt.”
March 3rd, 2010 at 1:24 pm
She should have mentioned the connection simply to avoid this whole issue. I don’t see that either party acted in any unethical manner, but neglecting to mention the connection makes you wonder why.
It’s called full disclosure, and people writing on financial and business matters do it all the time, even if their subject seems benign.
In addition, I find the statement that the CCD doesn’t stand to gain from an improved Parkway disingenuous.
March 3rd, 2010 at 1:26 pm
Yeah, the disinfectant of sunlight, as the Prez says. Still, Levy has been fighting the good fight for decades. His teaching and professional record in and on behalf of Philly is highly commendable.
March 3rd, 2010 at 1:59 pm
CCD might not receive any direct revenues from the Barnes, but it would obviously benefit from increased tourism in the way of hotels, restaurants and shops in center city.
March 3rd, 2010 at 4:29 pm
@ekr103: Only if that tourism increase translates into sizeable increases of real estate values within the CCD’s District (along with timely reassessments by the BRT). Seems a mighty feat for a small museum. As Levy points out, CCD’s hardly a player in the Barnes drama.
March 3rd, 2010 at 5:11 pm
At this stage in the game, the Barnes issue is just a PR war with neither side having any hope of affecting anything other than public support. So, as far as that’s concerned, I would think Levy should be the one needing to disclose the fact that his wife is a film critic who didn’t like ‘The Art of the Steal’ so it doesn’t affect his job on the CCD.
March 3rd, 2010 at 5:23 pm
Another example of the Barnes Maniacs trying to plant a lie in the press. In this case Gawker and Philebrity bought it. As I type construction crews are securing the foundation for the new museum on the Parkway. Soon, art lovers of all kind will be able to enjoy one of the greatest private art collections while the elitists and entitled of Lower Merion will do what they always do and will do forever and ever: Cry, bitch, complain, condemn, moan and groan.
March 3rd, 2010 at 6:15 pm
@iamdante,
I wouldn’t consider myself a “Barnes maniac” by any means, just a person who’s willing to respect the wishes of a man’s last will and testament. Don’t live in Lower Merion either, I live in South Philly. I’ve rode my bike to the Barnes on numerous occasions, it takes all of about 30 minutes and is a very nice and scenic ride. Art lovers of all kinds were already able to enjoy those works of arts. That is unless they were lazy shits like yourself, in which case…probably not a true art lover. I guess in your mind though what ever is “right” is what ever is easier for you to access. Seriously… go fuck yourself, preferably with a rusty knife.
March 3rd, 2010 at 6:55 pm
This would all be fine if her piece read like a film review and not like a guilt ridden center city district brochure.
I’m all for making the parkway great, but the rest of the country is laughing at us right now about the Barnes. The Barnes is already here… When people come to visit the Barnes, they don’t stay in Merion.
I live in Philly and I’m kind of embarrassed. Paul Levy, you should do all you can to help Philly not look ridiculous on this one.
March 3rd, 2010 at 10:25 pm
The Barniacs above have spoken with their petty and twisted insults, strange unsubstantiated claims, their weird views of the law, and crazy hyperbole. Nothing that they could ever verify. In the end it’s their elitism and their crazy rhetoric on full display above that shows the world the embarrassment they are.
True justice would be that the original Barnes home be turned into a housing development to piss off the elitist, cranky neighbors; the bigoted Barniacs go nowhere near the new, beautiful Barnes museum (or better yet, they stand outside screaming insults at the persons they have shown hate for–again see above), and Robert Zaller’s head would explode.
March 3rd, 2010 at 10:35 pm
iamdante,
I believe that you and I think alike. I love the term “Barniacs.” I’m not one of them. I’m a young broke guy from South Philly. I agree with you about the neighbors… but disagree about the move. I responded to one of your posts in the other comments below this moivie’s trailer from a while back. I just searched “Art of the Steal” on Philebrity. Check it out if you feel like it.
All of us who think the Barnes shouldn’t move have been dubbed crazy rich people with bad hair.
March 4th, 2010 at 11:06 pm
As a reader of the Philadelphia Inquirer, I am highly offended that in her review of The Art of the Steal, Carrie Rickey concealed her marriage to Paul Levy. When I first read her review, it seemed like a strange cross between a movie review and a press release written by a publicist for the Center City District. Now that Rickey has been exposed as the wife of the head of the Center City District, she owes an apology to the entire readership of the paper.
March 5th, 2010 at 1:41 am
In response to a tipster outing her, Carrie Rickey has finally confessed on her blog (but not as far as I know in the print version of “The Philadelphia Inquirer”) that she is in fact married to Paul Levy, President of the Center City District.
However, Ms. Rickey continues to defiantly deny that she did anything wrong by failing to voluntarily disclose this salient fact to readers in conjunction with her review of “The Art of the Steal,” which coincidentally (give me a break) trumpets the same position espoused by the Center City District. Incredibly Ms. Rickey is still sticking to her far-fetched story that she had no idea that her husband was a major proponent of the Barnes move (Ms. Rickey’s level of cynicism recalls the classic scene in “Casablanca,” in which Claude Raines tells Humphrey Bogart, “I’m shocked-there’s gambling going on here.” LOL)
Here is Ms. Rickey’s mind-boggling quote:
“Yes, I am married to Paul Levy of the Center City District. It’s news to me that he is a major proponent of the Barnes move.”
http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/flickgrrl/The_Art_of_the_Steal_Barnes-storming.html
News to you? Come on Ms. Rickey–don’t let the truth get in your way. How could you not know this? Your claim is totally unbelievable. It’s not exactly a state secret that your husband has been a big champion of the Barnes move, both in print as well as at public forums. After all, it’s Mr. Levy’s job to act as an advocate of the Barnes move to the Center City District. In addition to being the head of the Center City District, Mr. Levy is on the Parkway Council Foundation’s Board of Directors whose mission is to enhance and promote the Parkway. Mr. Levy sits on the board with Derrick Gillman, President of the Barnes Foundation. If Ms. Rickey is right and Mr. Levy isn’t a big proponent of the Barnes move, then he is stealing his paycheck.
Note that before this whole controversy around Ms. Rickey’s lapse in journalistic ethics erupted, Mr. Levy had been scheduled to speak at a screening of “The Art of The Steal” at the Bryn Mawr Film Institute. This fact was reported in Ms. Rickey’s own paper, “The Philadelphia Inquirer.”
http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/onmovies
All this certainly makes any reasonable person doubt the honesty of Ms. Rickey’s contention that somehow she didn’t even know that her husband was a big proponent of the Barnes move to the Center City District.
Mr. Levy appears at the public events, such as the screening of “The Art of the Steal,” to act as a vocal proponent of the Barnes move and to shoot down the premise of the film. That seems obvious to everyone except Ms. Rickey.
Of course, if Ms. Rickey didn’t harbor a hidden personal agenda, why didn’t she just allow one of the other writers at “The Philadelphia Inquirer” review “The Art of the Steal”?
March 5th, 2010 at 6:03 pm
You Barniacs make me laugh. Long-winded speeches, hyperbole and lies to distract the fact that no one cares about the stupid little lie of a movie. Rickey’s review was rather nice, I thought. Gawker and Philebrity were duped by lying, crazy Barniacs. They both cleared the air but the Barniacs continue to lie, grandstand and spread their hate rhetoric while the world shrugs, except for me: I laugh at the loonies. Passed the new Barnes site on the Parway and construction work continues at full speed. LOL!!!!!
March 6th, 2010 at 12:15 am
iamdante: You persistently defend Carrie Rickey’s journalistic misbehavior by launching unprovoked personal attacks at everyone who disagrees with you and has concluded that she was wrong to conceal her marriage to Paul Levy. You claim that they must all be crazy, nutty, Barnes maniacs who sees a conspiracy lurking behind every corner. Why would you leap to such baseless conclusions? You are way off base. I am definitely not a Barniac. And I don’t have any paranoid fears that people are conspiring against me. I haven’t even seen the film and can’t say whether it is any good. However, I do know that what Carrie Rickey did was very wrong. If Carrie Rickey had an opinion about the Barnes Foundation, she could have written an editorial not pose as a critic who is assessing “The Art of the Steal” as a film. Even if Carrie Rickey was going to write an editorial rather than pose as a reviewer of the film itself, then she still needed to divulge that she was married to Paul Levy, whose organization officially supports the move to the Parkway. You don’t need to be a Barniac or a conspiracy theorist to recognize that what Carrie Rickey did was very wrong.
March 8th, 2010 at 4:09 pm
I usually get a big kick out of snarkiness of your website. However I am really disappointed by your coverage of Carrie Rickey’s hiding of her marriage to Paul Levy. His job is to advocate in support of the Barnes move. I am especially disappointed at how easily you rolled over to help Rickey and Levy to whitewash the whole ugly affair. The Art of the Steal movie, reviewed by Rickey is a small-budget locally-made documentary which suggests that some powerful politicians had conspired to move the Barnes Museum.
gawker.com broke the story that Rickey had concealed her marriage to Paul Levy who is the powerful head of the Center City District and is politically connected to the very people lambasted in The Art of the Steal. In the interests of fair play, in an update of the original posting, gawker.com allowed Rickey to post her written defense of allegations of unethical conduct on her part. Rickey’s written statement offered the lame distinction that her husband did not publicly advocate for the Barnes move until the court case ended. She did not and could not deny accusations that as soon as the court case ended, her husband become an active proponent of the Barnes move that his political conies had engineered. In her written statement, Rickey insisted that despite her husband’s official opposition to the premise of the film, she was still entitled to conceal her marriage to Levy from the public while reviewing the film.
After posting Rickey’s written statement,gawker.com concluded that in their opinion since Levy is an advocate of the Barnes move, Rickey had erred by not disclosing her marriage to Levy. gawker.com definitely didn’t buy Rickey’s lame defense. gawker.com definitely never retracted their original story. They merely updated their original story to allow Rickey to state her defense. Ultimately, gawker.com rejected the legitimacy of Rickey’s defense as any responsible journalist would.
Initially, you guys cited the story which had previously run on gawker.com on your website.
Then all hell apparently broke loose. The politically connected Levy and Rickey contacted philebrity.com and bitched about the fact that you had cited the report posted on gawker.com, which had revealed Rickey’ marriage to Levy and had exposed her apparent conflict of interest. OK I wasn’t there—so it’s just speculation on my part. But I’d be willing to bet that Levy and Rickey reduced you poor guys to a bloody pulp and left you cowering in the corner like a litter of beaten puppies. It definitely seems that you got scared and agreed to post a disgustingly fawning apology to Levy and his wife on your website. philebrity.com also apparently agreed to plant a false story on your website that gawker.com had retracted their original story as inaccurate. If you read the posting at gawker.com, then you know that no such thing ever happened. Your account is factually wrong.
Instead of confronting Rickey about her bogus claim that Levy is not engaged as an advocate of the Barnes move, philebrity.com bizarrely granted her confidential informant status. Is she the subject of allegations of journalistic attempts to suppress a little indie documentary about the corruption of her husband’s political cronies or is she Deep Throat?
How does it qualify as principled journalism on your part to falsely report that gawker.com had retracted their story when they actually never had? Aiding and abetting Rickey’s journalistic whitewash of the corruption of her husband’s political cronies really destroys your own credibility.
This real story here isn’t about whether or not the Barnes Museum should move. Maybe it should and maybe it shouldn’t. I’m not smart enough to unravel that thorny issue. The real story is about how a politically connected insider conspired with his ethically compromised wife to gang up and squash a little indie documentary which exposed the abuse of power of his political allies. It’s sad that you guys whimped out and allowed Levy and Rickey to bully you guys into helping them whitewash their wrongdoing.
I hope that you guys will recognize you blew it big time. You should show a little bit of backbone. Next time you are confronted by bullies don’t be such chickens. Meanwhile, you should at least correct your factually inaccurate report that gawker.com had retracted their story. That is unless you are still cowering in the corner like a litter of beaten puppies afraid that Levy, Rickey and their political cronies will return to threaten you with further reprisals.
We shall see what you guys are made of. I hope that you won’t let us down.
March 10th, 2010 at 2:39 pm
@ sirensca. Thank you for explaining the curious background for philebrity backtracking on the Carrie Rickey scandal. Thank you for clarifying it. It is sad that philebrity got scared off the story by Paul Levy. Like you I hope that philebrity will have the gumption to retract their retraction. Maybe it is too embarrassing for philebrity to do it.
March 11th, 2010 at 11:57 pm
Nice work, Sirensca. You finally shut up that lying a-hole, Dante.
March 13th, 2010 at 12:11 am
@sirensca
A long-winded crock of Barniac shit. Hyperbolic, senseless, barley intelligible. Typical.