Fairness in Cannabis News Coverage: an open letter to the Editor of the Willamette Week

To the Editor:

I write specifically to address the Willamette Week’s unbalanced coverage of the letter sent by the Oregon Cannabis Association and the Cannabis Industry Association of Oregon relative to HB 3183 (which would mandate labor peace agreements and non-opposition to labor organizing in licensed cannabis businesses), and generally to criticize this news organization’s misfocus and seeming bias relative to the latest La Mota-Fagan-etc scandal, which detracts from the real scandal in the news of late: the OLCC audit revealing that the OLCC and the Oregon government in general, from 2016 to the present, have at best completely failed to support Oregon’s fledgling recreational cannabis industry, and have at worst actively undermined it, comparing unfavorably to the state governments of other states.

(I’ll put it to you like this: in wine, there are a choice few, top level, what the kids call “S-tier” regions: Champagne, Napa Valley, Tuscany, Bordeaux, to name a few. In weed, there’s one S-tier region: Oregon. Now imagine a Napa County Council where 90% of the councilors don’t know there’s a difference between Chardonnay and Cabernet and 99% of them are teetotalers. That’s what this audit suggests about Oregon’s treatment of its marijuana industry.)

In its headline, the Willamette Week article accuses the cannabis industry of being “an Industry Fighting Against the Unionization of Cannabis Workers” (as opposed to what other industry that is union-friendly?), and links industry opposition to the bill to La Mota, OCA, CIAO, etc. The WW article states, “Normally, labor-friendly bills sail through the Democratically dominated Capitol, but Selvaggio says HB 3183 remains mired in the House Rules Committee,” which is “bizarre and frustrating.” Unmentioned by the Willamette Week article is the fact that no other industry in Oregon that I’m aware of has similar labor peace requirements, making the fact that HB 3183 is not “sailing through” less bizarre than it might otherwise seem. While mentioning that fact might detract from the implication of the Willamette Week article – that the marijuana industry is shady and uniquely anti-labor – it certainly lends important context, especially because that is one of the reasons OCA and CIAO cite for opposing the bill.

Personally, I’m sticking with the union ‘til the day I die, so I hope HB 3183 passes (although having OLCC involved in labor disputes will be a shitshow) and that Oregon labor organizations go on to both unionize the cannabis industry and all other Oregon industries. It seems like UFCW 555 picked a good strategy: target an industry with little to no political power and (I’m hoping) use reform there as a springboard to require stronger labor protections in other industries. The union lobbyist quoted in the article appears to implicitly recognize the cannabis industry’s limited political power: even La Mota, that gave so much money to so many politicians, didn’t have enough juice to “stop the bills they don’t like’, because they weren’t giving enough to do that.” (This of course begs the question, who *IS* giving enough to stop the bills they don’t like? Is that really how Oregon politics works?)

But he’s right: neither La Mota, nor any other Oregon cannabis business or association, has the political juice to get what they need in Salem. Cannabis businesses must contend with burdens that are unique to them: double income taxation, no interstate commerce, lack of good banking access, the list goes on. Maybe 30% of cannabis businesses are profitable. In what other industry are so few businesses profitable? Southern Oregon organic farmers produce a world-class product that you can buy for around $2/gram. What is the parallel to that? Imagine Ken Wright barely squeaking by, hawking bottles for $5 each, with regulators who treat him like a criminal and he can go to jail and lose his whole operation if he sends one case out of state. The cannabis industry is underfunded and therefore under-represented: a soft target for labor efforts, and one can’t begrudge UFCW 555 for taking advantage of the opportunity.

The cannabis industry is also a soft target for scandalous news headlines. Don’t misinterpret me: Sophie Peel’s reporting on La Mota and Shemia Fagan has been an incredible public service and resulted in the rightful ouster of a corrupt politician. But to the extent this paper has conflated the rest of the industry, including the OCA and CIAO, with those bad actors, and to the extent this paper has impugned the integrity of the results of the audit because of La Mota’s corrupt influence on Fagan, the paper’s coverage has done a disservice to the good people of the Oregon cannabis industry who have toiled for years to provide Oregonians with the highest quality cannabis products at the lowest prices in the country, for little if any return.

We love the golden eggs, but we neglect the golden goose. And ironically, this is true for the paper itself. Perhaps it is fair to mention at this point that the Willamette Week has certainly not gone out of business as a result of its coverage of cannabis and cannabis-related scandals – the type of exposure from a story like La Mota/Fagan undoubtedly sells a lot of ads. And the Willamette Week itself has also directly profited from cannabis trafficking: from 2016 to 2020, the paper put on an event called the Cultivation Classic, where it trafficked more than a quarter ounce of cannabis to each of more than a hundred judges per year, and made a tidy profit by putting on events to celebrate the results of the judging. Should the paper then be considered a drug trafficker and be disallowed its regular business deductions under IRC 280E? The law is unjust, but this is a fact of life for cannabis businesses that report their drug trafficking activities. Would having to share this unjust burden result in more balanced coverage?

Additionally, the Willamette Week’s intense focus on La Mota and Fagan leaves almost no room to discuss how the Oregon government, from 2016 to the present, systematically failed to support Oregon’s cannabis industry. The three key leaders of Oregon’s government during the relevant period were OLCC Executive Director Steve Marks, Governor Kate Brown, and Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum. Because of the total focus on La Mota and Fagan (not totally unjustified, I might add), these leaders have largely escaped scrutiny for their part in Oregon’s cannabis debacle. Only one of them remains in power, and she happens to be married to one of the owners of the Willamette Week. I respectfully urge this paper to hold these leaders to account more fully than it so far has, both because how they have failed the Oregon cannabis industry is newsworthy, but also because it would dispel any appearance of impropriety or bias that might detract from the paper’s important journalistic mission.

All I am asking is that the Willamette Week tell the whole story, and not ignore the audit results that show how Oregon’s government, from 2016 to the present, has failed our cannabis industry. Whatever input La Mota had into the audit, even a broken clock is right twice a day. Shemia Fagan failed our state by moonlighting for a bad cannabis company, but Oregon politicians have been failing the cannabis industry for years, and by extension, failing the state of Oregon, which deserves to have a state government that supports the Oregon cannabis industry reaching its full potential, not one that strangles it in the cradle.

Sincerely,

Andrew DeWeese

(A note: after I sent this to the WW, the editor invited me to write them a letter of 250 words or less to be considered for publication. I decline to do so and instead publish it here.)