June 13, 2003
David Wood, Publisher
CJ Williamson, Editor
Classical Singer Corporation
1204 West South Jordan Parkway
Suite C
South Jordan, Utah 84095
ID: 5253467-0142
REACTION OF JULY 2002 CLASSICAL SINGER ARTICLE WHAT WENT WRONG WITH THE MAJORIE LAWRENCE COMPEITION
Dear Mr. Wood & Ms. Williamson,
I am writing to bring to your attention certain factual inconsistencies with an article published in July 2002 issue of Classical Singer Magazine. The article concerns certain events surrounding the 2001 Marjorie Lawrence Vocal Competition.
I am writing specifially to address those portions of the article which affect me and Opera Music Theater International (OMTI). I believe the article contained numerous false statements and its overall effect misleads the readers as well as painting me in a false light. As provided below, the actual facts were not accurately reported.
This letter will provide the other side of the story to the article. I believe it is in the interest of all concerned to remove the cloud of doubt which has been placed over me due to the article. The article not only has hurt me personally, but the false light it places me in, if left unchallenged, would hurt my reputation as well as the reputation of everyone involved in the competition.
I am a long time supporter of Classical Singer Magazine. OMTI has been a loyal advertiser with Classical Singer Magazine for more than three years. I have found that Classical Singer Magazine almost always allows for fair and balanced reporting.
We can agree that the opera community must be warry of any attempts by investigative reporters, editors and publishers to sensationalize stories by reporting statements which are not the whole truth. No good reporter would want to deliberately ignore facts and cause discredit to be placed upon opera organizations or artists individually.
There have been a few articles throughout the years that needed corrections, and Classical Singer Magazine has made those corrections. In this instance I am requesting that he whole story be provided to Classical Singers readers and more of the people involved in the competition allowed to provide the factual details which are missing from the article to allow Classical Singers readers to truly understand the situation.
1.) The winners of the competition were paid. It did take some time, however, by the first week of April 2002, an OMTI board member informed the author of the article that the winners were paid. In addition, the board of directors of OMTI and our attorney faxed letters to editor CJ Williamson and publisher David Wood. Classical Singer Magazine was notified by certified and signature confirmations letters that the winners were paid.
Unfortunately, there must have been a mix up because the article reported that Classical Singer was unaware if the winners were paid “at the time of writing”. We should correct this matter as soon as possible because the article made it seem that OMTI did not pay the singers. The singers have been paid and the magazine should print a follow up as soon as possible to correct this known error.
2.) The article also informs the readers that I was taking no action to raise the funds needed to pay the contestants, or communicate with the winners on the status of their awards. This is not true. I informed Classical Singer that I had secured additional funding and that it was pending at the end of March 2002.
Ms. Gunnell was specifically informed that the Independent Order of Odd Fellows had delivered check #1309 underwriting the Metropolitan Opera judges, the Master Classes, and the Winners Concert was one of our Official Sponsors. In a 10 to 1 Advertising Match, our Official Sponsors appeared in full page advertisements announcing the winners of the competition per our agreement. There was apparently a mix-up because Classical Singer Magazine, was unaware of the contents of that advertisement prior to the publication of the article.
3.) One of the most hurtful to me, and my reputation, was the allegation that I was not responding to requests from winners for information about their awards. Nothing could be further from the truth. I called competition winner Charles Reid, his voice teacher Dominic Cossa, and Judge Ryan Edward to inform them that I was working as hard as I could to raise the prize money that had been promised. I assured them that I would do everything in my power to honor those debts, and I did. I explained that it was an unfortunate matter which made it impossible to provide the money at the competition, due to a failure of the principal fund raiser to come through on his promises.
Most importantly, on the 7th of December, 2001, I sent a letter to all the winners giving them my personal assurance that I was in the process of raising the money and that they would all be paid. I invited all of them to contact me if they had any further questions or concerns. Each of the winners trusted me and my word and I came through for them.
4.) I also felt that the article failed to accurately state my intentions. The article alleged that I never had any intention of paying the winners. Moreover, Ms. Gunnell chose to place the word “fraud” throughout the article which gives the readers the idea that the Competition was somehow fraudulent. This type of reporting was unneccessary. I want to be perfectly clear, no person ever suggested that the Competiton was anything other than what was advertised: A competition judged by experts to determine the finest young vocalists.
Everything that was advertised was accomplished and the reality did live up to the promise. I felt I was providing a service to the singers and hoped to do it again in the future.
When the backer of the prizes refused to provide the money, it was me that raised the funds to cover all promises. I would hope that Classical Singer would want to ensure that its readers do not believe me to be a “fraud”. There is absolutely no evidence that I have done anything fraudulently, however, the article attacks me personally and harms my reputation. There are many people who were involved in the compeition who will vouch for my honesty, integrity, and sincerity.
5.) The article states that OMTI was not a corporation nor did it have a Board of Directors. This is false. Opera Music Theater International was incorporated in the Commonwealth of Virginia as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation on 15 February 1995. An annual report is filed each year with the State Corporation Commission which lists the Board of Directors on their website and is public information. I made sure that the author of the article had these facts prior to publication.
6.) The article states that there was no list of the competition prize money and fees. This is factually untrue, and again Classical Singer had this information prior to publication. The OPERA America’s CAREER GUIDE FOR SINGERS listed the Majorie Lawrence International Vocal Competition’s application fee, accompanist fee, prize monies, and adminstrator Randall Reade, Esquire which was sent to thousands of singers. These are facts which can be verified.
7.) In the interest of providing all of the facts, we ensure that the article’s author was given the names of two witnesses to interview that had information concerning the competition. The first was one of the OMTI Board Members, Randall Reade. Mr. Reade was the administrator for the 1998 National Opera Association Convention and 2001 Majorie Lawrence International Vocal Competition. The second person who could have assisted was Indiana University pianist Dr. Richard Bosworth, OMTI accompanist for our White House Concert, National Theatre Concert, and Majorie Lawrence International Vocal Competition. Neither of these persons were quoted and many facts wer left out of the article which were necessary for your readers to understand the situation.
In addition, Randall Reade, Esquire and Dr. Richard Bosworth each faxed statements to the author, the editor and the publisher. However, I was informed that the author did not consider these gentlemen credible. Without the balance they provided in the story it left only half-truths and partial facts which did not accurately protray me or the competition.
8.) The article also alleged that the judges were paid only after a threat of litigation. This of course is false. The canceled checks indicate that the Metropolitan Opera Judges were paid with in six weeks after the Competition, one day after we received the funds from our sponsors. This, in my view, is a reasonable time frame. No judge ever sent an attorney’s letter or threatened legal action to me of any sort. I would hope that Classical Singer would correct this error as soon as possible.
9.) The article informed readers that the persons selected to participate in the Competition were not notified until three weeks before the start of the Competition. However, the facts prove differently. The week of the 5th of April 2001 each of the Competition Contestants were notificed of their acceptance. They were informed that they would be judged by the Metropolitan Opera artists Evelyn Lear, Thomas Stewart, Ryan Edwards, Dominic Cossa, and Mattiwilda Dobbs. In addition the contestants were informed of discount hotel and airfare deadlines.
10.) I was also informed by the author that no other opera companies or competitions had problems with philanthropists failing to donate or raise money. That is also not true, several major opera companies and competitions had philanthropists fail to provide promised funds and paid their winners late. I explained this to Ms. Gunnell that it was beyond my control and I had relied upon promises made to me, the production coordinator, the musical director, and the judges that there was a person who promised to raise money for the prize and told others that the prize money would be substantial.
The author was also informed that due to terrorist activities, that meetings with funders in Washington DC had been cancelled in September, October and November. The author was also informed that the slumping economy after attacks on September 11 and anthrax bioterrorism, caused us to pay our 2001 Competition winners 11 months late. It was unfortunate that such a number of circumstances came together at the exact same time. In addition, financial contributions were down accross the board for artistic support in 2001-2002.
11.) The article alleged that the 1998 National Opera Association convention was over budget, of which I chaired. Although it is true that Ms. Betty Bullock was not paid her accompanist fee of $50, I can only speculate as to why NOA exectutive secretary Arvid Knutsen refused to pay her for services rendered. I informed the author that there was no fixed budget, and that the convention program was approved by National Opera Association executive secretary Arvid Knutsen before publication. After the convention program was published and money had been received for registration and had been allocated, one of the Master Class Artist demanded that she receive special treatment more than what NOA had ever planned on providing. NOA executive secretary Arvid Knutsen demanded that they be uninvited immediately, but I wanted to make sure that the reality lived up to the promise, and that everything that was advertised was accomplished.
In order to make the best program possible, I secured additional financial supposrt from Musical America for $5000 and in-kind donation from Host Marriott International in order to meet the Master Class Artists unexpected demands. After the convention, NOA executive secretary Arvid Knutsen had an attorney send me a letter demanding over $3000 from me for the Master Class Artists’ expenses and $3000 for costs of the advertisements because I use OMTI’s phone number and support staff to answer the phones. The results were NOA quadrupled its registrations from the previous year at no extra cost to them. We were able to straighten this matter out about the Master Class Artists’ unexpected demands, NOA soon after dropped their demand when all of the facts came to light and it was clear that there was no deficit and NOA did make a profit.
The author of the article did not report the facts as they turned out. Instead, it was reported that there was a $6,000 deficit on the 1998 convention and this established a “pattern”. When we requested that the author get NOA’s 990s and report all of the facts, including that it was ultimately determined that there was no deficit and NOA did make a profit. Instead, the article reported taht “Mr. McCully went over budget and NOA never recovered.” Those allegation were not true.
12.) The article stated that my office was merely an answering service, and that there was an insufficient number of volunteers for the event. This is also not true. As I informed the reporter, OMTI had a contract with a local office building, which provides meeting and work space and support services, in addition to telephone services. Moreover, we had two volunteers working the event to provide registration and other needs during the three days of the Competition.
13.) The article stated that the promised didn’t live up to reality. That is not true. The promise did live up to the reality, everything that was romised was accomplished. I played the voice message to OPERA America staff of Evelyn Lear stating that it was a “wonderful event”. In addtion, a National Endowment for the Arts Opera Onsite Evaluation and general manager of OPERA America compalies writes:
“2001 Marjorie Lawrence Vocal Competition Was Clearly A Success”
In closing, all I request is a fair evaluation of all the facts. I believe that Classical Singer Magazine has placed me in a false light. I believe that both Classical Singer Magazine and my reputation could be harmed by this article and it is in both of our best interests to work to correct the record to make it factually true and up to the reporting standards of Classical Singer Magazine.
Respectfully submitted,
James McCully, general director
OPERA MUSIC THEATER INTERNATIONAL
MCCULLY@OMTI.org
