Burning of Bridges

Burning of Rome gave a surprise show at U-31 on Friday, February 26, for former bandmate Tracy Morris. The band’s energetic stage presence, however, was allegedly met by hostility from club security.

“They went all out,” says BoR fan Rachel Tisnado. “Joe [guitar] was running around and sitting at booths where people were having bottle service. It was pretty crazy. At one point, about four or five songs in, Adam [front man] got up on the keyboard and managed to hit the disco ball. It wasn’t damaged or anything. But the security guards grabbed Adam and dragged him out the back door. Adam just kept singing with the mike cord wrapped around his neck. I went out back. Adam had a bloody lip, and Joe had a big mark on his neck. These big, burly guys just kicked the shit out of them. Adam and Joe are tiny guys. It definitely wasn’t worth beating them up over.”

Another audience member, Kolina Koleva, also thought the reaction to be overkill: “Any damage [the band] might have done was to their own equipment.”

“Cops came,” Tisnado continues. “The band was told that they couldn’t go back in or they would be arrested. So my friend and I were running back and forth, giving the band their equipment.”

Front man Adam Traub writes via email: “The whole demonstration by U-31 security was unnecessary. We did the same set at the Casbah a few weeks earlier and security shook our hands and helped us out with our gear. At U-31 they put me in a choke hold and kicked me in the face.”

“They were out of control,” says U-31 manager Steve Billings. “Promoter Gabe Vega told me he thought they had a little too much to drink before the show. The band was cussing at people who were leaving the bar and started spitting on the crowd. The singer tried to rip the disco ball off the ceiling. It’s maybe ten feet in the air, and if he succeeded in pulling the ball down, it probably would have killed somebody. The guitarist tried to spear one of the security guards with his guitar. One guy says he got kicked in his face. He didn’t get kicked in the face. There was no blood. The singer actually apologized to the security guys after the show. It was an incredibly unfortunate situation…on both sides.”

Comments

Tho this incident was already covered on many local blogs, within hours after it happened, this Blurt report goes the extra mile by quoting no less than four people, each with an insightful account. Good job, Mr. Deal!

Fine reporting, Chad, thank you. And I never read Blurts!

How weak. This exact same story ran a week earlier in CityBeat. Is the Reader now getting its news by rewriting articles from Citybeat. This is pathetic.

Yeah Chad...fine reporting. You're a real muckraker. What are you going to rewrite from Citybeat next week?

Exact same story? Cool, provide a link, I'd love to read it for myself and see if it is the exact same story. :)

the story is pretty similar...goes to show how much is really going on in San Diego. BOR is a great band...I personally think that everyone is missing the whole point, so go see 'em live. (the point) And boycott U-31 for being the lame-greedy-trendy bar that it is! Matta fact, boycott true north too AND good grammar...gooday

CB's writeup on this story is fine, tho it leans more heavily on reprinting from the band's own blog than our account. Nothing wrong with that, since it's quoting the source subject. I'd be hard pressed to say the Reader's take is that much better than CB's - but there's only so much one can say about a single incident that was already well-covered on at least three other blogs before either CB or the Reader could even put pen to paper.

The copycat/"rewriting" accusation, tho, is demonstrably laughable ---

The unfortunate incident happened on a Friday, Chad turned in a report before Monday night/Tuesday morning, and CityBeat's story didn't appear until either Tuesday afternoon March 2nd or Wednesday March 3rd (hard to tell, the way they date website posts differently from the print edition).

Just because a music story gets the attention of two writers, from two papers, doesn't mean one must be copying the other. Especially since the Reader story was already written and turned in before CB's could have appeared anywhere outside their office.

The Reader was already filled for the March 3rd issue, so Chad's report ended up in March 10. We usually tend to work two to eight days in advance of press deadline --

If someone wants to pay my regular freelance wage for an hour of my time, I'll gladly make a list of 50 music stories the Reader reported before CityBeat - and not one time did someone repping the Reader then go over to the CB website to screech "Copycat! Nyah nyah!"

Let alone twice in a row, like poor ol' lemongroovy, whose cluelessness is now on display for all to see and chuckle at.

Pay me an additional hour's fee, and I'll happily list 50 MORE music stories from recent Readers that CB NEVER covered. I'd make and post both lists for free, but modesty (and another pending deadline) prohibits --

Of course there were some quotes in the Reader article that were not in the original Citybeat article. But the point is, how sad is it that the Reader would run the same story a week later after it first broke in CityBeat. It's almost as sad as the story Jay Allen Sanford wrote that said everything was just fine at the Jumping Turtle. A week later CityBeat wrote the truth: The Jumping Turtle is finished as a music venue.

jayallen explained why the article ran when it did. If your point is that the Reader should not have run it at all, sorry, don't agree. It might have been nice to be the first, but didn't work out that way. Oh well. Some people read one and not the other. No one pub owns the news.

You can sit around all day and rewrite stories that appeared elsewhere a week before and call it "news." But guess what: it's no longer news. Now that the Reader is starting to do that it is losing its edge. And the fact that the Reader is writing something that is blatantly false (like the Jumping Turtle is OK story), that's a whole other problem for the Reader's credibility. The Reader/Sanford wrote unverified crap that was fed to them by the owner. Then Citybeat came back a week later and wrote the truth. Good for Citybeat. Not good for the Reader.

Oooooookay. lemongroovy, why do I suspect you have an agenda?

That's your response? So what if I do. We all have agendas. Unfortunately for you, your's seems to defending Jay Allen Sanford.

Is anything I said not true?

Yep. The story was not a rewrite. Snark off.

LOLOL!! And here I thought I was being my usual coldly objective and impartial self. jayallen will get a kick out of you saying I'm defending him. :)

"We all have agendas."

True. And while CF frequently enjoys bashing the Reader over at the SD CityBeat site, I'm a little curious as to why you are bashing this particular piece, since you just joined up and enjoy an anonymity not afforded to the rest of us. Hell, bash the entire publication, why concentrate your efforts on this small detail?

No defense needed (tho thanks, CF) - only a link to the Reader's Jumping Turtle story which was referenced (but apparently misread - or UNread?) by lemongroovy -

In the article, only the club owner states his HOPE that the JT "is not going out of business" - everyone knows that quoting a guy doesn't mean the writer and the Reader agree. And then the owner himself presages that the JT WILL likely be closed by the City, any day, BEFORE publication of the CB report that LG is so proud of!

The owner told the Reader that the City does indeed "have the power to do so anytime they want...Probably the only reason they haven’t revoked us yet is because they’re in the process of changing lawyers.”

The owner was right. So the Reader reported the impending closure days BEFORE it happened. CB's report came AFTER. Since lemongroovy makes such a case for the importance of being first ---

No wonder our guest commentator didn't include a link to our report - debate is far too easy when the other debater makes my own point for me.

CB is frequently a fine paper. They have many strengths and merits, and they've certainly broken their fair share of stories, music and otherwise, before the Reader. The city of SD is far better off by having multiple pop culture weeklies, each with their own strengths.

So, if someone repping for CB wants to stack up apples against apples again by comparing "rival" newspaper reports on the same topic...

...next time, don't forget to bring your apples.

Thanks for helping me prove the point. That Sanford article ran on Jan. 27. It didn't speak with anybody from the city or the sheriff dept. and completely ignored the myriad of problems including police calls, fights, underage drinking problems with neighbors etc. It was just a weak-and-lazy whitewash piece courtesy of Sanford who was happy to be tooled by the owner.

Then a week later they were closed down and this correct article ran Feb. 16 in CityBeat. That article wasn't trying to stroke anybody. It just reported the facts. Please read for yourself

http://www.sdcitybeat.com/cms/story/detail/reports_from_the_scene/8981/

There was also coerage in the Union-Tribune.

Weak.

Haha, of all the battles to pick -

The Reader has chronicled the Jumping Turtle story as it happened more with more ink than almost any other local music story! Well over a dozen full articles, chock full of quotes from cops, city officials, neighbors, patrons, promoters, etc. Has Lemongroovy even SEEN the Reader?! Sheesh! A random sampling:

Where kids and booze mix (quoting police): http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/20...

San Marcos hates the JT (quoting city officials): http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/20...

All ages allowed? http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/20...

Pay scale debate, metal/all age debate: http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/20...

Concert injuries: http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/20...

Promoters battle: http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/20...

Suing San Marcos: http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/20...

It's tedious to go on - anybody can search JT on Reader search bar -- of all the silly beachheads to attempt raising a CityBeat flag upon!

We've covered the Turtle so much, and so thoroughly, as it happened, that editors and contribs keep putting a cap on how often we'll revisit additional coverage! So of course my most recent JT article didn't go back over and repeat all we've already reported on the bar ----

This really is too easy --- can't somebody come over repping for CB armed with at least one clue?

BTW, I do like CB. The only current problem I have with the paper (aside from staffers' occasional laughable attempts to claim superiority via comment threads) is the mean spirited content perpetrated by a few newer columnists. This sort of F-U approach first got my notice with name-calling and baiting insults hurled at local performers in the name of “demo reviews.”

As I’ve stated elsewhere, that kind of "writing" approximates a schoolyard bully's tendency to reward any peer's attempt at philosophical or intellectual endeavors with a punch in the fukken head.

Yeah, the Reader (having been around since the early ‘70s), is the dinosaur. And CB is currently such a strong publication (hats off to Dave Maass for recent quality upgrades) that, in many other cities, it would probably have risen to be the top local weekly.

Unfortunately for CB, and for their fan (or staffer?) Lemongroovy, as in Jurassic Park/Lost World, the dinosaur in San Diego is still alive and kicking ----

Say what you want,you wrote an under-researched, one-sided puff piece on behalf of the Jumping Turtle. End of story

=sigh= CB deserves far better spokesmanship - with "supporters" like this, who needs detractors?

And on that note, "end of story" fadeout to the lemongroovy theme song - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZ9EWc...

re: #20:

Bravo, jayallen! That post got me "feelin' groooovy...da da da da da da da da..."

are you serious? That's all your going to say? something about a theme song? Jay Sanford you wrote a blatant lie saying Jumping Turtle is healthy and good and everything is fine. That was a lie. You don't even live in California and you are susceptible to whatever you are fed on the internet and the Reader is susceptible to printing what you write. You will write whatever someone feeds you, costing the Reader serious credibility.

I DON'T CARE ABOUT ALL THE OTHER READER ARTICLES BEFORE. YOU ARE A WEAK PATSY PUSHOVER FOR SOME FAILING BUSINESSMAN WHO KNOWS HE CAN FEED YOU ANYTHING AND YOU WILL NOT ONLY WRITE IT, BUT YOU WON'T EVEN CHECK IF ITS TRUE.

JAY ALLEN SANFORD IS THE REASON THE READER IS LOSING CREDIBILITY. I SAY KEEP IT UP! PRINT MORE JAY ALLEN SANFORD!!

"That's all your [sic] going to say?"

Board? Is that you?

Oooh, good catch, AG.

Don't think so, though. Board couldn't spell susceptible.

Jay - I like the way you defend your work. You don't respond to any of the charges and you post a meaningless you tube address. Quality.

I'm tired of babysitting. I already responded to your nonsense "charges" several times and several ways in this thread, and (tho it's funny how you keep embarrassing yourself), the point of diminishing returns has been reached. I'll not waste another word.

Fade out to THIS little ditty, far more apropos than the previous one - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHbStW...

it's interesting to note you have the same ethics and journalistic standards as Josh Board. Quality articles and classy Youtube posting!

Oh,and let's not forget you had the same issue with two other recent articles,....Diatribe and SDgossipscene.

Quality!

Log in to comment

Skip Ad

SD Reader Newsletters

Join our newsletter list and enter to win $25 at Broken Yolk Cafe!

Each subscription means another chance to win!

Close