Caitlin,

With respect, how did 'things get weird'? To be honest I don't know how you perceived the conference as a whole. Aside from Perrera's assumption about you and his statement, you never stated what it is that rubbed you wrong about the conference. If you were simply offering an overview of the event, then I think you may have shared more details. Presentation topics also included: Restorative (Justice) Programs for youth, community building programs, preservation of historical buildings (and significant historical graffiti) and methods of conducting graffiti surveys to name a few.

I also think you missed a great journalistic opportunity - the entire point of Dr. Spicer's 60 minute keynote speech. It was a well researched account of the dangers and crime that are indicative of being part of the Hip Hop graffiti sub-culture. This is more than a personal opinion. Her presentation is based on: more than a decade of experience as a Police Officer (now a Sergeant), her Masters Thesis; an aggregate study of 536 graffiti vandals and years as an expert in the field of graffiti investigation. Dr. Spicer supports her findings and claims with research by several world renowned experts such as psychologist Graham Martin (2006) and David Shannon (2001).

As a journalist you have an opportunity to educate the masses, tell them something NEW and promote critical thinking. This is much for than relaying the conference agenda, or presenting an 'art vs crime' or 'permissive vs. authoritarian approach' debate. That's been done to death and I'm glad you didn't go that route.

However, Dr. Spicer presented an argument for addressing the act of graffiti vandalism (non-consensual graffiti of any style or quality) as a red-flag indicating; underlying issues in the individual, their involvement in criminal activities and risk-taking that is inherent in the Hip Hop graffiti sub-culture. For parents especially, this is incredibly valuable information. Governments, youth, parents and caregivers need to hear this perspective if we want to change the status quo.

I believe that Dr. Spicer's point is that here has been a change in the perception that the motivation behind graffiti is to do art. Research and experience now tell us that graffiti is a youth at risk behaviour and the motivation is vandalism. We must see 'graffiti' for all that it is and address it accordingly. This involves law enforcement, policy makers, parents, and community resource providers.

I appreciate that you attended the conference and gave an account of your experience. Perhaps you'll continue to attend events such as graffiti conferences, art shows, court proceedings and City debates and bring your variety of experiences and the perspectives shared at these events to your readers.

Kristina