It appears that Deanna Isaacs [The Business, May 13] can be added to the list of media types who have given art gadfly Scott Hodes a written version of fellatio.

At least the Tribune can be explained for their blind support of Hodes due to the conflict of interest they have by him curating the Colonel McCormick exhibit for them. What is Isaacs’s excuse for ignoring the fact that Hodes’s five-count suit had three counts summarily dismissed, that Hodes sought the settlement to avoid the embarrassment of losing the other two counts, and that Hodes has obvious conflicts of interest?

At least the Chicago Sun-Times presented a fair and balanced account of the saga.

Darrell Mitchell

South Loop-Dearborn Park II

Deanna Isaacs replies:

Two, not three, of Hodes’s five counts were dismissed because action taken by the city in response to his lawsuit rendered them moot. The two counts had to do with the public art committee’s illegal practice of holding meetings and voting without a quorum. After Hodes filed, the city amended the public art ordinance to allow the use of proxy votes. And he’s not curating for the McCormick museum; he was hired to write contracts for artists participating in a museum competition.