Montgomery Mayor Advocates for Removal of Controversial Billboard Artwork
**The Controversy Surrounding the Removal of a “Bloody Sunday” Billboard in Montgomery**
The intersection of art, history, and political discourse has once again sparked significant controversy—this time in Montgomery, Alabama. A billboard artwork that merged a poignant image from the 1965 “Bloody Sunday” protest with the polarizing political slogan “Make America Great Again” has become the subject of intense debate. Mayor Steven Reed, Montgomery’s first Black mayor, has requested its removal, citing concerns over its politicization and the need to safeguard the legacy of the civil rights movement.
### The Historical Context of “Bloody Sunday”
“Bloody Sunday,” which occurred on March 7, 1965, was a harrowing milestone in the fight for voting rights in the United States. On that day, peaceful demonstrators attempted to cross Selma’s Edmund Pettus Bridge but were met with brutal police violence. It was an event that shocked the conscience of the nation and galvanized support for the civil rights movement, ultimately contributing to the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Spider Martin’s photograph “Two Minute Warning” vividly captures the tense moments before state troopers attacked civil rights activists Hosea Williams and John Lewis, among others. This image has enduring significance as a symbol of both the struggle and resilience of the movement.
### The For Freedoms Billboard Artwork
The contentious billboard was created by For Freedoms, an art collective known for using public spaces to provoke discourse on sociopolitical issues. Co-founded in 2016 by artists Eric Gottesman, Hank Willis Thomas, and Michelle Woo, the group seeks to inspire reflection and dialogue through their installations. The billboard combined Spider Martin’s iconic photograph with the Trump-era slogan “Make America Great Again” (MAGA), a phrase often associated with nostalgic visions of the past and criticized for its undertones of exclusion and regressive policies.
The artwork’s juxtaposition of an emblematic moment in the civil rights movement with the MAGA slogan is meant to ask vital questions: *When was America truly great?* For whom was it great? And what lessons can history teach us about the inclusiveness and equity of our present society?
### The Mayor’s Decision to Remove the Billboard
Mayor Steven Reed has come under fire for his decision to have the billboard removed, a move he justified by emphasizing the need to handle such powerful historical imagery with care. In a statement, Reed explained his concern that the billboard’s “politically charged” nature could detract from the unity and shared memory that the Bloody Sunday legacy represents for Montgomery and beyond.
“We must be extremely mindful of how we use such images of our shared history, especially when they risk being perceived as politically charged,” Reed wrote on X, formerly Twitter. He maintained that the decision was not censorship but rather an exercise of the city’s discretion over a public art installation it had funded.
### Reactions from the Art Collective and the Public
The removal of the billboard has ignited strong reactions from multiple sides. Tracy Martin, the daughter of Spider Martin, expressed her disapproval, calling the decision “a violation of freedom of speech.” She defended For Freedoms, noting that the billboard’s intention was to provoke thought and dialogue about America’s historical and present realities.
For Freedoms co-founder Eric Gottesman called the removal “a clear act of censorship,” underscoring the collective’s mission to use art as a means to dissect complex and polarizing issues. Another co-executive director, Michelle Woo, sympathized with the pressures facing cultural institutions in today’s politically charged climate but reaffirmed the group’s commitment to sparking critical conversations.
Many activists and community members have also weighed in, with some praising the decision to prioritize unity and others criticizing the act as one of silencing important—albeit uncomfortable—discussions about identity, race, and the nation’s history.
### The Legacy of the Artwork
This is not the first time For Freedoms has faced backlash for its use of provocative imagery. Since its inception, the collective has installed over 500 billboards, and a similar piece was removed in 2016 in Pearl, Mississippi, after public outcry. These controversies highlight the fragile balance between artistic freedom, collective memory, and public sentiment.
### Broader Implications
The removal of the billboard underscores the enduring tensions around how America grapples with its history. On one hand, public art can serve as a powerful channel for reflection, education, and societal growth. On the other, artwork that intersects with political issues inevitably risks alienating certain groups, sparking divisive reactions.
Moreover, the controversy calls attention to the delicate process of curating collective memory. Many argue that removing the billboard limits dialogue about systemic inequalities and how they persist in different forms today. Others believe that linking a sacred historical event like Bloody Sunday to a modern political slogan risks trivializing its significance.
### Conclusion
The uproar over For Freedoms’ billboard in Montgomery is emblem