Despite denying his role as an Axanar surrogate, one blogger has indefatigably promoted the beleaguered production’s interests. This two-part analysis examines Jonathan Lane’s role in the efforts to get CBS and Paramount to change their recently introduced fan film guidelines, and to further Axanar’s public narrative about the copyright infringement lawsuit its defending against Star Trek’s owners.

AxaMonitor published an article on August 26, “Axanar Supporters’ Report Critiques Fan Film Guidelines” that sparked many comments on the Facebook page for the Project Small Access group that served as the so-called focus group for the report.

An email we received via our Feedback form summed up the comments:

The Small Access Group is NOT a group of AXANAR supporters. It’s a group of people concerned about how [Star Trek] is being marketed and how fans’ productions are being reduced or made “illegal.” Some like Axanar, some don’t. It’s just NOT an AXANAR GROUP.

The report’s author, Jonathan Lane, had encouraged Small Access members to contact me to express their disappointment that the article unfairly implied the report was affiliated with Axanar, the production led by Alec Peters, when in fact its conclusions were drawn from surveys of the Small Access group, some number of which claim they are not supporters of Axanar specifically but of fan films generally, and that the report’s intent was to call for changes in CBS' fan production guidelines that would benefit all fan films.

Fair enough.

Except that’s not what the article states. It describes the Small Access group like this:

Project Small Access is a group organized by leading Axanar supporters to protest CBS’ fan films guidelines by calling for a partial boycott of its new television series, Star Trek: Discovery, which will be broadcast on CBS’ online streaming service, CBS All Access. The boycott’s name is, of course, a play on the name of the network service.

The project was created by blogger Jonathan Lane on Axanar Productions’ fan film blog, “Fan Film Friday.” The group uses its Project Small Access Facebook group page to conduct its business.

Everything in that description is factual. In fact, the article devotes an entire section, “What is Project Small Access?” describing the group and its objectives, none of which are directly affiliated with Axanar. It’s the leadership of the Small Access that casts doubt on the credibility of the report, and how it’s likely to be received by the studio executives targeted by the report.

A sidebar to the article, “What is its Connection to Axanar?” does raise questions about the distinction between the group’s proclaimed (and, I believe, sincere) independence from Axanar and the deep connections between its leaders and Axanar Productions.

For example, Mike Bawden, one of Small Access’ administrators, is Axanar’s public relations director. Lane, who established the group along with Bawden, regularly writes columns on the Axanar website. His own blog, Fan Film Factor, is often the venue in which Axanar’s talking points are aired. Example? When Axanar filed a counterclaim against CBS and Paramount, its attorney, Erin Ranahan,

And where is the downloadable PDF of the report hosted? On Axanar’s servers.

For his part, Lane takes issue with my description of him as an “Axanar surrogate.”