It is easy to accuse me of having mixed up priorities. While the rest of the world was grappling with major issues – war with Iran, climate change, the effectiveness of vaccines, etc. – last week I found myself in a knock-down, drag-out argument with a group of serious glass collectors debating the significance of the “bumblebee” trademark for verifying the authenticity of JB Higbee glasswork. A year or so ago I realized that the Facebook page for the Early American Pattern Glass Society was a possible source of information regarding collecting Higbee pieces manufactured in Bridgeville between 1906 and 1918. I joined the Society and began regularly monitoring their page, and several times a month I have come across relevant posts.
Recently Steve T. posted five photographs of a handsome pedestal cake plate he had acquired at an estate sale with the familiar Higbee “Delta” (aka paneled thistle) pattern. He noted that it lacked the classic Higbee trademark (a bumblebee with the letters H, I, G) and asked “Did Higbee mark all their glass in 1910 to 1911?” A person identified as “Moderator” (whose name I will not report) had replied “JB Higbee did not mark all of their glass”, but opined it probably was a reproduction. Because I am convinced that Higbee did indeed put their trademark on the vast majority of their pieces, I replied that this “is a controversial topic” and that the folks in our Higbee collectors group, “based on extensive research…are convinced that all items produced in Bridgeville bear the trademark”. This is a valid statement, but my comment violates the old axiom, “Don’t poke the bear!”
The first response was from a person identified as “Group Expert”. He requested I “share what extensive research you refer to” and stated “My research supports the fact that JBH did not mark every single piece of glass they made” and then proceeded to use the “Era” pattern as an example. I responded by referencing the book Lola and Wayne Higby wrote (“Brice, Higbee and J. B. Higbee Glass”) and the interviews they had with Bridgeville folks – Higbee descendants and glassworks employees — thirty years ago. “Group Expert” replied immediately, “Their book is filled with many errors …that I addressed in my book”. It turns out he has written a book entitled “Homestead Glass; Brice, Higbee and Company, 1879-1907”. Our information, from the reference he derided, regarding the “Era” pattern is that it was produced solely by Brice, Higbee and that his reference to it was irrelevant.
The second volley I received was from a person identified as “Administrator”. He reported that his sister had collected “Delta” pieces in the 1960s “before L G Wright started making many pieces” and that they had no trademark. I replied to him with a reference from “Brice, Higbee and J. B. Higbee Glass” (being unaware at the time that the EAPG Society powers had discredited that reference) that reported “Delta” reproductions from L. G, Wright from as early as 1947. His immediate response was that another book, “The L. G. Wright Glass Company” by James Measell and W. C. Rottheis was proof of his information.
By now I realized that I was fighting a losing battle. I replied that our group in Bridgeville were not serious collectors like the folks on the Facebook page and that our emphasis was on the authenticity of historical local artifacts. The “Moderator” then got in the last word, “The absence of a mark does not indicate a piece is a reproduction”. It is obvious that my campaign to inform the members of the EAPG Society that the subject is indeed controversial has been thwarted. Between the “Moderator”, the “Administrator”, and the “Group Expert” it was decreed that our opinion was wrong. Period. End of discussion.
All of which forces me to wonder about the validity of any information on social media, or even elsewhere on the Internet. Who decides what information is acceptable to be transmitted to the niche group populating a particular website or page? Is every statement that does not conform to the party line immediately attacked by the appropriate “Moderator”, “Administrator”, and “Group Expert”? Was my experience unique or is there a “truth squad” assigned to every special interest site, poised to snuff out any attempt to question the status quo? Perhaps Congress is right in investigating the power that the folks controlling Google, Facebook, Instagram, OpenAI, etc. have to determine what is designated truth and what is fallacy. We once believed that “history is written by the conquerors”, perhaps today we have a different type of conqueror, the persons in complete control of the information age.
Perhaps I am too pessimistic. A few days after my defeat by the EAPG Truth Squad, I received an email from a lady requesting information on locating the bumblebee trademark on a Higbee piece she had acquired. She reported that she had found a column I had written on this subject on January 27, 2022, and realized I was an expert on this subject. I presume she had found the column on the Bridgeville Area Historical Society website, which I will guarantee is completely free from bias and censorship.
As an experiment, I asked ChatGPT if there was a correlation between glass made by JB Higbee in Bridgeville between 1906 and 1918 and the presence of a bumblebee trademark. They immediately confirmed such a correlation, citing my January 27, 2022 column as a reference. I then queried the search engine on my laptop with the topic: “JB Glass, bumblebee trademark”. The first citation was the January 27, 2022, column; the third, my September 29, 2016, column on JB Higbee; and the sixth, my July 24, 2025 column dealing with collecting Higbee glass pieces. I may have the last laugh after all. The best way to influence the party line is to organize your own party.