--- In [email protected], "Heath" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ok, devil's advocate here, It does go to Drew/Rocketboom, he doesn't > run it, then people find out it was sent to RB, someboby asks "why > did he send it to RB, why would he do that, RB never showed it, why? > Does RB have something to hide?", "if RB doesn't have anything to > hide they should show it" Don't think that would happen? You better > believe it would happen.
In this hypothetical scenario, there's no agreement between Rocketboom and anyone sending them material. Actually, even if they ASK someone to send them material, there's no obligation to air it if they don't feel like it. "Why did he send it there?" can be answered by the fact that he's a fan, and he thought a lot of people would see it if it were aired there. In the real-life situation, the shooter chose wisely, because he sent it to a station that did exactly what he wanted done with it. "Do they have something to hide?" would have to rest upon the belief that there was some kind of agreement between the sender and the station/show. Without evidence of any agreement, it's the same thing as if someone sends any other materials that you don't choose to air on your own station or show. There's nothing to hide... there's just no connection to this person, so there's no reason to post it. I'm sure it would happen. There are always conspiracy theorists. The question is what kind of a show/station are you running, anyway? Is your goal to cater to anyone that sends you anything? I think a better question than why DIDN'T you show it would be... why DID you show it? :/ When you know damned well that the shooter is dead and the relatives and friends of the victims are the ones that you're showing these videos to as if it's a trailer for the next movie release, what makes you think that's an intelligent thing to do? The answer is "the bottom line", but what it shows is how greedy you are to make a buck. Bill C. http://BillCammack.com > Should they have shown it, NO, but's that's me, some would say it > should be shown, for everyone saying "tit" I can find someone who > says "tat" > > Take the Unibomber for example, they never ran his "manafestio" for > years because they didn't want to encouge him or give him a forum, > when they finally did, he was caught. Now you have some people who > would say, "if you ran it earlier you could have saved lifes", "why > didn't you run it earlier?" Now this is not excatly the same but the > principal is there. How do you deciede what the right thing to do > is? > > Wheather anyone wants to admit this or not, there are a lot of sides > to consider and in all honesty there probably is no "right" answers > just shades of grey.... > > Heath > http://batmangeek.com > > > --- In [email protected], "bestdamntechshow" > <bestdamntechshow@> wrote: > > > > Bingo, thank you for saying this Drew. > > > > Just because it got to a news station doesn't mean it should be > published. > > > > At what point do we not feed into crazy peoples egos? He sent it to > > NBC so his message would be splattered everywhere, and he got his > wish. > > > > _drew > > > > --- In [email protected], andrew michael baron > > <andrew@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Apr 19, 2007, at 12:23 PM, Heath wrote: > > > > > > > I only see and hear people saying how the MSM is > > > > covering it is wrong. So I ask out to the group, you are the > news > > > > director you have the ablilty to shape how this story is told, > how do > > > > you do that? > > > > > > If the guy sent the package to Rocketboom, I wouldn't publish it. > > > > > > I would hand it over to a committee to decide what to do with it > > > based on academic reasons as opposed to economics. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > >
