CBS and the airpark manager

Nobody should allow themselves to be interviewed like this unless they make
their own videotape of the entire interview and are prepared to put it on
the internet as a rebuttal when the media terrorists strike.

hear hear - smart idea. i notice this on local news all the time. it's so
tightly edited and when they have a clip of someone it's ONLY A RESPONSE - you
have no idea what question was even asked.

someone could say "i was scared to death and almost pooped my pants"

well they could insert that comment in any story from a roller coaster to a
home burglar.

not that they go that far - but who polices the news and gets upset when things
are that out of context?

not that they go that far - but who polices the news and gets upset when
things
are that out of context?

we do

"David" wrote in message
...
not that they go that far - but who polices the news and gets upset when
things
are that out of context?

we do

That's who do!

In article ,
kcuspam (Tune2828) wrote:

Nobody should allow themselves to be interviewed like this unless they
make
their own videotape of the entire interview and are prepared to put it on
the internet as a rebuttal when the media terrorists strike.

hear hear - smart idea. i notice this on local news all the time. it's so
tightly edited and when they have a clip of someone it's ONLY A RESPONSE -
you
have no idea what question was even asked.

someone could say "i was scared to death and almost pooped my pants"

well they could insert that comment in any story from a roller coaster to a
home burglar.

not that they go that far - but who polices the news and gets upset when
things
are that out of context?



I have emailed AOPA, suggesting that they help Mr. Trissel sue CBS for
slaneder and defamation of character. It would certainly be nice to hang
a few of our most dishonest critics out to dry.

"Orval Fairbairn" wrote:
I have emailed AOPA, suggesting that they help Mr. Trissel sue
CBS for slaneder and defamation of character.

CBS indeed behaved despicably, but how did they slander or defame Mr.
Trissel?
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM
(remove pants to reply by email)

In article ,
"Dan Luke" wrote:

"Orval Fairbairn" wrote:
I have emailed AOPA, suggesting that they help Mr. Trissel sue
CBS for slaneder and defamation of character.

CBS indeed behaved despicably, but how did they slander or defame Mr.
Trissel?

Certainly -- by qouting him deliberately out of context, in order to
chang the meaning of his statements in a public arena.

It would be interesting to see a "deep pockets" tort lawyer get hold of
this one.

Don't know about slander or defamation .. but their deliberate inaccuracy
of what he said certainly held him up to ridicule and attack in his
profession,
which would have been a forseeable result given the highly charged topic
they were presenting. The only answer of course is to NEVER allow what
you say to be used .. unless you have final say over what is presented.


"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...
"Orval Fairbairn" wrote:
I have emailed AOPA, suggesting that they help Mr. Trissel sue
CBS for slaneder and defamation of character.

CBS indeed behaved despicably, but how did they slander or defame Mr.
Trissel?
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM
(remove pants to reply by email)

It is considerably plausible that the broadcast was designed to instill a
sense of public panic and would therefore qualify for complaint as follows:

http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts...broadcast.html

If local law enforcement has chosen to visit the premises for the purpose of
any type of inspection, within a certain "immediate" timeframe since the
broadcast....

He should at least file a complaint as follows:

http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/journalism.html

Seems that the FCC is pretty limited in what they can do....

Perhaps, tho, we should encourage them to make all complaints public record
so the people can decide for themselves...


"Robert Henry" wrote in
news:3N%Ob.4276$_H5.983@lakeread06:

It is considerably plausible that the broadcast was designed to instill
a sense of public panic and would therefore qualify for complaint as
follows:

http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts...broadcast.html

If local law enforcement has chosen to visit the premises for the
purpose of any type of inspection, within a certain "immediate"
timeframe since the broadcast....

He should at least file a complaint as follows:

http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/journalism.html

"Judah" wrote in message
...
Seems that the FCC is pretty limited in what they can do....

I think you underestimate the size and power of that bureaucracy. Here's
the list of hot topics. See anything that affects you in your daily life?

Wireless Local Number Portability (WLNP)
Do Not Call Advisory
Parents Place
Rural Telecommunication
Cellular Telephone Specific Absorption Rate (SAR)
What You Should Know About Wireless Phone Service
High Speed Internet Access (Broadband)
Environmental and Historic Preservation Page
Information About Your Telephone Carrier
Understanding Your Phone Bill

Can you see "Understanding 'the News'" or "What You Should Know about
Sensational News Programs" or "Tabloid Television Journalism Advisory" or
"Information about your National News Broadcaster" on the list?

See also some of the numbers on this page:

http://www.fcc.gov/headlines.html

I'm not saying any such would apply in this case, but broadcast licenses do
have to be renewed....Also, freedom of speech has limits (e.g., yelling fire
in a theatre, invasions from mars, and mindless speculation of [fill in the
conveyance] commandeered by terrorists, etc)


Perhaps, tho, we should encourage them to make all complaints public
record
so the people can decide for themselves...


They are. Did you notice that 'standing' is not required? Any person or
group can make a complaint. The FCC may choose not to act upon it, but maybe
that isn't required. Accountability can be generated in many indirect ways.

Of course, it may be counterproductive to have someone erroneously draw the
conclusion that in fact suburban airpark communities are far more secure
than other types of airports. Oh no!