List-Unsubscribe: 
Reply-To: xerxes 
Precedence: bulk
Status: O
X-Status: 

-----------> This message was posted to the ONLINE-NEWS list. <-----------

A couple of respectful questions about Freedom Forum practice and policy
appear to get under Max's skin.  One wonders why?

xerxes   wrote:

>> Identity is immaterial to the suitability of inquiries posted. The
>> questions stand or fall on their own merit. Certainly, the four questions
>> asked were direct and honest.

>Sorry you don't understand the basic concept of credibility and
>accountability.

Oh, on the contrary, I understand the game perfectly well.   But  I refuse
to play, Max.

>I don't know you, don't want to know you, and yet you *expect* everyone to
>give your diatribes the same credibility as those of us who do identify
>themselves.

No,the misunderstanding is yours.  I do not expect anything from anyone
here.  If people respect my observations, as some do, that's fine.  If
others disrespect my observations, that's fine too.   I am indifferent.
Read my posts, don't read them, makes no difference to me.    Ignore my
germane and honest questions. That angry dismissiveness itself is a valid
data point for observers.

> You may have resolved this with Steve Outing, the owner of this
>list, but for me (and many others here), I *choose* not to take credibly
>the posting of anyone who will not identify themselves openly (for whatever
>reason), and stand by their words.

Steve has never been troubled as far as I can tell.  E-mail from folks
interested in my observations are often too frequent for same day replies.
And those who are uninterested are not my concern.   You may *chose* as you
say, Max, to ascribe no credibility to me, ....or ignore my posts.  Forgive
me for not being too troubled.

However, one cannot help noticing that for someone to whom you attribute so
little credibility, the fact is, you respond.  And, the responses brim-over
with passion and disdain.  Are these qualities of journalism those in the
profession cultivate?   8-)

Or, are they part of the Freedom Forum's mission?   One would assume not.

My questions were reasonable and germane.  How does a discredited
journalist earn the opportunity to use the Freedom Forum for disseminating
rebuttals?  Does every discredited journalist have this recourse, or just
some selected ones.   If the latter, what makes a rebuttal worth carrying?
Are these questions so dangerous or controversial that they must be
stonewalled?    Or is this Nixonian tactic simply back in fashion these
days?

>I stand by my reasons for posting the information on the Smith/Oliver
>rebuttal as previously posted on this list.  I do so in the interest of
>spreading information to those who want to see it for themselves, and draw
>their own conclusions.

I have no problem with your posting whatever.  In fact, my interest is
sincere.  The case is the most recent example of how some journalists seem
to go wrong under various pressured situations.  My interest is in how
rebuttals come to be taken up, or hosted, by the Freedom Forum.....is it by
invitation only?  If so, what characteristics merit this favor?  Is the
issue handled ad hoc, or is it handled by policy?

For example, would the journalists responsible for the exploding pick-up
truck charade be offered the same opportunity?

>I also stand by what I said about the Freedom Forum's reasons for hosting
>such programs. I would hope that this would be clear enough for most
>thinking people, without further explanation. Again, note I am only
>speaking for myself, and not for my bosses.  I would never presume to do so.

But the stated reasons do not address the questions directly....am I
inquiring of the wrong person?
Perhaps I should ask Howard Kurtz?

>As I said, you are invited to draw your own conclusions.  I will not
>respond to your further "flame bait" and get drawn into pointless
>discussions with you.  Its hot enough outside, life is too damn short as it
>is, and I have better things to do with my time.

Perhaps we should meet  in Rosslyn, and I'll help you chill with a
lemonade.   You can harang me with sad ad hominem jibes as much as you
like, and I will keep asking a few direct questions.   Summertime in the
city.



->  ONLINE-NEWS uses Lyris mailing list software. http://www.lyris.com  <-
-> Change your list settings:  http://www.planetarynews.com/online-news <-
->   Online-News is archived: http://www.planetarynews.com/on-archive   <-
You are subscribed to online-news as: [rballard@access.digex.net]
To unsubscribe, forward this msg to leave-online-news-20155U@clio.lyris.net
SPONSOR: Knight Ridder Real Cities - http://www.realcities.com


From CableGuy@Cable.com Thu Jul 23 12:10:44 1998
>From CableGuy@Cable.com  Thu Jul 23 12:10:44 1998
Received: from cnj.digex.net (qlYBsVTekvXHY@cnj.digex.net [205.197.245.176])
	by pony-1.mail.digex.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA09379
	for ; Thu, 23 Jul 1998 12:10:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from pony-1.mail.digex.net (pony-1.mail.digex.net [204.91.241.5])
	by cnj.digex.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA20736;
	Thu, 23 Jul 1998 12:10:40 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from 209.154.64.48 (midtown-dnnqi-048.ny.compuserve.net [209.154.64.48])
	by pony-1.mail.digex.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id MAA05699;
	Thu, 23 Jul 1998 12:10:34 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199807231610.MAA05699@pony-1.mail.digex.net>