My Morning Facebook Post

[TennesseeWaltz1]

"I must admit I have never paid much attention to Rolling Stone magazine...never gave them a 2nd thought. I've naturally heard of them but I can't say I ever picked up a copy and read its contents. It seems they are in deep trouble now...not only did they publish a dangerously libelous story but it seems they did it with the intent of seeing a group publicly discredited and possibly facing criminal charges. It was a story of malicious lies and deceit...the individual who wrote it is still employed by them...and because of this I hope they are litigated into oblivion. Maybe it will send a message...the First Amendment isn't in place to distort and abuse...it is in place to expose injustice and criminal behavior...and this wasn't the case here. In a perfect world the person who wrote this should serve time in prison or at least never be allowed to work in the media ever again. If a doctor, lawyer or even teacher commits illegal acts they are disbarred or have their licenses revoked...the same should hold true for those who claim to be ethical, professional journalists".

 

[INXS83]

"I must admit I have never paid much attention to Rolling Stone magazine...never gave them a 2nd thought. I've naturally heard of them but I can't say I ever picked up a copy and read its contents. It seems they are in deep trouble now...not only did they publish a dangerously libelous story but it seems they did it with the intent of seeing a group publicly discredited and possibly facing criminal charges. It was a story of malicious lies and deceit...the individual who wrote... it is still employed by them...and because of this I hope they are litigated into oblivion. Maybe it will send a message...the First Amendment isn't in place to distort and abuse...it is in place to expose injustice and criminal behavior...and this wasn't the case here. In a perfect world the person who wrote this should serve time in prison or at least never be allowed to work in the media ever again. If a doctor, lawyer or even teacher commits illegal acts they are disbarred or have their licenses revoked...the same should hold true for those who claim to be ethical, professional journalists".

Purporting their worldview is more important to them than trivial matters like ethics, integrity or legality.

 

[TennesseeWaltz1]

Purporting their worldview is more important to them than trivial matters like ethics, integrity or legality.

Just wondering if we have any media people here who would like to refute what I published...

 

[MN.HAWK]

I'm wondering why you needed to state it was your facebook post?

 

[gusto79]

least never be allowed to work in the media ever again. If a doctor, lawyer or even teacher commits illegal acts they are disbarred or have their licenses revoked...the same should hold true for those who claim to be ethical, professional journalists".

I disagree with this part. I don't think we should be in the practice of barring people from working in media. And are you saying you should need a license to work in media?

 

[ping72]

Just wondering if we have any media people here who would like to refute what I published...

You're assuming people read that wall of text.

 

[Funky Bunch]

well that made you easy to find on facebook. i'll send you a friend request

 

[TennesseeWaltz1]

I disagree with this part. I don't think we should be in the practice of barring people from working in media. And are you saying you should need a license to work in media?

I certainly do...they are in the business of controlling thought and ideas...not mine because I am intelligent enough to sift through what is factual and what is story created bullshit. If you don't hold them accountable you wind up with any swinging dick who fancies him/herself as the next Art Buchwald/Molly Ivins...gotta make them accountable...heck they make barbers hold a license for gosh sakes.

 

[TennesseeWaltz1]

well that made you easy to find on facebook. i'll send you a friend request

I'll delete it if you have that funky looking pic that graces your avatar...

 

[ICHawk-I]

"I must admit I have never paid much attention to Rolling Stone magazine...never gave them a 2nd thought. I've naturally heard of them but I can't say I ever picked up a copy and read its contents. It seems they are in deep trouble now...not only did they publish a dangerously libelous story but it seems they did it with the intent of seeing a group publicly discredited and possibly facing criminal charges. It was a story of malicious lies and deceit...the individual who wrote it is still employed by them...and because of this I hope they are litigated into oblivion. Maybe it will send a message...the First Amendment isn't in place to distort and abuse...it is in place to expose injustice and criminal behavior...and this wasn't the case here. In a perfect world the person who wrote this should serve time in prison or at least never be allowed to work in the media ever again. If a doctor, lawyer or even teacher commits illegal acts they are disbarred or have their licenses revoked...the same should hold true for those who claim to be ethical, professional journalists".

Lawsuits will abound I am sure and if they wrote something that was untrue and people suffered damages they should pay, but not sure how this has to do with the First Amendment unless the government is involved and directly trying to manipulate the situation.

 

[TennesseeWaltz1]

I'm wondering why you needed to state it was your facebook post?

Well that is where it was posted...

 

[gusto79]

I certainly do...they are in the business of controlling thought and ideas...not mine because I am intelligent enough to sift through what is factual and what is story created bullshit. If you don't hold them accountable you wind up with any swinging dick who fancies him/herself as the next Art Buchwald/Molly Ivins...gotta make them accountable...heck they make barbers hold a license for gosh sakes.

I guess I just value the first amendment more than you do.

 

[TennesseeWaltz1]

I guess I just value the first amendment more than you do.

Oh so do I sir...it is the reason I wrote that.

 

[thewop]

Maybe a couple of years of crackdown on Media would be a good thing. If we could clean up the bias of MSNBC, Fox News, and to a lesser extent, the rest, it would be a good thing for our country to get back to news and away from the contest of who can make who look worse.

Really, if they were required to give the whole story, and not just the part that was convenient to their agenda, the whole country would be a little more sane. I'm tired of flipping between 3 channels to figure out what really happened.

If we all knew up front that the Dentist had paid $50k for a hunting tag to hunt a lion, and we knew for a fact (not just assumed) a certain number of tags were sold annually to fund wildlife preservation, would he be demonized by anyone outside of those who oppose hunting of all kinds? I doubt it. Sure the paid guide/landowner would still be in trouble, as they knowingly broke the law. That's not how any of it was presented, and instead the social media mob has decided, in extreme cases, that the man should be put to death. It's a commentary on news media, and where our society is more than it is about a lion being wrongfully slain.

 

[gusto79]

Oh so do I sir...it is the reason I wrote that.

You value it but you want to start restricting it and requiring a license to exercise it. And who is going to issue these licenses? Are you okay with the Obama administration deciding who gets to be journalists?

 

[CarolinaHawkeye]

So what was the article about?

 

[theIowaHawk]

So what was the article about?

I think he must be talking about the UVirginia rape scandal.

You know, something near and dear to OP's heart.

 

[TennesseeWaltz1]

You value it but you want to start restricting it and requiring a license to exercise it. And who is going to issue these licenses? Are you okay with the Obama administration deciding who gets to be journalists?

I don't want to restrict anything except bold face stinking lies...I've had them written about me by the most lowdown little pos shyster on the planet. All I got out of it were statements by me(which the paper wasn't going to allow until their lawyers made them) and a couple of retractions 1 year after they published their garbage.These clowns work in office buildings surrounded by more guards than Hitler had in the bunker...they are not held accountable and you have to work like heck to get any kind of admission that they didn't totally tell the truth...now is that too much for you to understand?

 

[theIowaHawk]

I don't want to restrict anything except bold face stinking lies...I've had them written about me by the most lowdown little pos shyster on the planet.

Please, please tell us more!

 

[22*43*51]

Is there a difference between Media and Press?

 

[TennesseeWaltz1]

Is there a difference between Media and Press?

Media would include both broadcast and print...press is print and probably digital.

 

[TennesseeWaltz1]

Please, please tell us more!

When I have been here longer and have built a trust that you can be objective I will be happy to share it with you.

 

[22*43*51]

Media would include both broadcast and print...press is print and probably digital.

Is there entertainment media vs. legitimate media?

How would determine between the two? Is Rolling Stone entertainment, or legitimate?

How can you tell?

 

[theIowaHawk]

 

[TennesseeWaltz1]

Is there entertainment media vs. legitimate media?

How would determine between the two? Is Rolling Stone entertainment, or legitimate?

How can you tell?

I would classify entertainment media as junk media in the same class as the tabloids...which direction all media is heading to.

 

[22*43*51]

I would classify entertainment media as junk media in the same class as the tabloids...which direction all media is heading to.

I'm just trying to get you to think about how hard that classification is to make. And what kind of power the person who makes it has.

As much as that stuff drives me crazy too, it is the bad that comes with the overwhelming good provided to us by the 1A.

I don't think we need to even consider going down the path of limiting media/press/thoughts/speech. You cannot turn around on that erosive path once you have started down it.

 

[TennesseeWaltz1]

I'm just trying to get you to think about how hard that classification is to make. And what kind of power the person who makes it has.

As much as that stuff drives me crazy too, it is the bad that comes with the overwhelming good provided to us by the 1A.

I don't think we need to even consider going down the path of limiting media/press/thoughts/speech. You cannot turn around on that erosive path once you have started down it.

Correct...but once again you must realize I will never sacrifice truth and integrity in the media in spite of the 1st Amendment...it does not give any news source a green light to ruin lives with lies...if it is printed it must be 100% dead on balls correct...if not it makes a mockery of the very thing they say gives them the right to publish a story.

 

[22*43*51]

Correct...but once again you must realize I will never sacrifice truth and integrity in the media in spite of the 1st Amendment...it does not give any news source a green light to ruin lives with lies...if it is printed it must be 100% dead on balls correct...if not it makes a mockery of the very thing they say gives them the right to publish a story.

But, 100% correct to whom?

Perception is different person to person so consensus is never truly obtained; just relented to.

You cannot find a truly accurate history book anywhere. You can find all sorts of books written about a historian's perception of what happened. But, it is never 100% accurate.

Even if he/she were alive and witnessed the story personally you wouldn't get 100% accuracy. You would just get their perception of what happened.

 

[TennesseeWaltz1]

But, 100% correct to whom?

Perception is different person to person so consensus is never truly obtained; just relented to.

You cannot find a truly accurate history book anywhere. You can find all sorts of books written about a historian's perception of what happened. But, it is never 100% accurate.

Even if he/she were alive and witnessed the story personally you wouldn't get 100% accuracy. You would just get their perception of what happened.

So you are saying if some publication writes something it doesn't have to be 100% correct? If it is something that could wreck a person's life and career it only has to be moderately truthful? Tell me you aren't a media hack...

 

[22*43*51]

So you are saying if some publication writes something it doesn't have to be 100% correct? If it is something that could wreck a person's life and career it only has to be moderately truthful? Tell me you aren't a media shyster...

How do you determine 100% correctness? Is it in the eye of the writer? The topic being written about? Tens of thousands of readers? Who decides that?

In the case of Libel, judges do. But I disagree with ratcheting down on something that is almost impossible to measure.

 

[TennesseeWaltz1]

How do you determine 100% correctness? Is it in the eye of the writer? The topic being written about? Tens of thousands of readers? Who decides that?

In the case of Libel, judges do. But I disagree with ratcheting down on something that is almost impossible to measure.

In the eye of the writer it better be 100% correct...or they become journalistic frauds. The hack who penned his hit piece on me has now had 6 jobs in media the last 5 years...what does that say about his integrity?

 

[SweatPantsStiffy]

Well that is where it was posted...

You're tall.

 

[TennesseeWaltz1]

You're tall.

You stalking me? LOL!

 

[torbee]

Maybe a couple of years of crackdown on Media would be a good thing. If we could clean up the bias of MSNBC, Fox News, and to a lesser extent, the rest, it would be a good thing for our country to get back to news and away from the contest of who can make who look worse.

.

I always find it interesting how few people realize that for the vast, vast majority of American history, the "media" was never intended nor expected to be unbiased. Why do you think so many newspapers still have names like The Democrat or The Republican, etc.?

For decades and decades - dating back to the creation of the printing press - pamphlet and print media was primarily driven by specific political interests and causes. (for example, many American publications were created to fight slavery and were called the abolitionist press).

If you had a political agenda or party to promote, you bought a printing press and got to cranking. Heck, this is primarily how American colonists in favor of independence gathered support for the American Revolution.

It really wasn't until post WWII that the idea of an "unbiased" press that would give equal treatment became the alleged norm. (and many would argue that never really held true). And I'd argue that era of at least ATTEMPTING some balanced reporting only lasted until the advent and popularity of cable news networks.

 

[hawkifann]

I'm with Torbee on this one. Plus, if the expectation were to become "100% dead-on balls accurate" and the "100% whole truth" (assuming we can determine such a thing), you've now completely eliminated breaking news and any ability for the press to serve as a watchdog.

 

[TennesseeWaltz1]

I'm with Torbee on this one. Plus, if the expectation were to become "100% dead-on balls accurate" and the "100% whole truth" (assuming we can determine such a thing), you've now completely eliminated breaking news and any ability for the press to serve as a watchdog.

Being a "watchdog" gives you the license to lie?...LOL Bullshit...

 

[theIowaHawk]

Being a "watchdog" gives you the license to lie?...LOL Bullshit...

Ok, so now you've written, publicly, a few times that the Rolling Stones "lied".

Do you have 100% proof of that?

 

[TennesseeWaltz1]

Ok, so now you've written, publicly, a few times that the Rolling Stones "lied".

Do you have 100% proof of that?

Have you been living under a rock someplace in IA? They have admitted the broad lied...they retracted the story...what more proof do you need? Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhheeeeeeeeeeeesssssssssssssssshhhhhh

 

[theIowaHawk]

Have you been living under a rock someplace in IA? They have admitted the broad lied...they retracted the story...what more proof do you need? Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhheeeeeeeeeeeesssssssssssssssshhhhhh

Do you know what a lie is?

Do you have proof that they knew she was lying?

Otherwise, aren't you putting something out via media (message board, facebook) that isn't 100% true?

 

[TennesseeWaltz1]

Do you know what a lie is?

Do you have proof that they knew she was lying?

Otherwise, aren't you putting something out via media (message board, facebook) that isn't 100% true?

If it isn't 100% correct it is a lie...if any or all of the story is retracted the author is a journalistic fraud. I even provided a link from your favorite folks.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/how-did-rolling-stone-get-rape-story-so-wrong