Re: WLS convention / media

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 11/6/2002 10:27:44 AM Eastern Standard Time,

datwell@... writes:

> Free reign to the press would not be a good idea as they do have the

> tendency to twist whatever information they have free reign to, they could

> edit sound bites or reports to make it " sound " like whatever they wanted to

> sell newspapers or time on news TV -- Way too big of a risk IMO.

*****************************

Yes, you're all right about this one. I'm in way over my head here

anyway...LOL I'm with Dave, all I really wanted was a big party anyway.

in NJ

[Guest guest]

I would be opposed to inviting the media for several reasons -- privacy

being one, not everyone is " out of the closet " and that privacy should be

respected but, and I guess more importantly is that media will

sensationalize any news to make it news worthy and by virtue of inviting

them we give permission for them to write it as they want or film it as they

want and broadcast it as they want -- I would not want to take that risk

with the media -- they are not the top of the food chain when it comes to

accurate information given to the public (sorry if I step on any media

persons toes here) but what makes a story news worthy?

Nope, I would much prefer some media savvy people form a committee for us

and write and distribute press releases so the media would actually get the

information that we want them to have and then they can print it or not

print it.

I would be opposed to any one person or any group of people attending the

convention being allowed to speak to the media as representatives of our

group without prior group approval of those " chosen representatives " by vote

of the group as a whole.

Free reign to the press would not be a good idea as they do have the

tendency to twist whatever information they have free reign to, they could

edit sound bites or reports to make it " sound " like whatever they wanted to

sell newspapers or time on news TV -- Way too big of a risk IMO.

I am sure there is a strong possibility that groups who are " pro " big body

image beauty and very " anti " WLS could protest our meeting and THAT would

make the news -- the " real " WLS person who is 10 years post-op, healthy and

doing great would not make the news... see? Nothing sensational about a

person who is doing well... they would dig in and find the sick ones, the

anti-WLS ones the ones that sell newspapers and advertisement on TV

stations.

If the media were in any way given unrestricted access to any part of this

meeting I would not attend. If a media committee were formed for us and by

us to act as our " spokes persons " then I would attend. If camera's were

allowed anywhere that EVERY single person being filmed did not give

permission I would not attend. If the committee were to invite and choose

the people who would be in front of the camera and speak for us as a group I

would attend.

That is how I feel about the media involvement -- it would be a good thing

as long as we have complete control over what is said, written and who is

interviewed as spokes people for our group.

hugz,

~denise

[Guest guest]

I would be opposed to inviting the media for several reasons -- privacy

being one, not everyone is " out of the closet " and that privacy should be

respected but, and I guess more importantly is that media will

sensationalize any news to make it news worthy and by virtue of inviting

them we give permission for them to write it as they want or film it as they

want and broadcast it as they want -- I would not want to take that risk

with the media -- they are not the top of the food chain when it comes to

accurate information given to the public (sorry if I step on any media

persons toes here) but what makes a story news worthy?

Nope, I would much prefer some media savvy people form a committee for us

and write and distribute press releases so the media would actually get the

information that we want them to have and then they can print it or not

print it.

I would be opposed to any one person or any group of people attending the

convention being allowed to speak to the media as representatives of our

group without prior group approval of those " chosen representatives " by vote

of the group as a whole.

Free reign to the press would not be a good idea as they do have the

tendency to twist whatever information they have free reign to, they could

edit sound bites or reports to make it " sound " like whatever they wanted to

sell newspapers or time on news TV -- Way too big of a risk IMO.

I am sure there is a strong possibility that groups who are " pro " big body

image beauty and very " anti " WLS could protest our meeting and THAT would

make the news -- the " real " WLS person who is 10 years post-op, healthy and

doing great would not make the news... see? Nothing sensational about a

person who is doing well... they would dig in and find the sick ones, the

anti-WLS ones the ones that sell newspapers and advertisement on TV

stations.

If the media were in any way given unrestricted access to any part of this

meeting I would not attend. If a media committee were formed for us and by

us to act as our " spokes persons " then I would attend. If camera's were

allowed anywhere that EVERY single person being filmed did not give

permission I would not attend. If the committee were to invite and choose

the people who would be in front of the camera and speak for us as a group I

would attend.

That is how I feel about the media involvement -- it would be a good thing

as long as we have complete control over what is said, written and who is

interviewed as spokes people for our group.

hugz,

~denise