[*BCM*] bad news and good news
jym at econet.org
Fri Aug 14 23:23:13 EDT 2009
=v= My approach with recalcitrant media goes like this:
o Vent on an email list such as this one and pay attention
to feedback, which is afer all from people who agree with
at least part of my worldview.
o If the media story has a comments/blog section, refine the
message a bit and post it there. These are for the most
part rantfests. Hateful replies will come rolling in, for
the most part a total waste of time but sometimes you get
a sense of an argument you need to rebut.
- Some especially shoddy media will cull their comments
for ranting soundbytes, so I don't participate there.
o With feedback from friends and foes, refine the message
some more and email it to the letters page. Odds are that
it won't get printed but you'll have your thoughts better-
organized and a better written piece.
- For more egregious media coverage I go so far as to put
together a list of good talking points and send them to
friendly email lists, forums, etc. with instructions for
sending a letter. With luck they get several letters
and maybe one will be printed.
o If my well-written piece isn't printed, publicize the heck
out of it online. "The _Globe_ printed all these rants
(link to rants) but chose not to print this fine letter"
would be a well-deserved thing to mention.
=v= Media sources are extremely thin-skinned. A letter to them
would do well to be moderate with their comments about how bad
the paper, station, article, etc. is, but should be firm and
uncompromising in correcting falsehoods. If they refuse to
print that, then again, fair game to rip them apart where they
will never officially reply. (Sometimes they *do* officially
reply, and it's rarely pretty for them.)
More information about the Bostoncriticalmass