2010.04.21 - PCSO asks Bloggers and TV Personalities to back off....

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Emma, I agree with your sentiment--the problem I have is when NG says and now to Emmy-Award INVESTIGATIVE journalist, AH. Here at WS, we are fortunate to have a more informed perspective. The mass public watching, IMO, believes it is an investigative show. I was talking to a friend of mine and she parrots EVERYTHING she hears as if it were the Gospel. That's the problem, IMO.

I so agree HH. The problem is the gullibility of the masses. But Kimster would seriously zap me with her ray gun were I to follow your excellent observation here with a discussion of the status of education in our country.

So I won't. :angel:
 
I thought Granny's speculation on Rons guilt was based on fact as we know it. Misty was strung out and Ron left her to babysit her kids. How can GMS counter that?

She could say that's Teresa's fault.

Why not call in and ask tonight Doc? 'Cause NG won't ask that one. IMO

:wink:
 
I'm tellin' ya, it will, because if I miss a potential wild show, things happen! It's some kind of "gibby missed it" law... And, I'm willing to be absent for the sake of yawl finding out some bombshells... :D



Thee and me!

I have to miss tomorrow night, so I'm sure something bigger will happen then!
 
Also, we have Ron's lawyer claiming LE told Ron to begin planning a funeral. I greatly doubt that report.


I saw a broadcast this morning about that rumor. They said LE was discussing the situation with the family at that meeting last week, and they wanted to know the legalities of declaring a person dead. Wait seven years and have a judge make the decision. How to do it sooner? They were told under the circumstances, they could probably get a declaration now if a judge agrees. They think that's where the "funeral" rumor came from.

About the funeral rumor:

http://www.news4jax.com/video/23225552/index.html
 
To all the posters I quoted, I repectfully shortened your posts but only for space and clarity of my response. :)

Except for the post of Astraea (that's how I came to be at WS---through NG and her coverage of Laci case but I didn't join until Caylee had been found).



The public drives the media. As long as we listen and read, the television personalities and bloggers will speak and write. It's simple economics. We demand news; they supply it. When demand exceeds supply, meaning there is a dearth of strong news, the supply is strained and the end result is a substandard end product.

I've stated this repeatedly, and I'll say it again. We cannot cast blame without holding the mirror up to ourselves. Whether we click on the blogs directly or read quotes on other websites; whether we tune in NG or read the NG threads here at WS, we are still consumers contributing to the demand. If we are truly opposed to the aforementioned popular brand of shoddy journalism, we must examine our consciences and make the tough choice to boycott it completely.

So very well said Bessie. I watch crime entertainment almost everynight. I read blogs on crime almost everyday. I read non-fiction books about crime all the time. There is one author in particular that I have every single book she has published. I look for interviews given by her too. I belong to only one crime board, but I also read others from time to time. I must admit shamefaced that I treat my interest in crime as a hobby. I do. I can't deny it. (Although, I am genuinely concerned about the missing and their famlies at the same time too. My interest is endless).

Can I point a finger and blame the newspaper reporters, crime entertainment TH's, the bloggers and the members of crime boards? No I can't. I am a part of the demand for information. JMHO.

NEWSFLASH:

For goodness sake, the NG show, and JVM show are not the news press - they are opinion/analysis/entertainment shows.

I could go on with a longer list of shows that are classified the same way.


(IMO - There's been something going on at the NG show (cough, cough, duckett case, cough, cough) where NG is walking on eggshells with regard to victim families.)

IMO.

I have a different view of why NG is treating RC so cautiously (not different from you EP, different from many others). I don't think she likes him or dislikes him. She has a major liable death lawsuit up her butt right now. She personally is being sued, as well as others associated with that show. She may be the TH on that show but she does have to answer to someone and that someone probably told her to cool it or they will lose that show and a LOT of money. She's not the only one that gets a paycheck from that show and she's not the only one that will lose a lot of money if they are found liable for the death of M. Duckett. She's doing her job. I even think she doesn't dislike Crystal. She's just doing her job. JMHO.

I think the part I bolded at the beginning of this thread about "media personalities" says it all. I dont consider them journalists by any means. They ARE good at what they do though.

After all, when I still paid for cable television (before moving and not subscribing again), I happened upon NG one day....sigh....it was at the beginning of the Anthony case when the protestors were outside their home(ICK!!). I watched it faithfully....until about the time the Cummings case began. If not for NG, I wouldnt likely know about either of these cases, or have been so intrigued!! I hate to admit that, but it is sadly the truth!

We now live in a technology based information society, that is out of control, and the average individual has simply not caught up yet. In not caught up, I mean not able to pick apart the info they are being bombarded with. It is very scarey really when you think of our younger generations and what they are exposed to. It has always been this way of course(media dictating beliefs and facts to society), but no doubt with the technological advances this has increased at an phenomenal rate. As a society we need to get a grasp on this in my opinion!!

Boy Astraea, a book could be written about what you have said right there sweetie. I think this out of control started with 24 hour news (CNN). I also watched the Anthony case and discussed it with my Husband (he is just as interested and his first case he was very interested in what JonBenet).

If anyone is still reading this really long post, thank you. I'll just say this, even though I'm ashamed of my interest and that I am a part of the problem I won't stop reading, watching and searching the internet for information. I won't stop coming to WS. I can only rationalize in my mind that I am keeping watch for these victims and their families. All JMHO.

To keep this on topic: Yes, bottom line, we all hold a tiny bit of responsibility for the demand for info. JMHO.
 
SNIPPED

Granny Hollar unleashed a swing at Ron last night on NG.

Granny Sykes will get all the air time. [I]Granny Flo might not even be there live.[/I] IMO.

I have to say I think you may be right!! Never thought about it this way! I bet NG will have GGS respond to clips of everything GH has said the last few nights.

What makes it unfair is GGS has had all day today to review GH and have her very prepared answers ready. Not good!! And not fair!!
 
Misty and her relatives are apparently an ignorant lot. I would prefer not to ever hear one word from them again. Really disappointed that NG, AH, and others are presenting their lies as the truth.
 
I saw a broadcast this morning about that rumor. They said LE was discussing the situation with the family at that meeting last week, and they wanted to know the legalities of declaring a person dead. Wait seven years and have a judge make the decision. How to do it sooner? They were told under the circumstances, they could probably get a declaration now if a judge agrees. They think that's where the "funeral" rumor came from.

About the funeral rumor:

http://www.news4jax.com/video/23225552/index.html

I don't think the statement from Ron's lawyer about the family planning a funeral can be called a rumor. The lawyer stated it as fact as Ron's mouthpiece.

It was a lie period used to garner sympathy for his client.
 
<respectfully snipped>

The public drives the media.

We cannot cast blame without holding the mirror up to ourselves. ... If we are truly opposed to the aforementioned popular brand of shoddy journalism, we must examine our consciences and make the tough choice to boycott it completely.


Bessie, thanks button not enough. Just wanted to say you expressed the dilemma very well. Appreciate your timely and introspective post.
 
I will def watch tonight. I never take any news report as absolute fact, but I think that watching the gma's debate will give some kind of insight, stuff to think about.
 
The thing is Art Harris IS in fact reliable. He NEVER clarified what kind of bones Misty looked at. He just said she was shown bones. The fact of the matter is what he reported was legit. She was shown Animal Bones. Maybe if LE would come out and clear some stuff up with people it would stop the rumors.
 
I'm hoping out of dignity for Haleigh this doesn't turn into a "Jerry Springer" type situation with both of 'em hollerin' and screamin' at each other and then taken off camera.

Do you think NG will allow them to talk to "each other'? She controls the show and who asks who questions - this is going to be a tough control over these two.
 
I'd just like to point something out, then I'll try to shut my mouth and not say anything further on this issue; One of the points that I've heard Levi raise (or at least attempt to) during his recent guest appearances, pertains to the source(s), in this particular case, Gma's source(s) for all of her recent proclamations and, as Levi pointed out, Gma Hollar can't even recall precisely who told her what - instead her reply, when asked for specifics, was something along the lines of "Oh one of em in Florida." Why is this so important? Its important, not only because any information pertaining to a missing, possibly murdered child case, should naturally be of the utmost importance, especially when aired publicly on national television - its important because it makes the difference between the individual who is simply publicly sharing their own personal opinion(s) and the person who genuinely has credible information relating to the case.

Let's face it, if NG and JVM invited guests on their programs simply to add another opinion to their panel of guests, we'd all be invited. Gma Hollars opinion is/has been given special favor purely because of her close proximity to the case; the family relation. IMO, that may be enough to get her (Gma Hollar's) foot in the door, so to say, but it shouldn't be enough to keep inviting her back when she clearly can't even give (or recall) the important specifics related to the information she's disclosing.

Sadly, due to NG's and JVM's lowered bar of standards regarding their guest's credibility, they've become nothing more than a public national forum whereby family members and others related to a criminal case can appear to duel it out. Sadly, it has become no different, IMO, than the Jerry Springer Show - chairs being flung across the room. As long as viewers realize this, there isn't any danger (take it with a grain of salt...) but unfortunately due to NG & JVM's programs covering true crimes and cloaked in a "fighting for justice" platform, people take what they and their guests say very seriously. The public's opinions then become prejudiced - not by facts, but by which guest, in this case, it will be Gma Hollar vs. Gma Sykes, is more likeable or seems more believable.

With so much potential to do so much good, what a shame that these programs have been reduced to this but, lets not kid ourselves, this is all about ratings and $$$ - nothing more and nothing less.
JMHO ~
 
I don't think the statement from Ron's lawyer about the family planning a funeral can be called a rumor. The lawyer stated it as fact as Ron's mouthpiece.

It was a lie period used to garner sympathy for his client.

Exactly....
 
The thing is Art Harris IS in fact reliable. He NEVER clarified what kind of bones Misty looked at. He just said she was shown bones. The fact of the matter is what he reported was legit. She was shown Animal Bones. Maybe if LE would come out and clear some stuff up with people it would stop the rumors.

I respectfully disagree. He did in fact imply, infer, allow to promulgate the notion that the bones were Haleigh's. Whether he half-heartedly attempted to keep it on a speculative note, he still put it out there.

What LE does to run their case is what they feel they have to do and because media personalities who seem to want to get on TV choose to twist things as though they wrote for the worst tabloid newspapers is not LE's fault. They have to take this case to court at some point and proceed in the manner they feel will best protect their evidence.

Art Harris and his ilk.....well, I should never confuse them with journalists.
 
The thing is Art Harris IS in fact reliable. He NEVER clarified what kind of bones Misty looked at. He just said she was shown bones. The fact of the matter is what he reported was legit. She was shown Animal Bones. Maybe if LE would come out and clear some stuff up with people it would stop the rumors.

2010.04.21 - Art Harris Reports,Misty saw animal bones @ the dock - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

interesting debate on this is @ the above thread.
 
has it been reported as stated BY LE that Misty was ever "shown bones"? Because I have only heard that covered on AH and NG and for all the reasons listed in the last two or three pages of this thread, they are not credible sources of FACTS.

I don't recall LE ever admitting that MC was shown bones at all. If I am wrong I will happily apologize.
 
even good journalists muck stuff up w/their own and/or networks opinions and interests. I've had it happen personally and it wasn't even a big or important story.
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
143
Guests online
2,528
Total visitors
2,671

Forum statistics

Threads
601,265
Messages
18,121,526
Members
230,996
Latest member
unnamedTV
Back
Top