Survivor - Lake Tahoe Article

[Slander]

The article is crap. It looks copy and pasted. Jimi's quote is from years ago I believe and Frankie's quote is from an interview while Jimi was still in the band. What crap. Reporter should be canned. Terrible journalism. Extremely misleading.



You stated that you think it's terrible to trash someone (i am assuming FS) that is not here to defend themselves. Is this report on the board to defend himself from your opinionated comments? Trashing is a two way street, not just when it is something bad about FS.

Are you referring to the reporter who wrote the article. I didn't trash him personally at all. I trashed the article which was poorly written in misleading. There is a difference.

[Lark]

Poorly written in your opinion, I bet his Momma is damn proud and thinks its a good article! Differences of opinion, personally or professionally. Personally speaking, the few that I know that have made negative remarks about FS are speaking from Personal experience. Not from reading poorly written articles.

[axecrew]

The article is crap. It looks copy and pasted. Jimi's quote is from years ago I believe and Frankie's quote is from an interview while Jimi was still in the band. What crap. Reporter should be canned. Terrible journalism. Extremely misleading.



You stated that you think it's terrible to trash someone (i am assuming FS) that is not here to defend themselves. Is this report on the board to defend himself from your opinionated comments? Trashing is a two way street, not just when it is something bad about FS.

Are you referring to the reporter who wrote the article. I didn't trash him personally at all. I trashed the article which was poorly written in misleading. There is a difference.

Slander...sorry but if you look at it objectively....you are wrong...you did trash the reporter by saying he should be canned. And by calling it terrible journalism. By saying that you did actually bring the writer into it. Had you said they,the newspaper, should be reprimanded or whatever that would be different.
I'm surprised that a journalist, like yourself, would make this mistake.

[Joe Vana]

The article is crap. It looks copy and pasted. Jimi's quote is from years ago I believe and Frankie's quote is from an interview while Jimi was still in the band. What crap. Reporter should be canned. Terrible journalism. Extremely misleading.



You stated that you think it's terrible to trash someone (i am assuming FS) that is not here to defend themselves. Is this report on the board to defend himself from your opinionated comments? Trashing is a two way street, not just when it is something bad about FS.

I think it's just lazy reporting work by some jamoke that probably has to interview every band that comes to the casinos and is probably lazy, and didn't do his homework...or even talk to the band....

JJ has better things to do with his time I am sure, and so does JP and FS for that matter....

JV

[Slander]

Poorly written in your opinion.

In anyone's opinion who has ever taken beginning journalism.

[Lark]

PLease don't speak for everyone's opinion. It is YOUR opinion. You stand by it, don't drag everyone into YOUR opinion. You have the right to have YOUR OWN opinion.

[Slander]

PLease don't speak for everyone's opinion. It is YOUR opinion. You stand by it, don't drag everyone into YOUR opinion. You have the right to have YOUR OWN opinion.

Guy do you really not understand why this is a poorly written article? Seriously 2 plus 2 equals four. That's not an opinion that is fact. There is a way to construct a basic news article and rearranging quotes to make it sound like the article is current isn't the way to do it. It's misleading. It's not accurate. It the news business accuracy is everything.

[Lark]

First of all, I am not a guy, that was a false assumption on your part with no evidence or facts to support it. But according to you, I am not only one that makes statements without evidence to back them up. Secondly, I was making a point about opinions, not about Pulitzer Prize Winning Journalism.

[Slander]

you did trash the reporter by saying he should be canned. And by calling it terrible journalism. By saying that you did actually bring the writer into it. Had you said they,the newspaper, should be reprimanded or whatever that would be different.

Guy you can get canned if you attempt to mislead people in a news story. It's not honest. It's not accurate. I can't believe I'm even having to spell this out. This article may be accuarate in it's quotes of the parties but it's not accurate in its timeline. Sorry that's not a persronal attack on the reporter. It's a fact. Hell the reporter may be a great guy what difference does it make. I hope his momma is proud of him. This article however would be held up as an example of how NOT to write a piece.

[Slander]

First of all, I am not a guy, that was a false assumption on your part with no evidence or facts to support it. But according to you, I am not only one that makes statements without evidence to back them up. Secondly, I was making a point about opinions, not about Pulitzer Prize Winning Journalism.

My apologizies. Guy was used in the generic sense. Like "hey guys." Very informal. It was your expert "opinion" that this is the way an article should be writtern. It clearly is not. I know you can see the difference. Please tell me you can see the difference. Hey I got a great idea why don't you write an article with old quotes from JP, DB, FS and we post it and we can live in fantasy land and pretend like the band never broke up. I'm sure people will have the "OPINION" that the article is great, the statements true, but unfortunately it wouldn't be very accurate now would it?

[Lark]

It was your expert "opinion" that this is the way an article should be writtern. It clearly is not. I know you can see the difference

Please stop putting words in my mouth.

I never implied that this is the way an article should be written. I only implied that the value of the material is subject to the reader. If a reader has never read, heard or was unaware of any of these events, then the article would have been of value to him, however, I was around during those events, so, yes, I am aware the article facts are a little out dated. However to all the Senior Citizens that visited the casino and went to the show, this may have been breaking news to them. I was pointing out that we all have our right to have an opinion, about FS, this article and the state of the nation in general, it is our right to form and opinion, whether we know the person personally or not. I bet you have an opinion of Brittney Spears and have never met her. If I am to guess correctly, I bet you have had casual conversation about her and bashed her as a mother or a trainwreck, all because of what you see or read on the internet. IT IS YOUR RIGHT SO DON'T BASH US FOR THAT SAME RIGHT and please don't bash the people that have formed opinion on FS, Brittney Spears etc from personal experience. That's all.

[Slander]

I bet you have an opinion of Brittney Spears and have never met her. If I am to guess correctly, I bet you have had casual conversation about her and bashed her as a mother or a trainwreck, all because of what you see or read on the internet. IT IS YOUR RIGHT SO DON'T BASH US FOR THAT SAME RIGHT and please don't bash the people that have formed opinion on FS, Brittney Spears etc from personal experience. That's all.

Please pass what you are smoking. I can honestly say I don't waste a second of my life on celebrity gossip. Sorry not my thing. The bottom line is that the reporter made it sound like the quotes were current. Am I missing something here? It's not accurate. What is the argument here? Even if the article is used for historical perspective it really isn't that accurate because the quotes are not attributed to a place and time.

[Slander]

I only implied that the value of the material is subject to the reader. If a reader has never read, heard or was unaware of any of these events, then the article would have been of value to him, however, I was around during those events, so, yes, I am aware the article facts are a little out dated.

In journalism if there is not a lot of value if the facts are not accurate.

[Lark]

were the facts not accurate or just old?

[Slander]

were the facts not accurate or just old?

Actually both. The quotes become inaccurate when they are not put in proper perspective. This is the kind of garbage that keeps entertainers from speaking to the press at all. So yes while the quotes may be accurate they are arranged so the article is not accurate. Nice try.