News Media Management (or not)

[billbob]

In reference to the recent Oregonian blog on last weekend's five climber incident, where the Oregonian included excerpts taken from the CC.com site, several issues are raised that should (IMO) be discussed here. For starters, if we assume that any and all news media are reading our posts and taking our comments out of context as they wish in order to further their own agenda, then must we mitigate and edit our writings every time we want to speak our mind so as to prevent such unwanted news clips? Kinda sucks, doesn't it? One of the great things about CC.com is that members are free to express whatever thoughts they have, even if it is inflammatory or bullshit or whatever... How can people here continue to give their opinions, to employ the means of this much-loved venue, if The News is always watching and waiting to spin things in ways that ultimately work very much against us climbers? Yet there appears to be no realistic mechanism to prevent this from happening and still keep an open forum. News media will continue to exploit whatever sources they can find if they believe it will further their goals. Is the result of that to be an increased public opinion against climbers, thenceforth bringing about an increase in novel legislation focused on limiting the heretofore rights accepted by NW climbers as our basic rights? We just went through the MLU issue and one has to wonder - what will be next?

[dinomyte]

Interesting Bill....

 

In various jobs that I've had over the years I have been forced to speak to the press. I can't count the number of times I've been misquoted, and I can count on one hand the number of times I think the press presented a clear unbiased summary including my comments.

 

Still, this forum is unique. It is damn difficult to communicate sarcasm via an email or post, as the reader cannot hear intonation or see expression or body language. For that reason, I personally avoid saying things like "Maybe everyone should have to pass a test before climbing." Could be sarcasm, but hard to tell.

 

And, I particularly avoid saying things like, "Hell, you don't need a rope to climb Jeff" becuase not only is the sarcasm difficult to detect, but you are potentially giving bad advice to someone who might take you seriously. It's in this area, that I feel we do have a responsibility, even though there are always those who state the obvious, "Climbing is dangerous..." and noting that everyone should do the homework.

 

I'll continue to state my opinion on here, even if it's unpopular, but I try not to spout pure incessant bullshit, here or anywhere.

Edited May 17, 2007 by dinomyte

[mattp]

Billbob, we have had many discussions related to this question over the years. CC.COM IS a public forum, but in many ways we get so comfortable wasting time at work or logging in after the kids go to bed that we treat it like a private playground. We’ve got our pet issues, or our pet peeves with certain posters, and we fling about all kinds of ill thought or maybe even ill intentioned spew without a second thought.

 

E-mail communication can be similar, and that is why I try to avoid it in my professional life. People tend to treat it as informal communication, but our messages are written down and they tend to be preserved or forwarded to someone we don’t anticipate.

 

The history of this site shows that your concern is based in reality. A few years ago, I was called names for suggesting that rangers and reporters read cc.com, but over and over again we have seen that they do and that our words here have real effect elsewhere. I don’t think there is any “answer” to your query, but all of us should keep this in mind

[Frikadeller]

Well I certainly learned a lesson about this.

 

From now on I am gonna use a [sarcasm] tag anytime I am felling snarky and posting about it here.

 

I apologize to anyone who got pissed at me because of my comments taken out of context and abused by some reporters.

[Sunnyside_up]

 

Vultures. Vultures everywhere!