Re: Idaho Statesman

Posted by LLB on April 18, 2002 at 08:32:09:

In Reply to: Re: Idaho Statesman posted by Lori Foster on April 18, 2002 at 06:34:24:

Lori -

I hardly know how to respond to your post. I read an article in a mainstream newspaper which I accepted at face value because it was not in a tabloid. Having been interviewed myself only a few times over the years, I know how important it is to answer interview questions very carefully so that nothing can be misconstrued. I assume RLH did the same, since as a former RWA president, she'd been interviewed many more times than that.

If I read an article about you in a newspaper or magazine (RT comes to mind), am I required to contact you before posting a link to it? That's simply absurd.

The fact remains that until RLH came to AAR and refuted - point by point - the article, anyone who read it would assume, since this is not a tabloid newspaper with articles about 100 year old women giving birth to 300 pound babies, that it is factual.

Simply providing a link to that article and starting a discussion based on it is not unprofessional. And when RLH said that she was misquoted and taken out of context, I went to the newspaper to get an explanation. That explanation is forthcoming. When it is given, we can all see what really happened. RLH would not even have contacted the paper had it not been for the discussion here.

I stand by the steps I took here - and I believe it is you who are the one who is behaving unprofessionally and in a vituperative manner.

I have no need for dirt, but now I feel the need to wash my hands.

LLB

Follow Ups:

Re: Idaho Statesman AK11 20:17:18 04/18/02 (3)
- Using the word "vituperative" constitutes "taking the moral high ground"? I would say it's a very apt description for Lori Foster's message (nt) Sophia 02:54:52 04/19/02 (2)
  - Re: Using the word AK11 03:03:15 04/19/02 (1)
    - Oh, I'm sorry, AK11. My mistake! nt Sophia 02:24:43 04/20/02 (0)
Re: Idaho Statesman I am so proud of you Lori avid reader 09:12:08 04/18/02 (1)
- do you bother reading the responses to your posts? Jill Rosenberg 11:36:09 04/18/02 (0)

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
: Lori - : I hardly know how to respond to your post. I read an article in a mainstream newspaper which I accepted at face value because it was not in a tabloid. Having been interviewed myself only a few times over the years, I know how important it is to answer interview questions very carefully so that nothing can be misconstrued. I assume RLH did the same, since as a former RWA president, she'd been interviewed many more times than that. : If I read an article about you in a newspaper or magazine (RT comes to mind), am I required to contact you before posting a link to it? That's simply absurd. : The fact remains that until RLH came to AAR and refuted - point by point - the article, anyone who read it would assume, since this is not a tabloid newspaper with articles about 100 year old women giving birth to 300 pound babies, that it is factual. : Simply providing a link to that article and starting a discussion based on it is not unprofessional. And when RLH said that she was misquoted and taken out of context, I went to the newspaper to get an explanation. That explanation is forthcoming. When it is given, we can all see what really happened. RLH would not even have contacted the paper had it not been for the discussion here. : I stand by the steps I took here - and I believe it is you who are the one who is behaving unprofessionally and in a vituperative manner. : I have no need for dirt, but now I feel the need to wash my hands. : LLB