As I went about my duties today, I fought this skirmish. Look at the way this guy lumps 'psychics' in with 'aerospace engineers'. And before he changed the webpage, the next to last paragraph HAD said the Challenger blew up last weekend, not the Columbia:
I e-mailed the man who wrote the piece. Three exchanges, and I hope he sees things in a little different light now:
---------
MY FIRST E-MAIL:
A San Francisco amateur astronomer who photographs the space shuttles whenever their orbits carry them over the Bay Area has captured five strange and provocative images of the shuttle Columbia just as it was re-entering the Earth's atmosphere before dawn Saturday....
"They clearly record an electrical discharge like a lightning bolt flashing past, and I was snapping the pictures almost exactly . . . when the Columbia may have begun breaking up during re-entry," he said.
You got the name of the shuttle wrong at the end of your article (the Columbia blew up last weekend, not the Challenger), and you say we should depend on you and your mainstream 'news' for enlightenment?
---------
That was a typo. If that's your only standard for debunking something you're logic is flawed.
But I like your research.
---------
Then why are you writing articles for the people trying to destroy America? YOUR debunking of an engineer as 'self-published' is a pathetic attempt to lead readers to believe only you, as someone who is published, can be trusted.
But the internet has changed all that, and that's why your article attacks freedom of speech.
---------
Self-published is simply a fact about Mr. Maxson's book. But so is the fact that he is an aerospace engineer that worked for Lockheed on rocket launches.
I found him to be credible and knowledgable. He had a contrary view to NASA but told me he didn't consider himself a conspiracy buff.
I don't get your hostile tone. You're entitled, certainly. And I appreciate your comments.
But I'm proud to work for a company like the San Antoniuo Expresss-News, which contrary to your view, is not trying to destroy America.
The Internet is great. But a lot of stuff on it is pure crap.
---------
If you were ASSIGNED the task of writing the article, then the purpose of the piece is most likely to help your company stay in business. The old print papers can't compete with free news sources, so an attempt must be made to destroy those free sources.
And the comments in your article that the internet is 'startlingly free of intellectual control' and offers an 'uncrontrolled set of ideas', are meant to suggest to the reader that there is an alternative to freedom of speech...CONTROL of speech. No matter WHERE the quotes came from, they are intended to plant the idea of internet control in the reader's mind. That would violate the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The idea is abhorrent, no matter HOW it is presented.
If you cooked up the idea for the article, you need to examine your priorities. If your company ordered you to write it, you work for scum.
---------
I thank you for your comments. The correction to the story has been made.
I must say, however, it sounds like you can dish it out, but just can't take it. You want everyone to think like you, I guess.
I wasn't shocked by Prof. Miller's comments -- which boil down to just because someone says something and it can go with lightning speed around the world doesn't automatically mean that its accurate or even intelligent.
I'm sure in the grand scheme there are intelligent, well-informed conspiracy theorists and that the opposite is true, too.
My story was assigned as a feature pice. But no, my bosses aren't scum. Theories by nature are open to debate.
---------
The new U.S. government is corporate fascism in action. FCC rules now allow a handful of people to control all media in the U.S. Your paper will parrot what they say. That's why your bosses are scum...any representative of the new fascist govt is scum. If you think you have freedom of speech, you are wrong. You, as a writer for the paper, will always have an 'incorrect' idea tweaked here and there. If you don't believe it, just try inserting something critical of your paper's controlling interests into one of your articles. Your editor will change it, or he/she will be out of a job. You are a writer for the media arm of the new corporate fascist government, whether you realize it yet or not. That is what infowars.com attempts to make people aware of...that our perverse new government is trampling on Constitional rights. Not theory...fact.
Thanks for your patient exchange. Best wishes.
---------
So did I get through to the man? I'm sure he turned in a good bit of writing, and his editor butchered it until it was fit to print. I don't think this guy was even AWARE of the fact that a 'rocket scientist' had been compared to a 'psychic'. The kid just wants his byline and his paycheck. But now maybe he'll think about things differently. Was this a windmill or a giant? I can't say, but I engaged in the battle. If we don't have freedom of speech and thought, we have nothing. And we're losing our freedoms sure as sunrise. This is one of my typical, unglamorous 'battles', for what it's worth. I don't expect it will amount to much, because today NASA...100% military...took possession of the evidence. They'll pronounce the 'anomaly' lightning, or lense refraction or something: