Note: To protect the privacy of our members, e-mail addresses have been removed from the archived messages. As a result, some links may be broken.
What is better: Misinformation or no information at all? Do you ever
find yourself having to re-teach the truth?
IMHO, as most of you might expect, I would prefer no information over
misinformation. Misinformation can cause too much damage. One might
suggest that someone later on (one of the news kids discovery the "tell the
truth" gene, as I think Henry suggested) will take the misinformation and
correct it. Perhaps.
But we are not limited to just these two choices, are we? We certainly
know enough to tell the truth about a lot of things. Literary license is no
excuse, and marketing is not an acceptable rationale. There is, in my mind,
no excuse for not stating the facts as they are well known.
If there is a question, then all sides should be presented. I know that
this is impractical for a movie, but then we should discuss whether the
disputed materials should be left out altogether. It's a point which sort
of feels like the old saw, "If you can't say something nice, don't say
anything at all." So, if you can't say it's a fact, then don't say it.
I can't see any advantage to supplying mis- or dys-information.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 10 2000 - 15:33:32 PDT