RE: virus: Re: virus-digest V3 #34

Richard Brodie (richard@brodietech.com)
Sat, 6 Feb 1999 00:11:06 -0800

It's amazing that most people don't realize that authors go on talk shows to sell books, and movie stars to sell movies.

Richard Brodie richard@brodietech.com http://www.brodietech.com/rbrodie/ Author, "Virus of the Mind: The New Science of the Meme" http://www.brodietech.com/rbrodie/votm.htm Free newsletter! Visit Meme Central at
http://www.brodietech.com/rbrodie/meme.htm

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-virus@lucifer.com [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com]On Behalf Of Sodom
Sent: Friday, February 5, 1999 1:58 PM
To: virus@lucifer.com
Subject: Re: virus: Re: virus-digest V3 #34

haha - thats funny. If Phillip Morris was a tv network - I guess you wouldnt
mind the legal advertising lie "Cigarettes arent addictive" as a part of the 5:00 news on the Phillip Morris channel "Today scientists discovered - Cigis aren't addictive - Hurah - now go buy a pack" while the news casters (hired for
their sexy looks) sit and puff at their desks - ever smiling.

Reed, this is the knit I am picking. The content is irrelevant. An advertisement presented as information without a disclaimer is terribly unethical in my opinion, and the opinion of most television producers who are
very careful to label non-obvious advertisemnts as such. If you ever watch MSNBC or ABC - you will see that refrences to Microsoft and Disney respectivly
have disclaimers attached.

I question Oprah's integrity - and so far I have seen or heard nothing to dissuade me. What I see is an excellent entertainer who knows how to make money
and exploit people. That is fine, it is the business she is in - good for her.

Bill Roh

Reed Konsler wrote:

> William Roh:
> > I have no problem with a guest talking about their show
> >- - that is not the issue. This show was dedicated 100% to advertising
her
> >movie and telling the viewers to go see the movie - never moving away
> >from the subject. The show had one purpose only - to sell tickets to her
> >movie. The station had no vested interest in the movie. This is a
> >conflict of interests and should have had a disclaimer attached. Of
> >course - it is Oprah - so rating were the only concern of the station.
> >Money overpowers morals in most cases and she is in front of the line
> >for the biggest piece of the cake. I don't object to her being
> >successful or an entertainer - but these things are not a license for
> >deception.
>
> The question is, when did she affirm your list of ethical guidelines?
> What are the common denominator ethics of talk-show hosts?
> Methinks I see knits being picked.
>
> Reed
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Reed Konsler konsler@ascat.harvard.edu
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------