Ann, it's absolutely and unequivocably unethtical for a reporter to ever let the subject of his news article grant any kind of approval or disapproval let alone even see it before it is printed or broadcast. Again, this is one of the tenets of a free, fair and unencumbered press. This is meant to prevent the abuse of power by government to control freedom of speech. A reporter could get fired for doing it. I've seen it happen.

Unfortunately, the way the media have evolved, fair isn't always part of the equation. Teri's right, the complimentary comments Mark may have made likely won't see the light of day because they're not juicy enough. The line between news and entertainment is so blurred now. Sad, but true. Mark can say all he wants, positive or otherwise, but if MTV doesn't want to air it, that's its prerogative. Again, sad, but true. He'll have to find another medium through which to do it.

You hit the nail on the head with everything you said Dogstar. Although I still want to reiterate that I think that, even without the positive comments added, MTV did a great job with the article.

Michael

Thank you for being so concise in your explanation, Dog Star...but after the Creed experiences with MTV, it would have been quite naieve of Mark not to expect something like that to happen...i believe he chose his source well...as Michaels comment clearly illustrates:



~Ann~

Which is why I think he showed considerable restraint given the situation. He really could have trashed him if he wanted to, whether what he said was true or not, but he didn't.

That may be, but it's not as if the New York Times would be so interested in the breakup of Creed (though it did make the web headlines :D). MTV does have an audience that does listen to music and thus, would be interested.

It's kind of funny to me, given that MTV wouldn't give Creed the time of day at the outset and now they were probably foaming at the mouth for anything negative they could get on Creed. It could have been a lot worse for Scott S in that respect had Mark gone the Pantera route and just totally trashed him.

Dogsatar....


this comment can be taken another way as well...and tho Mark did not go the "Pantera route"...he gave them just enough ammo...;)

~Ann~

I know what you meant. And I don't profess to be naive enough to think he didn't have a plan. Publicity of any kind is good when you're starting something new.

Actually....I think Stapp was the smart one in turning down the interview with MTV. The music media has butchered most of what Stapp has ever said to make it spin their way, not Stapp's or Creed's.....the dude knows exactly what would have come out of an interview with them.....a nice "they said"....."he said" juicy article....that MTV would have obviously skewed negative in Stapp's favor. I hope that when he does have something to say it's in a more reputable forum than MTV News. MTV kinda strikes me as the "National Enquirer" of the music press.

You would have thought that thought would have entered his former bandmates minds when they agreed to do their interview..

As for a free and unbiased press.....everyone remember Jayson "if I don't wanna take the time to look for the truth....I'll just make it up" Blair? And he worked for the New York Times....not everything you read is just what it appears to be.

Too bad....all that positive stuff that was said will never see the light of day........ :wtf:

I disagree with you Jooji in that I think it was a huge blunder on Stapp's part not to get his side out. I think that if Stapp had done that the article might have taken a more positive turn. I also hope you watch the MTV news segment that airs at 5:50pm eastern. It is a full 2 min segment where MTV basically says that Mark took the high road when it came to speaking about Scott. Also more clips of the interview are aired as well as mention about the situation with Brian being back. MTV also states in this segment that Stapp was asked "numerous times" to be interviewed but declined. Check it out and see what you think.

Michael

even if it is at the expense of another?...but of course the ends justify the means...and any "reason" is better than no "reason" at all...and so it goes...sad but unfortunately true in the world of today...and someday maybe understanding will dawn on them that everything they do/say is connected to the universe in one way or another and will come back to them eventually, in one form or another.

but i believe there are still people of integrity around and at the end of the day...it's those people that can look at themselves in the mirror and know that they listened to their hearts...and did the best they could. :)

later
~peace

~Ann~
a.k.a. M.O.M/Cdm2
(maintaining my integrity)

It doesn't surprise me that MTV would do that. Like Teri and Dogstar said, they want it to be controversial. The media can take a rain shower and turn it into a hurricane if they wanted.

And Michael, in regard to your post last night - okay - I look forward to receiving a pm back from you, or, if you prefer, you can email me at [email protected] (Thank you for letting me know you read it)



Marcos, I don't think I ever took what you said out of context. In another thread I did read that you said you would support him, in light of what's come out. I hope that the true Creed fans will support Scott. I have been a fan since the beginning, so I do tend to cut Scott alot of slack. I still listen to Creed on a daily basis.

Everyone is entitled to feel differently. And I am very, very impressed that no one has been arguing (like a few weeks ago).

I'm not saying it's right; I'm just saying that's the mind-set in the entertainment world.


There aren't many of those people in the entertainment world, sad to say. It's a vicious existence, if you ask me. I think those people with the passion to pursue their art have a very rough road, despite the good fortune that comes with it. Our country is obsessed with celebrity and what goes along with it. I would think living like that could suck the life right out of a person.

[quote=Ann Allusion]right, Dogstar..and Mark will be honest with his "feelings" with anyone he can tell them to...remember the first "can of worms"...that was just honesty too, huh.

Yes, it was, and everything he told us that night in Nov. is true. It is official now Creed is no more. The man doesn't lie or twist the truth, he has no need too.

"Actually, Ann, the article points out that Stapp was asked to comment but he refused. Take the article how you will, just remember that Mark has never spun anything in the past. He's told fans at meet & greets how it is and what would be happening. All that ended up being fact."

Thank you Steve, I really appreciate you saying that.

I will reply as soon as I can Shadow. As a side note, I hope you can carry a message for me. I am recieving emails that I am being talked about at the passionbreedsfollowers bb where I have been banned. Here is what was said..

"Yes siree bob Anita...that old double standard that Scott and his fans are always held up to.
Sounds like michael doing his normal and only job of pr...and I hear serious back peddling...and the sound of Scott fans everywhere slamming their doors on ab."

This was posted by a woman or man named Frankie. I find the comment pretty funny and I would love to hear what issue it is that I am back peddling on. If you could, please invite her over here for a cheerful and spirited debate, where I may at least defend myself, and she or he can give me an update on all those crazy doors slamming since I guess she has the pulse of Stapp fans everywhere.

Michael

I will relay the message.

L M F A O !!!!!!!!!

And yes Steve, thank you again. Sami and I were at that meet & greet, and Mark has not changed any of what he has said. He has been honest and told the truth from day one. And sometimes the truth hurts.