alabamagrizzly said:IdaGriz01 said:He does have that freedom. Since I'm "old school" (or just old), I believe that any specially-granted freedom (and it is specially granted, not a "natural right," BTW) comes with an attendant responsibility. That responsibility is to use his/her privileged position wisely and fairly.alabamagrizzly said:... So I think I’m coming at this from a different point of view. Your defending the journalist’s right (or freedom) to ask the questions he wants to get his story and I get that. There are interviews that do need to be handled that way. I think the reason for the reaction to most on this thread is they see a Griz family member being asked a loaded question and are coming to his defense letting Mint know it wasn’t appreciated.
So in terms of "incentives," I totally agree with those who jumped on the interviewer -- to let him know that his approach "was not appreciated" and that he should avoid the attempt at sensationalism in the future.
But to then dismiss the entire interview as worthless is neither fair nor smart. The interviewer did not try to belabor the Stitt-Hauck point, and conducted an informative and balanced interview the rest of of the way. The results were well worth hearing, and (in my view) only enhanced Reese's stature.
And now we have reached our conclusion. I agree with all you say there. It’s been a pleasure debating this with you in a very cordial way.
See PR, it’s not hard to debate and not come off as being rude and insulting. :thumb:
You two have been complete cocks to each other throughout this entire evolution and as a result I have blocked you. I can’t read any more of your attack-mode drivel. :lol: