From Kagemushi on alt.fan.furry: "THIS, I repeat, is how one talks to a reporter: http://www.unclekage.com/waynesuburban.gif" This article was written pre-convention; copies of it were floating around the con all weekend.
Agreed. This is one good article.
I'm impressed. While Kage did a fine job of representing the fandom, the real breath of fresh air is that the reporter apparently had no interest in writing something lurid and sensational.
I'm with Linnaeus on this one. Granted, Kage did a great job of representing Furries, and I don't mean to steal his thunder on this -- but it wouldn't have taken much, had the reporter decided the article was too boring, for him to scrounge around and find a less-desirable individual to serve as a counter-viewpoint and speak out on what Furry fandom means to him.
Kudos goes to both the reporter and Kage for this exceptional article.
"We use them for divine retribution."
I liked the article so much I had to transcribe it.Text version may be found here:http://www.xydexx.com/anthrofurry/furries.htmShare and enjoy! -=)
Furry Fandom Infocenter
Yeppers, very similar to the report on "All things considered" from FC99. Its nice to see another decent article...its been a dry spell since 1999.
Actually, that was "Beyond Computers" by Public Radio International, not "All Things Considered". There's an MP3 file of the segment available.
Well, with all due respect to Mr. Conway for his successful and enjoyable convention, I feel it a little elitist to state "THIS is how one talks to a reporter" like it was the solely the inexperience of others that have led them to be the butt of bad articles.
This is a Public Service Announcement article, and is the kind of thing assigned to junior reporters. They take a press release, ask a few questions of their contact, and print what they were told. It is no more significant than a paid advertisement, and is done for everything from air shows to museum exhibits. He printed nothing bad because he was TOLD nothing bad. Simple as that.
Comparing this to investigative journalism (good and bad), where the reporter is in the field and writing what he or she sees, is rather shortsighted. They are two different things, and I hold that no press liaison, however good, can fend off a reporter determined to find something shocking to say.
The best way to make sure no one says anything bad about you is to enforce a total press blackout like Anthrocon has done. If a reporter seeking to have bad things to say had seen Anthrocon 2001, he would undoubtedly have had plenty. But then, the same reporter probably could and would make an Elderhostel meeting sound sinister.
More information about formatting options