Re: a mainstream message?

[Al Tschaeche <antatnsu@pacbell.net>]

Michael Stabin wrote:

> Ron K wrote:
>
> This statement was backed up by a _journalist_, actually a columnist, Ellen
> Goodman, in a particularly insightful editorial some years back.  She
> likened debate in the US today on any major issue to a group of people using
> earplugs and megaphones, and said the best way to get hung up on if asked
> for an interview by a media outlet was to say "Well, I can see both sides of
> that issue..."  I don't think that embracing hyperbole should be our
> strategy, but Ron is right that the sensible and reasonable voice is seldom
> heard in today's media environment.  Controversy sells papers and makes 60
> Minutes ratings shares; the truth is not always on the agenda, if it's
> boring.

So, why can't we say to the media things such as:  The anti nuclear people lie
when they say small doses will kill you.  That should get a reporter's
attention.

Why can't we say: Moving the tailings pile at Moab will not save one life and is
a great waste of taxpayer's money.

Why can't we call the antis on all their misinformation in such a way as to be
controversial and thus get the reporters to report our point of view?  I think
it would work.  It has for me in the past.

Al Tschaeche antatnsu@pacbell.net
begin:vcard 
n:Tschaeche;Al
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
org:Nuclear Standards Unlimited
version:2.1
email;internet:antatnsu@postoffice.pacbell.net
title:CEO
x-mozilla-cpt:;0
fn:Al Tschaeche
end:vcard