221 lines
6.9 KiB
Plaintext
221 lines
6.9 KiB
Plaintext
|
|
SUBJECT: JFORUM UFO POLL ON COMPUSERVE FILE: UFO2357
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Its time once again for my annual JFORUM UFO Poll.
|
|
|
|
1: Do you, as a journalism professional, feel that the subject of UFOs is one
|
|
that should be taken seriously by the media? Or do you think it has already
|
|
gotten too much press?
|
|
|
|
2: What seems to be the policy on UFO stories at your house? Does your editor
|
|
avoid the "in-depth" UFO article, favoring instead the human interest angle
|
|
("See the Funny Guy who Wants to Build a UFO Landing Pad")? Do you avoid the
|
|
subject entirely? Or do you go with whatever stories come across?
|
|
|
|
3: How do you view the current crop of UFO Abduction tales, such as
|
|
"Communion" and "Intruders"? How about the Government Documents/Cover-up Angle
|
|
(last year's MJ-12 debacle, for instance)? The latest sighting flaps,
|
|
involving a large boomerang-shaped object over several areas of the country
|
|
(Hudson Valley; Wytheville, VA; Pittsburgh; Texarkana)?
|
|
|
|
4: How can Ufologists upgrade their credibility with reporters? How can we
|
|
increase the "palatability" of the subject, if at all?
|
|
|
|
5: What would it take to convince your house to run an in-depth,
|
|
Watergate-style, "XYZ News has learned..." story on the UFO problem? What sort
|
|
of solid leads would you require?
|
|
|
|
I appreciate your consideration of these issues, and I promise not to bother
|
|
you for another year.
|
|
|
|
Jim Speiser
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Reply: 37047
|
|
|
|
#: 37047 S5/Commentary
|
|
26-Feb-88 16:11:25
|
|
Sb: #37040-#UFO Poll
|
|
Fm: David Cohen 76657,103
|
|
To: Jim Speiser 72135,424 (X)
|
|
|
|
Jim:
|
|
|
|
Without responding to your survey question by question, I think we do UFO stoi
|
|
stories (that is) in batches, like when there are a large number of sightings
|
|
or something that makes a new sighting something different from previous ones.
|
|
|
|
I do feel that the credibility of UFO experts would be greater if just once we
|
|
found one real, up close and personal and it could be shown that it wasn't an
|
|
aberration.
|
|
|
|
While not trying to sound like I'm off kilter, I believe deep down somewhere
|
|
that out there are other beings wwith the intellect and abilities as we have.
|
|
|
|
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Reply: 37055
|
|
|
|
#: 37055 S5/Commentary
|
|
26-Feb-88 19:45:15
|
|
Sb: #37047-#UFO Poll
|
|
Fm: Jim Speiser 72135,424
|
|
To: David Cohen 76657,103 (X)
|
|
|
|
David:
|
|
|
|
Thanks for you considered reply (and I recall your reply last year was also
|
|
valuable).
|
|
|
|
As to finding one up close and personal, that sure would be the end of the
|
|
line, wouldn't it? The story would write itself, your job would be done, and
|
|
so would mine, and we could all prepare for the fallout. But obviously it
|
|
isn't that easy. My question is, does the fact that its not that easy preclude
|
|
any possibility of it being true, or even worthy of investigation? Did
|
|
Wood/Stein have the Watergate Tapes in their possession when they started
|
|
following up on the burglary?
|
|
|
|
My point is this: We DON'T have what you're looking for -- the ultimate UFO
|
|
photo (unless this Pensacola case turns out to be genuine, which I doubt)
|
|
complete with windows and waving aliens. We DO have some genuine evidence that
|
|
rather strongly argues for our contention that SOMETHING quite bizarre is
|
|
going on. At what point do you fellows say, "Wait a minute, it may not look
|
|
like an alien spacecraft, but then again it doesn't look like anything of ours
|
|
either"?
|
|
|
|
"While not trying to sound off kilter"...now what force in our society made
|
|
you feel obligated to preface with that disclaimer? Could that same, rather
|
|
subliminal force be at work in the minds of journalists faced with the
|
|
prospect of covering another UFO story?
|
|
|
|
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Reply: 37068
|
|
|
|
#: 37068 S5/Commentary
|
|
27-Feb-88 06:39:58
|
|
Sb: #37055-#UFO Poll
|
|
Fm: David Cohen 76657,103
|
|
To: Jim Speiser 72135,424 (X)
|
|
|
|
Jim:
|
|
|
|
Sure I'm looking for the easy way out. But geneal acceptance of UFO phenonema
|
|
will be harder than Watergate without something of substance.
|
|
|
|
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Reply: 37094
|
|
|
|
#: 37094 S5/Commentary
|
|
28-Feb-88 00:28:45
|
|
Sb: #37068-#UFO Poll
|
|
Fm: Jim Speiser 72135,424
|
|
To: David Cohen 76657,103 (X)
|
|
|
|
<Sigh> I hear ya, David, and I guess I can't really blame you, especially
|
|
since you took the trouble to respond. I think the fact that you were the only
|
|
one to reply in public is also symptomatic of the media's generally sneering
|
|
attitude towards the subject.
|
|
|
|
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Reply: 37166
|
|
|
|
#: 37166 S5/Commentary
|
|
29-Feb-88 07:13:42
|
|
Sb: #37094-#UFO Poll
|
|
Fm: David Cohen 76657,103
|
|
To: Jim Speiser 72135,424 (X)
|
|
|
|
Jim:
|
|
|
|
I think there's a burnout problem. Without something of substance, we've heard
|
|
it all before, and its just rumor, speculation, or illusion.
|
|
|
|
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Reply: 37209
|
|
|
|
#: 37209 S5/Commentary
|
|
01-Mar-88 01:24:40
|
|
Sb: #37166-#UFO Poll
|
|
Fm: Jim Speiser 72135,424
|
|
To: David Cohen 76657,103 (X)
|
|
|
|
I understand completely, David, and I wouldn't expect journalists to keep
|
|
covering the same tired wolf-cries for forty years. But I believe there are
|
|
some things happening in the field right now which HAVEN'T happened before,
|
|
and I'm not speaking of this abduction hysteria, either. Its these boomerang
|
|
things. Right now, we are experiencing a wave of sightings in which people
|
|
report LARGE, we're talking LARGE, V- or boomerang-shaped craft in the night
|
|
skies. So what's different, besides the size and shape? Plenty. For one thing,
|
|
where in the olden days you would have maybe two or three witnesses to a
|
|
sighting, now there are dozens and sometimes hundreds at a time. For another,
|
|
the witness demographics are trending away from the rubes and more towards the
|
|
sophisticated professionals -- lawyers, teachers, accountants, electronics
|
|
company vice-presidents, and yes, radio and newspaper reporters and editors.
|
|
And, in the case of the Hudson Valley Object, we have definite, clear proof of
|
|
its existence, in the form of a videotape. Now, before Dave Browde jumps all
|
|
over me, I should tell you that the tape has recently been examined by JPL
|
|
Director Lew Allen who confirms that it is a solid object and not a flight of
|
|
planes, as was thought by some critics. (Allen's letter to this effect is on
|
|
file here at ParaNet). Before I bore you further, please tell me, are we
|
|
getting close to what you would call "substantive?"
|
|
|
|
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Reply: 37212
|
|
|
|
#: 37212 S5/Commentary
|
|
01-Mar-88 05:05:39
|
|
Sb: #37209-UFO Poll
|
|
Fm: David Cohen 76657,103
|
|
To: Jim Speiser 72135,424
|
|
|
|
Jim:
|
|
|
|
Its getting closer. But lets compare it to a family driving from Boston to Los
|
|
Angeles. The car is now passing thru Hartford. Yes, you're closer, but you
|
|
still have a long drive ahead.
|
|
|
|
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Function:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#: 391510 S0/Outbox File
|
|
2-Mar-88 13:10:00
|
|
Sb: UFO Poll
|
|
Fm: JFORUM RE37212
|
|
To: David Cohen 76657,103
|
|
|
|
Hmmmm...OK, thank you. Do the rest of you agree with that assessment?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**********************************************
|
|
* THE U.F.O. BBS - http://www.ufobbs.com/ufo *
|
|
********************************************** |