From: RichA <rander3128@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Rotten Tomatoes Under Fire For "Justice League" Review
Full headers:
X-Received: by 10.107.8.26 with SMTP id 26mr24125624ioi.27.1511818676902;
Mon, 27 Nov 2017 13:37:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.157.14.137 with SMTP id 9mr326229otj.14.1511818676757; Mon,
27 Nov 2017 13:37:56 -0800 (PST)
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin1!news.mi.ras.ru!goblin.stu.neva.ru!peer03.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer02.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!193no1331053itr.0!news-out.google.com!x87ni5528ita.0!nntp.google.com!i6no7737975itb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 13:37:56 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <49bcf90d-4834-43d5-a261-15ea8f06607d@googlegroups.com>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=184.75.212.29;
posting-account=8Vsz_woAAABQPV3Epo66m_rYvK1EHzOV
NNTP-Posting-Host: 184.75.212.29
References: <ova1d5$8gq$1@gioia.aioe.org> <49bcf90d-4834-43d5-a261-15ea8f06607d@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <54bd2db1-447c-45a2-96b5-b7cae214320c@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Rotten Tomatoes Under Fire For "Justice League" Review
From: RichA <rander3128@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:37:56 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 16
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3352095498
X-Received-Bytes: 2085
Print Article
Forward Article
On Monday, 27 November 2017 13:04:46 UTC-5, Ed Stasiak  wrote:
> > Alan Smithee
> >
> > More than just a kerfuffle over one superhero movie, the incident raises 
> > larger questions about the relationship between reviewers and the 
> > public, the editorial objectivity of aggregators and how much studios 
> > should be empowered to control the pre-release messaging of their films.. 
> 
> Not at all, it’s called the 1st Amendment.
> 
> The movie studio can simply stop providing preview viewings to critics
> if they don’t like what they’re saying.

Legally, sure.  Ethically, no.