From: Ed Stasiak <estasiak@att.net>
Subject: Re: Rotten Tomatoes Under Fire For "Justice League" Review
Full headers:
X-Received: by 10.36.36.197 with SMTP id f188mr4424169ita.37.1512423050447;
Mon, 04 Dec 2017 13:30:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.157.85.67 with SMTP id h3mr710549oti.10.1512423050339; Mon,
04 Dec 2017 13:30:50 -0800 (PST)
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!news.unit0.net!peer01.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!i6no3034420itb.0!news-out.google.com!b73ni1200ita.0!nntp.google.com!i6no3034418itb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2017 13:30:50 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <slrnp271jp.qub.g.kreme@snow.local>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=24.192.140.152;
posting-account=Ixrd5gkAAABsU4dRz0UR13K3JpdoZL-Z
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.192.140.152
References: <ova1d5$8gq$1@gioia.aioe.org> <49bcf90d-4834-43d5-a261-15ea8f06607d@googlegroups.com>
<slrnp1r7li.1mdf.g.kreme@jaka.lan> <4e10b631-c022-4212-af7c-32a9c8ff1153@googlegroups.com>
<slrnp271jp.qub.g.kreme@snow.local>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <bbb19175-1092-400f-92fa-af866430182e@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Rotten Tomatoes Under Fire For "Justice League" Review
From: Ed Stasiak <estasiak@att.net>
Injection-Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2017 21:30:50 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 17
X-Received-Body-CRC: 1573263850
X-Received-Bytes: 2263
Print Article
Forward Article

> Lewis
> > Ed Stasiak
> >
> > Unless the film critic signed some kinda “approved disclosure” agreement, 
> > they’re free to say whatever they want about the movie or tv show. 
>
> Either way, has *nothing* to do with the 1st Amendment. 

“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.”

The above implies the studios have some kinda right to control what
movie critics say about their flicks and that IS a 1st Amendment issue.