Subject: Re: Rotten Tomatoes Under Fire For "Justice League" Review
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!kreme.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Subject: Re: Rotten Tomatoes Under Fire For "Justice League" Review
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 03:16:44 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: Miskatonic U
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <slrnp2c3ss.1rmd.g.kreme@snow.local>
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>
<bbb19175-1092-400f-92fa-af866430182e@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 03:16:44 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: kreme.eternal-september.org; posting-host="66db068922e5a18c3fb3c7a6ec599288";
logging-data="7055"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/W8UtXQosbnt1FJpmMyE2j"
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.2 (Darwin)
X-Face: )^b5"R:T7U>9~:PEn3YkzMfW*[b1qKeU.fP9C8~8HpU9}lA&6`bH1z
Cancel-Lock: sha1:hdMkpD+s9CW3qHU5M7NjFMNenRs=
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Mail-Copies-To: nobody
Print Article
Forward Article
In message<bbb19175-1092-400f-92fa-af866430182e@googlegroups.com> Ed Stasiak<estasiak@att.net>
wrote:
>> 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.

No it is not. Not in any imaginable way. Perhaps you should *read* the
First Amendment.

-- 
It's better to burn out than it is to rust -- Neil Young as quoted be
Kurt Cobain