Re: ENT Forum Mediation Thread--Please Participate
It does seem that differences and misunderstandings do tend to get amplified in this medium. This is, unfortunately, a factor in the medium – which is often written casually, yet often read with precision, particularly when there is a disagreement. And I do apoligize for what does seem to be largely a “violent agreement”. I see them in the boardroom all the time. In this case, I’d like to focus on our “violent agreements” first.
I don’t like remarks that are extremely personally disparaging about people involved with the show. This includes – to some extent, even the “How to save Enterprise threads” – which invariably start off with “Fire Brannon and Braga”. I may agree with that action, or result, but there isn’t really a ton of insight into “saving Enterprise” in the statement.
Instead, how about “Hire Joss Whedon, or Billy Shakespeare” or some such writer who’s all that? Or a comment that is specific – like, “Fire Brannon and Braga because they apparently rewrite all the scripts, according to so-in-so, and evidently they do a poor job of it” (assuming that’s true- which it may not be – it’s just an example). The point being, that in a BBS, the insight is the thing that drives the discussion. Give us something to talk about, you know? Say what you need to say, but support it.
And, like some, I think it’s just rude to read the extremely disparaging remarks about people involved with the show, whether or not those remarks are irrelevant to the show’s quality. Comments about Brannon’s wife, or whether or not he celebrates the Black Sabbath communion weekly, really aren’t helpful or insightful. If you really think the work is terrible, there should be plenty of work on the screen to criticize without inventing new.
Posted by SilveRisa:
If you're not interested in educational pedigrees and writing credits, why did you ask for mine? I never asked for yours.
It was intended to put the whole – “you are a fan, so be one. These are the writers, so let them…” statement into a different context, so you could see how it sounded. Subsequent statements make it seem that your original statements came across to me, and to
Reno in a very different way than you intended. I’ve never had a beef with anything you’ve said in the past, so I don’t think I was being ungenerous – though it does appear to be a misunderstanding. The focus of my disagreement was focused around that elitist sentiment – which it now appears you do not subscribe to.
Posted by SilveRisa:
I am curious, however, as to why you would focus necessarily on the PR coaching. I would suggest perhaps that people say what they mean, and so they often mean what they say.
Oh, I agree with you – people often do say what they mean. That doesn’t mean they
should say it though, especially when the brand is welded to your name. I’m a PR guy – in the TV biz. You just don’t let spokespeople say things “off the cuff” like that. I find the comments themselves entertaining and amusing (and a little dissappointing) from a personal perspective. But from a professional perspective, I wince when they talk. To me, it either reflects on the competance of their handlers, or on their relationship with their handlers.
Their statements, interviews, claims and promises are an integral part of the publicity machine – which makes these aspects of them perfectly acceptable to comment on. If they promise specifics in their direct, personal appeals to fans (ie “iron clad continuity,” “fixing problems in Voyager” – where those problems are mentioned specifically) or make hyperbolic claims (“spasms of ecstacy”), then it is a direct reflection on their character if they don’t deliver. In cases like these – I do think it’s fair to criticize and speculate about personal qualities and subjective matters such as honesty, or the level of respect they have for their audience.
The publicity, ratings, and marketing of the show is as much a topic of discussion as anything else in here, and since they have worked so hard to make Berman and Braga part of the Trek brand (like Lee Iacocca, Martha Stewart, Rosie O’Donnell, Oprah Winfrey) – then I think this makes certain aspects of their persona into topics for legitimate discussion. Does this seem reasonable?
Again, to emphasize the agreement – I also don’t think it’s fair to say so-in-so can’t act or write. More importantly to me – such a statement offers no grist for the mill. Like you, I prefer to discuss specifics.
collective 
Although being aware of it when we read other peoples posts and perhaps being a little more careful in how we word our own posts.
