Fox reporter wants to speak with me
- 04-02-2004, 12:57 PM
Fox reporter wants to speak with me
I emailed him, and he got back to me and wants to speak via telephone. I have Chemo's and Siz'e e****lent repsonses from the thread ready to go. Do you guys think I should do this, anything else I should take into consideration? I pretty sure he wants to speak w/me because I have a financial interest in the ban. If we do talk, it will probobly be around 3:00 central time. Any opinions?
- 04-02-2004, 01:14 PM
04-02-2004, 01:15 PM
My prayers are with you...and yes, you should do this. A voice of reason needs to be heard. The media has tipped the scales and someone with some intelligence needs to inform the masses. We have to erase the "meathead" mentality that's being portrayed.
04-02-2004, 01:20 PM
04-02-2004, 01:22 PM
Make sure you don't hang yourself. Try not to mention tiratricol, I can just see the FDA coming after you.
04-02-2004, 01:25 PM
Honestly, I believe the media's only intention ever is to make money. They do this by getting good ratings, which increase their advertisement revenue. They get good ratings by promoting contraversy and anything else that the mass general public will want to watch.
The truth and fairness never fit into that equation. Unless the truth will cause a stir of viewers, it's irrelevent.
If you were given final veto power to what material this fox guy shows - that would be different. But something tells me you won't. And something tells me most things he'll show will be taken out of context and skewed pretty badly.
Possible things to consider:
- are you making money off of this interview directly? (Good if yes, bad if no).
- is your business going to benefit or be hurt by this? (no such thing as bad publicity? Maybe... New customers from seeing the interview - maybe. Government spotlight directly on your company - maybe a bad thing...)
Try to find out the past stories this guy did and try to judge if he was fair or biased. You never know.
Who knows what this guy will do? He'll get a lot of support if he makes a fool out of "andro" supporters. BUT - maybe he can get a lot of controversy as a reporter who believes in "andro" supporters. He can stand out in a crowd that way and make a name for himself.
So to answer your question - I don't know. Hopefully someone else can bring more insight into this. Personally, I think you did a great thing in bringing this situation up.
Just my opinion.... and good luck in whatever you do.
04-02-2004, 01:25 PM
As long as you feel confident that you can answer the questions in a way that shows that you are informed about the issue, I see no problem with an interview. I've seen how the media works and it would be nice to know what angle they are aproaching this from. They can edit your responses however they like to make you sound however they want. Lets just hope they aren't biased and looking to condemn this thing. Good luck bro.
04-02-2004, 01:26 PM
Sir Foxx is right, he (they) will more than likely come at you with the products you sell which are in the "grey" so be prepared to defend yourself. I don't think the research products will go over too well with them...
04-02-2004, 01:28 PM
I'm just terrified I will be made to look like Bill L. and his ESPN interview. I have not made up my mind yet...Defiantly need to accumulate a wealth of pre-existing articulate responses. I in no way plan on mentioning the name of my business if I do go through w/it.
04-02-2004, 01:36 PM
04-02-2004, 01:42 PM
Remember to utilize "off the record" to cover yourself, BUT you have to say this before the statement or else it's too late.
04-02-2004, 01:43 PM
Bro, please do it. We need to be heard now. You won't really say anything as stupid as Bill L. did so don't worry about sounding like him, try to get it tape recorded for accuracy. Point economic impacts such as the effects it has on retailers and how it hurts small businesses. Point out that Republicans and Democrats may lose our vote because they don't represent our voice and are taking our freedoms away, they usually listen when they hear they will lose many votes since there hundreds of thousands of us that use supplements.
Good luck and be as informed as you can.
04-02-2004, 01:44 PM
04-02-2004, 01:47 PM
Originally Posted by custom
Other than drawing attention to your business, you have no reason to talk with this person. Their agenda is already set: pro-hormones = steriods = menace to society. You will probably end up being edited between a "prominent" physician describing the dangers of pro-hormones ("that's right, by the time little billy got help he already had size DD breasts and had murdered his little sister and her chipmunk in a fit of roid rage") and somebody from the anti-doping agency talking about how society cannot tolerate cheaters. You will look like someone trying to make a buck no matter what the cost. Back out and let some other stooge take the heat.
04-02-2004, 01:50 PM
say something to the effect of "the civil liberties of the consumers are being stripped away by the FDA at will without justifiable research..."
04-02-2004, 01:54 PM
That is a very good point. I may just speak w/him about guidelines for the article first if anything, and that may be it.Originally Posted by RVEXLER
04-02-2004, 02:51 PM
At this point in the game I don't think the interview can hurt us anymore than were are. The gig is pretty much up, the government, media and medical industries have painted us into a corner and now have the upper hand. The end is nigh.
As long as you don't make statements to goad the FDA and the government-you should be fine. We have to fight and media is probably our last tool. All that said, make sure you cover your own ass and don't give out to much info about what you sell and who you sell it to.
I think a well articulated reponse about people's freedom to use what they wish would be, at the very least, last gesture of defiance. You could challenge their beliefs about the safety of these products. Inform them that MILLIONS of people use these compounds to great benefit and no harm. End with a warning that allowing the government to legislate what we can and can't ingest is the ultimate slippery slope.
Good luck, stay calm. We have great faith in you.
04-02-2004, 04:03 PM
I wouldn't do it at all. If you actually think this guy wants to see the other side then your fooling yourself. He will take things out of context and use them against you. This is what they do. If anything you should just contact him via email then you would have an actual copy of what you say so he cna't just randomly take things out of context. There is a reason they are going after you. No offense but you are just a retailer and are probably looking for someone who might screw up the tough or techincal questions. THey might try to portray you as the guy trying to make money off of teenagers or at the expense of peoples health. We know its not true but they will exploit you to get a better story. This is also typical of FOX. My brother used to work for them. This is what they do. If you do it, give the most generic and general answers you can think of. Just give him a bunch of cliches. Pretend your a professional athlete
For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
04-02-2004, 04:08 PM
i debinetely agree on taping it yourself. and that way if your words are misconstrued you could at least sue him for slander or something. you could really do this because it would be damaging to your livelyhood and effect your income. i know this isnt really constructive advice but i think we are pretty much screwed and you should just go out in a blaze of glory. but still reperesent us well cuz anything is possible.
04-02-2004, 04:12 PM
Yeah, the more I think about it, the more I think it's not a good idea. I think what I will do is see if he wants to do a discussion via email, so that I can logically think through a proper, slightly vaugue response. I'll keep you guys posted on what goes down.
04-02-2004, 04:26 PM
04-02-2004, 04:35 PM
Well here is an update:
Here is what he responded with:As I think about our pending discussion, I honestly feel a bit leery about going "on the record." Please do not take this a personal comment to you, but I am sure you are aware that the media is not portraying these substances or their supporters in a very positive light. I certainly do not want to be portrayed as someone trying to make a living off of potential scheduled III substances.
I would very much like to contribute to your piece, but I think it may better suit me, and my conscience, if we would share our ideas and opinions in a different matter other than telephone. If this is a viable option for you, please let me know. As I said earlier, I will be leaving this office at 3:00 central time, and will not have access to this email until Monday. I would greatly appreciate it if you could either call and confirm this, or forward anything to [email protected].
I just couldn't do it. Not enough trust in the media to fill a thimball for me.Not a problem. I can understand why you might want to avoid the telephone or not want to engage with the media because of the the ban. That said, we're looking for a potential interview subject. Do you know of anyone in the community who would consider going on camera and on the record regarding andro and pro-hormones? Thanks.
04-02-2004, 04:37 PM
04-02-2004, 04:39 PM
They should read some of the studies I posted which apparently have been ignored.
Odd how female hormones (birth control) in the USA are readily available to 16 year old girls without any problems.
04-02-2004, 04:43 PM
Well, since Fox News prides itself on being "fair and balanced" I think it would be a good idea to forward him those studies so he does not have to dredge through the stupidity of bb.com.
04-02-2004, 04:47 PM
forward the info or contact Rick Collins, I am sure he would be interested in giving them some info.
04-02-2004, 04:48 PM
I did just go ahead and forwarded these following studies Size posted at bb.com. Who thinks they will actually be used?
Here is some information that relates to anabolic steroids. Much of the typical information is based on incorrect public opinion. Here is just a small example of legitimate medical information:
One text to research in is Sports Endocrinology
by Michelle P. Warren , Naama W. Constantini
Here are some links to studies and these are only a few:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...st_uids=8855834 --> Conclusion: Supraphysiological doses of testosterone, when administered to normal men in a controlled setting, do not increase angry behavior
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...t_uids=11175645 --> Comment: The histologic findings in our 2 cases and in the few others reported in medical literature are nonspecific and do not prove the cardiac toxicity of AAS
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...t_uids=11153743 --> CONCLUSIONS: Although high-level bodybuilding is associated with impaired vascular reactivity and increased arterial thickening, the use of AAS per se is not associated with significant abnormalities of arterial structure or function
04-02-2004, 04:48 PM
Oh hell yeah, thats a good idea...he would handle it very well I think...Originally Posted by Designer Supps
04-02-2004, 04:49 PM
04-02-2004, 04:55 PM
Similar Forum Threads
- By AvgHomeboy in forum Post Cycle TherapyReplies: 2Last Post: 03-29-2011, 06:36 PM
- By A_I_Sports_Nutrition in forum Company PromotionsReplies: 67Last Post: 02-02-2011, 05:35 PM
- By CopyCat in forum MMAReplies: 2Last Post: 01-08-2010, 02:11 PM
- By OmarJackson in forum PoliticsReplies: 29Last Post: 08-05-2006, 03:03 PM
- By sifu in forum General ChatReplies: 11Last Post: 01-26-2004, 01:03 AM