Letterboxing USA - Yahoo Groups Archive

Time article

23 messages in this thread | Started on 2004-08-22

Time article

From: Alafair (lkazel@mindspring.com) | Date: 2004-08-22 17:43:29 UTC
Don,

Though I rarely post, I wanted to respond to your concerns about
publicity because your posts over the years have always been
respectful of others, cogent and thoughtfully written.

I was involved with the "Time" reporter and article. Like you, I
hestitated about doing this at all. I exchanged emails with the
others who were mentioned, all veteran letterboxers, and, I think I
can speak for all involved. We felt that if we didn't do this and
emphasize the traditions associated with the game, the wrong
impression would have been given to the reading public and, sadly,
even more letterboxes would go missing. Doing this was truly a double
edged sword.

Further, we invited the writer of the piece, Deirdre Van Dyk, to
Connecticut to letterbox with those of us in the East who had done
phone interviews with her. Deirdre graciously gave up her one day a
week off and joined us. Before we set one foot on a trail, we sat
with her at lunch and discussed in great detail the nuances of the
game and how playing it runs along a continuum from complete stealth
and anonymity to others who are much more open. Incidentally, in
advance of Deridre's coming to Connecticut and writing the piece, she
read Randy Hall's book. Most of us had several telephone
conversations with her and we emailed back and forth constantly
because she was committed to painting as accurate a picture as she
could. Shortly before publication, her editor reduced her allotted
space to 99 lines so she had to cut quite a bit of content from the
piece.

While we all were letterboxing with Deirdre, we happened upon some
technical scenarios that, I feel, helped her understand how the game
is played and some of the issues we all face and discuss on the talk-
lists. We came upon a poorly hidden letterbox, some clues that were
written in such a way as to cause undesirable impact to the
environment and a box hidden in plain sight of a family gathering
that we decided to pass on. We took the time to point these things
out to her and I feel she achieved a more balanced perspective that
most letterboxers are sensitive to the environment and LNT, are
thoughtful and respectful people who would pass up a letterbox rather
than compromise its location to non-boxers.

Whether the piece was 99 lines or 9 pages, it would have attracted
people to our beloved game who had both good and bad intentions,
some who will stay and become great and interesting players or others
who will try it, lose interest and fade away. In that regard, if
the "Time" article was to happen at all, ironically, we probably have
the writer's editor to thank for preventing too much from being
written about it. The downside is that regional media sources who
picked up on the piece are now clammoring for their own spin, as many
of you have already found out. Best kept secrets aren't secrets for
very long.


I think we are all saddened by the loss of a letterbox, particularly
when it happens at the hand of man. While art is ephemeral, it still
smarts and makes us ask why anyone would be so thoughtless. This is
one reason so many of us harp "ad nauseum" on the importance of
rehiding a box carefully and making good choices about hiding spots.
These things need to be reiterated over and over somewhere so that
those who are new to the game of letterboxing follow on with respect
for the efforts by and hard work from every boxer who preceded them.
It's also just one reason why so many of us are not publishing our
clues any longer and making them WOM.

Your comment about media people having their own agendas is true.The
nature of the press is that, in theory, it may strive for balance,
but the end result is always presented with a point of view. It was
extremely important for those of us who were involved with "Time" to
make sure that the article was as balanced as it could be. If it had
to happen at all, I, for one, am thankful to have worked with a
reporter who was generous of herself and her time, understood our
delimma and attempted to write about letterboxing as fairly as
possible.

Don and Gwen, I am very sorry for the loss of your letterboxes.

Alafair



--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Gwen and Don Jackson"
wrote:
... We were contacted by the Time writer, but we chose not to
respond. Not only do I think that the game is better served by word
of mouth, I have a great distrust of most news folks as they will
always follow THEIR agenda. ...Publicity for this game can be
detrimental to the viability of the planted letterboxes. That is just
the way it is. For those that only "Find" the missing letterbox is an
inconvenience. For those that "Plant" the missing letterbox is more
than that, and a little part of you is gone... Don



Re: [LbNA] Time article

From: Hikers_n_ Hounds (hikers_n_hounds@yahoo.com) | Date: 2004-08-22 16:23:46 UTC-07:00
"It's also just one reason why so many of us are not publishing our
clues any longer and making them WOM."

Alafair,

Perhaps I am misunderstanding this. You participated in the article and directed people to the website but then don't post your own clues on the website for fear of repercussions from publicity? It doesn't seem to make sense to me....

Alafair wrote:
Don,

Though I rarely post, I wanted to respond to your concerns about
publicity because your posts over the years have always been
respectful of others, cogent and thoughtfully written.

I was involved with the "Time" reporter and article. Like you, I
hestitated about doing this at all. I exchanged emails with the
others who were mentioned, all veteran letterboxers, and, I think I
can speak for all involved. We felt that if we didn't do this and
emphasize the traditions associated with the game, the wrong
impression would have been given to the reading public and, sadly,
even more letterboxes would go missing. Doing this was truly a double
edged sword.

Further, we invited the writer of the piece, Deirdre Van Dyk, to
Connecticut to letterbox with those of us in the East who had done
phone interviews with her. Deirdre graciously gave up her one day a
week off and joined us. Before we set one foot on a trail, we sat
with her at lunch and discussed in great detail the nuances of the
game and how playing it runs along a continuum from complete stealth
and anonymity to others who are much more open. Incidentally, in
advance of Deridre's coming to Connecticut and writing the piece, she
read Randy Hall's book. Most of us had several telephone
conversations with her and we emailed back and forth constantly
because she was committed to painting as accurate a picture as she
could. Shortly before publication, her editor reduced her allotted
space to 99 lines so she had to cut quite a bit of content from the
piece.

While we all were letterboxing with Deirdre, we happened upon some
technical scenarios that, I feel, helped her understand how the game
is played and some of the issues we all face and discuss on the talk-
lists. We came upon a poorly hidden letterbox, some clues that were
written in such a way as to cause undesirable impact to the
environment and a box hidden in plain sight of a family gathering
that we decided to pass on. We took the time to point these things
out to her and I feel she achieved a more balanced perspective that
most letterboxers are sensitive to the environment and LNT, are
thoughtful and respectful people who would pass up a letterbox rather
than compromise its location to non-boxers.

Whether the piece was 99 lines or 9 pages, it would have attracted
people to our beloved game who had both good and bad intentions,
some who will stay and become great and interesting players or others
who will try it, lose interest and fade away. In that regard, if
the "Time" article was to happen at all, ironically, we probably have
the writer's editor to thank for preventing too much from being
written about it. The downside is that regional media sources who
picked up on the piece are now clammoring for their own spin, as many
of you have already found out. Best kept secrets aren't secrets for
very long.


I think we are all saddened by the loss of a letterbox, particularly
when it happens at the hand of man. While art is ephemeral, it still
smarts and makes us ask why anyone would be so thoughtless. This is
one reason so many of us harp "ad nauseum" on the importance of
rehiding a box carefully and making good choices about hiding spots.
These things need to be reiterated over and over somewhere so that
those who are new to the game of letterboxing follow on with respect
for the efforts by and hard work from every boxer who preceded them.
It's also just one reason why so many of us are not publishing our
clues any longer and making them WOM.

Your comment about media people having their own agendas is true.The
nature of the press is that, in theory, it may strive for balance,
but the end result is always presented with a point of view. It was
extremely important for those of us who were involved with "Time" to
make sure that the article was as balanced as it could be. If it had
to happen at all, I, for one, am thankful to have worked with a
reporter who was generous of herself and her time, understood our
delimma and attempted to write about letterboxing as fairly as
possible.

Don and Gwen, I am very sorry for the loss of your letterboxes.

Alafair



--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Gwen and Don Jackson"
wrote:
... We were contacted by the Time writer, but we chose not to
respond. Not only do I think that the game is better served by word
of mouth, I have a great distrust of most news folks as they will
always follow THEIR agenda. ...Publicity for this game can be
detrimental to the viability of the planted letterboxes. That is just
the way it is. For those that only "Find" the missing letterbox is an
inconvenience. For those that "Plant" the missing letterbox is more
than that, and a little part of you is gone... Don



Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/letterbox-usa/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: [LbNA] Time article

From: Beverly Snow (snow-bee@att.net) | Date: 2004-08-22 19:26:25 UTC-04:00
Can you clarify for a newbie what WOM is?
Thanks, Bev
----- Original Message -----
From: Alafair
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2004 1:43 PM
Subject: [LbNA] Time article

It's also just one reason why so many of us are not publishing our
clues any longer and making them WOM.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: [LbNA] Time article

From: John Chapman (john@johnsblog.com) | Date: 2004-08-22 19:53:43 UTC-04:00
WOM = Word of Mouth
----- Original Message -----
From: Beverly Snow
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2004 19:26
Subject: Re: [LbNA] Time article


Can you clarify for a newbie what WOM is?
Thanks, Bev


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: [LbNA] Time article

From: lb_isosceles (lb_isosceles@yahoo.com) | Date: 2004-08-23 00:15:31 UTC

> Perhaps I am misunderstanding this. You participated in the article
and directed people to the website but then don't post your own clues
on the website for fear of repercussions from publicity? It doesn't
seem to make sense to me....

This is not an inconsistent logic. By participating in the interview,
a top-notch 'boxer like Alafair has the opportunity to put the best
possible spin on the article. Ignoring the inevitable "Time Article"
does not make it go away. If the hobby is to stay strong and not
succumb to dilution from "non-traditionalists", experienced boxers
need to speak their minds, emphasizing the secrecy of the clues and
the boxes while publicizing the sport.

As far as WOM (word of mouth) clues, "repercussions from publicity"
is certainly not the only reason for using them, but it is a valid
one. Persistent finders will get them, hooligans may not. Keeping
some of the clues off of the LBNA site, or off of the web entirely,
adds another dimension to the game. Phyto and I have been known to
drive hundreds of miles for a good underground box while forsaking
ten easy boxes near home.

My hat is off to Alafair for speaking up for traditional 'boxing and
for doing whatever she pleases with her clues!

-Isosceles


Re: [LbNA] Time article

From: rscarpen (letterboxing@atlasquest.com) | Date: 2004-08-23 00:20:03 UTC
> Perhaps I am misunderstanding this. You participated in the article
> and directed people to the website but then don't post your own
> clues on the website for fear of repercussions from publicity? It
> doesn't seem to make sense to me....

I figure I can put my take into this, since I participated in the
article as well but don't post all of my clues to the LbNA website.

I've found my boxes tend to last longer when fewer people find them.
I'd like my boxes to last for a long, long time. Therefore,
sometimes, it is best if the clues aren't always easily accessible.

If I think too many people are finding one of my boxes--either too
many for the environment to handle or too many of the types of people
that I feel aren't doing a good job rehiding the boxes, I'll take the
clues off LbNA.

Some people don't list clues if they planted the box in a national
park or some other location where boxes shouldn't be.

There's a lot of reasons not to publish a clue on LbNA, but
essentially it boils down to the fact that there's someone (or
several someones--either individually or as a group) that use LbNA
for their clue source that you don't want finding your letterbox.

Historically, there's never been a 'difinitive source' for clues.
Part of the challenge is finding the clues in the first place. Part
of letterboxing is interacting with other letterboxers that can give
you tips to other clues that might not be as readily accessible.

The wonderful thing about letterboxing is the variety of people of
types of boxes it supports. Some people like easy, straight-forward
clues served to them on a silver platter--and there are clues for
those people. Some people like more selective boxes where the clues
are hard to come by and once acquired, impossibily difficult to
crack. And there are clues for those people.

In the 'old' days, boxes were so few and far between, even listing
clues on LbNA didn't guarantee anyone would ever get a chance to find
your boxes anytime soon. Nowdays, any easy, drive-by box is likely
to have a full logbook within a few weeks. A couple of years, it
might only take a couple of days.

Things change, and people have to adapt. Those of us who were here
years ago are adapting by creating WOM clues. Or listing them on
alternative websites. Or listing them only on their own websites.
Or clues that need to be mailed. We aren't necessarily opposed to
new blood joining the hobby, but we're adapting to that fact.

Anyhow, I hope this helps you see it from my perspective. *shrug* =)

-- Ryan


RE: [LbNA] Time article

From: Kim Calcagno (hannahkat@cox.net) | Date: 2004-08-22 21:07:19 UTC-04:00
I agree...

When CSCM and I decided to agree to be interviewed by the Providence
Journal over a year ago, we agonized over it. We finally decided that we
would do it BECAUSE reporters have their own agenda. We figured that, as
veteran 'boxers, we would be able to strongly emphasize the importance of
hiding, and secrecy and 'leave no trace'. If we didn't do it they might have
gone with a newbie or with text from the talk list (taken out of context)
etc.

We figured it was going to be written ANYWAY, so why not be able to steer
it. We were very explicit..."It's really important to stress this or that to
your readers..."

It's a double edged sword, but we wanted to be the ones wielding it. It was
definitely the same situation with TIME Magazine.

-----Original Message-----
From: Alafair [mailto:lkazel@mindspring.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2004 1:43 PM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [LbNA] Time article

Don,

Though I rarely post, I wanted to respond to your concerns about
publicity because your posts over the years have always been
respectful of others, cogent and thoughtfully written.

I was involved with the "Time" reporter and article. Like you, I
hestitated about doing this at all. I exchanged emails with the
others who were mentioned, all veteran letterboxers, and, I think I
can speak for all involved. We felt that if we didn't do this and
emphasize the traditions associated with the game, the wrong
impression would have been given to the reading public and, sadly,
even more letterboxes would go missing. Doing this was truly a double
edged sword.

Further, we invited the writer of the piece, Deirdre Van Dyk, to
Connecticut to letterbox with those of us in the East who had done
phone interviews with her. Deirdre graciously gave up her one day a
week off and joined us. Before we set one foot on a trail, we sat
with her at lunch and discussed in great detail the nuances of the
game and how playing it runs along a continuum from complete stealth
and anonymity to others who are much more open. Incidentally, in
advance of Deridre's coming to Connecticut and writing the piece, she
read Randy Hall's book. Most of us had several telephone
conversations with her and we emailed back and forth constantly
because she was committed to painting as accurate a picture as she
could. Shortly before publication, her editor reduced her allotted
space to 99 lines so she had to cut quite a bit of content from the
piece.

While we all were letterboxing with Deirdre, we happened upon some
technical scenarios that, I feel, helped her understand how the game
is played and some of the issues we all face and discuss on the talk-
lists. We came upon a poorly hidden letterbox, some clues that were
written in such a way as to cause undesirable impact to the
environment and a box hidden in plain sight of a family gathering
that we decided to pass on. We took the time to point these things
out to her and I feel she achieved a more balanced perspective that
most letterboxers are sensitive to the environment and LNT, are
thoughtful and respectful people who would pass up a letterbox rather
than compromise its location to non-boxers.

Whether the piece was 99 lines or 9 pages, it would have attracted
people to our beloved game who had both good and bad intentions,
some who will stay and become great and interesting players or others
who will try it, lose interest and fade away. In that regard, if
the "Time" article was to happen at all, ironically, we probably have
the writer's editor to thank for preventing too much from being
written about it. The downside is that regional media sources who
picked up on the piece are now clammoring for their own spin, as many
of you have already found out. Best kept secrets aren't secrets for
very long.


I think we are all saddened by the loss of a letterbox, particularly
when it happens at the hand of man. While art is ephemeral, it still
smarts and makes us ask why anyone would be so thoughtless. This is
one reason so many of us harp "ad nauseum" on the importance of
rehiding a box carefully and making good choices about hiding spots.
These things need to be reiterated over and over somewhere so that
those who are new to the game of letterboxing follow on with respect
for the efforts by and hard work from every boxer who preceded them.
It's also just one reason why so many of us are not publishing our
clues any longer and making them WOM.

Your comment about media people having their own agendas is true.The
nature of the press is that, in theory, it may strive for balance,
but the end result is always presented with a point of view. It was
extremely important for those of us who were involved with "Time" to
make sure that the article was as balanced as it could be. If it had
to happen at all, I, for one, am thankful to have worked with a
reporter who was generous of herself and her time, understood our
delimma and attempted to write about letterboxing as fairly as
possible.

Don and Gwen, I am very sorry for the loss of your letterboxes.

Alafair



--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Gwen and Don Jackson"
wrote:
... We were contacted by the Time writer, but we chose not to
respond. Not only do I think that the game is better served by word
of mouth, I have a great distrust of most news folks as they will
always follow THEIR agenda. ...Publicity for this game can be
detrimental to the viability of the planted letterboxes. That is just
the way it is. For those that only "Find" the missing letterbox is an
inconvenience. For those that "Plant" the missing letterbox is more
than that, and a little part of you is gone... Don





Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
click here
oups/S=1705065786:HM/EXP=1093283027/A=2319501/R=0/SIG=11tq0u909/*http://www.
netflix.com/Default?mqso=60185353&partid=5285298>


_____

Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/letterbox-usa/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com


* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service .


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: [LbNA] Time article

From: uneksia (uneksia@yahoo.com) | Date: 2004-08-22 22:30:01 UTC-04:00
how right you are isosceles. there is something very special to finding a
wom or a very hard mystery. and those that want to find them bad enough will
there is also a place for the drivebys i suppose. i know i have had plans
to go letterboxing to wake up to the pouring rain. i am not up to stamping
in those kind of conditions as i do not trust myself to keep the logs dry.
the cure (withdrawal is not a pleasant sight) is to find a driveby so i can
stamp in the car. in the end i always feel like i am cheating as i did not
climb a mountain, battle crowds, or solve a tremendous mystery. i just hope
that those that do decide not to post any clues have pity on me from time to
time.
smile
uneksia

Re: [LbNA] Time article

From: marthastewartletterboxer (nishakamada@yahoo.com) | Date: 2004-08-23 04:37:52 UTC
"In the 'old' days, boxes were so few and far between, even listing
clues on LbNA didn't guarantee anyone would ever get a chance to find
your boxes anytime soon. Nowdays, any easy, drive-by box is likely
to have a full logbook within a few weeks. A couple of years, it
might only take a couple of days."

Just to throw in my own two cents, here in Utah it still just like the
old days. I can have a logbook sit for several months in a drive-by
location and still have no visitors. So I confess that here in Utah I
welcome new boxers with somewhat more enthusiasm. Try to remember
that the rest of the country does not look like Connecticut. In the
entire state of Utah there are only 59 boxes on the LBna site, while
Connecticut must have most of the 10,000 boxes that are posted. Be it
a blessing or a curse!
Think about it,
Nisha


RE: [LbNA] Time article

From: Kathryn Wolfe (kwolfe@cq.com) | Date: 2004-08-23 13:10:53 UTC-04:00
First, let me say that I hope I don't offend anybody with this email.
Now I've got your attention, right? =) But seriously, I want to state at
the outset that these are just my opinions and aren't really directed at
anyone in particular.

I just wanted to share with all of you that -- gasp -- *I* am one of
those "news folks." I'm a political reporter. I'm a letterboxer. I'm also
a Time newbie. How about that? (Wonder if I can pile on any more odious
categories. Good thing I'm not a lawyer. ;) ) I've been watching the
recent Time thread and am really perplexed by the distrust of the media
that's being talked about here. I'm not saying reporters don't make
mistakes -- they do. But by and large they're because of human foibles, not
because of some nefarious plot. To ascribe such sinister motives to a noble
profession, especially one to which I've dedicated my life, is just more
than I can take without saying something.

I can't speak for everyone -- there are bad apples in every barrel --
but I and my colleagues all work long hours for relatively little pay for
mostly idealistic reasons. If anything, a reporter's agenda -- if you want
to call it that -- is to make people in power of ALL PERSUASIONS answer for
the things they do. It's an important job. (Remember Watergate?
Iran-Contra? Ernie Pyle?) I'm just a regular old person with a job to do,
and so are my colleagues. And contrary to what you'll hear from politicians
and pundits, reporters -- certainly the ones I know -- really don't have an
"agenda" except to do our jobs well, make a difference in peoples' lives,
and write something that people will want to read.

I'm not suggesting that it's wrong to be skeptical of news reports, or
to carefully examine what the media does. In fact, it's ESSENTIAL that
every citizen do both because of how influential news can be. But, please,
form your OWN opinions on this. Have you read a newspaper and truly found
an article to be biased, independent of what some talking head or politician
said on CNN or FOXNews last night? Here's a bit of perspective: People in
power have always and will always criticize the media, because it is our job
to hold their feet to the fire. Nobody likes to have someone look into what
they do, to have their dirty laundry aired (this is why people don't like
the police). Be skeptical of them, too. What is THEIR agenda when they
talk nebulously about the left-wing or right-wing media? (Believe it or
not, I've been accused of being both -- guess I'm doing my job.)

To bring it back to the topic at hand, I can assure you that the Time
reporter had no agenda except to write an interesting piece. Let's be real
here -- it was a softball article giving readers a glimpse into a very nice,
fun hobby, not examining a political campaign. What agenda do you suppose
she had beyond reporting and writing something someone would want to read?
Just a question to ponder.


Off the soapbox (thanks for indulging me),
Longhorn









-----Original Message-----
From: Gwen and Don Jackson [mailto:foxsecurity@earthlink.net]
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2004 10:50 PM
To: letterbox chat list
Subject: [LbNA] Time article and others


Well I just popped into the SoCal list here in the KOA, Idaho Falls, Idaho
while we are on a letterboxing/shooting junket. Since this Newbie/Time topic
has come up I thought that I would give my perspective. We were contacted by
the Time writer, but we chose not to respond. Not only do I think that the
game is better served by word of mouth, I have a great distrust of most news
folks as they will always follow THEIR agenda. When we started letterboxing
there was only 14 letterboxes in the state, and we tried to generate other
letterboxers by either word of mouth or with some articles in the
neighborhood papers. I noticed that everytime that an article was printed,
either in neighborhood papers or even in the Orange Co Register we would
lose letterboxes. After the Time article I think we have 8 confirmed missing
and clue pages pulled or edited, and another 5 that may have a problem?
Publicity for this game can be detrimental to the viability of the planted
letterbo xes. That is just the way it is. For those that only "Find" the
missing letterbox is an inconvenience. For those that "Plant" the missing
letterbox is more than that, and a little part of you is gone. We have
always attempted to replant one time when a box goes missing, and it usually
gets a better stamp than on the first plant, but if the box goes missing
again it doesn't get replaced. Examples would be "El Dorado's -Train,At Bat,
Wm Tells Target",and currently "Seal Beach's 101". Do we need publicity?
probably not, but since there is no way to stop it, try and replace your
loss with better stamps and when you plant remember that some of the finders
aren't as slick as they should be.
We just checked on one of our letterboxes here in Idaho Falls- "Early
Hunters". Last year we planted it across the two lane highway from a lava
tube(cave) about 16 miles outside of Idaho Falls. Other letterboxers (2)
planted their letterboxes inside the very long lava tube. Now we thought
about it at the time, but figured that some one would discover boxes inside
the cave, and we were right. Upon entering the cave a few days ago we found
various letterboxing paraphernalia, boxes, baggies, and letterboxing notices
scattered about, and only one box had survived inside the cave. Now hiding a
box inside the cave is really cool(pun intended), but just getting folks to
the site is what we like to do. I can't imagine anyone stumbling upon our
letterbox in the other direction , the location isn't as neat, but the box
should last and finders can still go into the cave.

.. No Buzzard we are delighted that someone has moved into Seal Beach. I
think we were able to get some of the best spots first. I haven't had the
opportunity to check out the clue sheet yet, and I'm for more plants. Well
as long as they aren't Geocacher s that grab your sites.

Popping back out, helping to plant Idaho seeds.
Don

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

ADVERTISEMENT

oups/S=1705065786:HM/EXP=1093271452/A=2319498/R=0/SIG=11thfntfp/*http://www.
netflix.com/Default?mqso=60185352&partid=5285298> click here

:HM/A=2319498/rand=791647763>


_____

Yahoo! Groups Links


* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/letterbox-usa/



* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: [LbNA] Time article

From: rscarpen (letterboxing@atlasquest.com) | Date: 2004-08-23 17:37:26 UTC
> I've been watching the recent Time thread and am really perplexed
> by the distrust of the media that's being talked about here.

I'm kind of surprised at the distrust shown towards the Time
reporters myself. The guy I talked to seemed very friendly and
interested in letterboxing. Thinking they might have an 'agenda' is
pretty funny, though. Yeah, to sell more papers! =) (It is a
buisiness, after all.)

But distrust of the media is a healthy thing, I think, so I'm not one
to complain about it. We've got to keep you reporters on your toes--
just like you keep politicians on theirs. ;o)

What urks me most about media isn't reporters, but advertisers. Why
does anyone EVER believe something they read in a paid
advertisement? *grumbling* Reporters are outright angels compared
to the outright lies and deceptions advertisers spew out with every
breath.

But that's just me. =)

-- Ryan

PS. Welcome to letterboxing! In case you haven't noticed, we're a
very opinionated little bunch. ;o)


RE: [LbNA] Time article

From: Kathryn Wolfe (kwolfe@cq.com) | Date: 2004-08-23 13:46:15 UTC-04:00
Hey, that's OK! I like opinions. They're the best things about getting
to know people -- even if you don't agree with me (imagine that! ;) ). We'd
be a boring lot otherwise. And thanks for the welcome.

Longhorn

-----Original Message-----
From: rscarpen [mailto:letterboxing@atlasquest.com]
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 1:37 PM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [LbNA] Time article


> I've been watching the recent Time thread and am really perplexed
> by the distrust of the media that's being talked about here.

I'm kind of surprised at the distrust shown towards the Time
reporters myself. The guy I talked to seemed very friendly and
interested in letterboxing. Thinking they might have an 'agenda' is
pretty funny, though. Yeah, to sell more papers! =) (It is a
buisiness, after all.)

But distrust of the media is a healthy thing, I think, so I'm not one
to complain about it. We've got to keep you reporters on your toes--
just like you keep politicians on theirs. ;o)

What urks me most about media isn't reporters, but advertisers. Why
does anyone EVER believe something they read in a paid
advertisement? *grumbling* Reporters are outright angels compared
to the outright lies and deceptions advertisers spew out with every
breath.

But that's just me. =)

-- Ryan

PS. Welcome to letterboxing! In case you haven't noticed, we're a
very opinionated little bunch. ;o)



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

ADVERTISEMENT

oups/S=1705065786:HM/EXP=1093369099/A=2319498/R=0/SIG=11thfntfp/*http://www.
netflix.com/Default?mqso=60185352&partid=5285298> click here

:HM/A=2319498/rand=265431130>


_____

Yahoo! Groups Links


* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/letterbox-usa/



* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: RE: [LbNA] Time article

From: (hannahkat@cox.net) | Date: 2004-08-23 14:01:50 UTC-04:00
Sorry, I must disagree with you here.

I have dealt with many different types of reporters over the years, be they newspaper, television, magazine or what have you, and I have found the exact opposite to be true in many cases, with all manner of negative repercussions.

They may not have an agenda starting out, but more often than not, they latch onto a facet of a topic that appeals to them and 'run with it', because they think it is more likely to get them published or aired...it is more sensationalistic....it's a better photo op...you name it.

For instance, I was once interviewed by a reporter when I was a state park ranger. The article was supposed to be about the programs we offered for children in the park I worked at. Somehow she had gotten info on our salaries and then a simple question to me about why us environmental educators work for so little ("because we believe in what we are doing")turned into an article about how park rangers are disgruntled about their poor pay....when I had said nothing of the sort. Luckily my supervisors knew me better than that - otherwise I could have lost my job.

Most of my experiences with reporters has shown me that because many reporters are plagued by their deadlines and their need to appeal to the masses (rather than tell the whole truth), they tend to do very poorly at 'getting the whole story' or 'telling all sides'or 'exposing these stories to the world' - political or otherwise. They tend to be hurried, superficial and impatient.

I have learned that I need to tell reporters doing 'light' or 'family fun'-type stories exactly what they need to tell people and what not to put in.
e.g. "You MUST let your readers know that there is an admission fee" or "It is imperative that you tell your audience that letterboxing has a strong 'leave no trace' ethic".

Certainly, there are great reporters out there, but my experiences have taught me not to wholly entrust a story to them. If we have a story to tell, it is OUR job to make sure it is told correctly. I'm not leaving it up to anyone else.

Respectfully,
-Kim (Rustypuff)


>
> From: Kathryn Wolfe
> Date: 2004/08/23 Mon PM 01:10:53 EDT
> To: "'letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com'"
> Subject: RE: [LbNA] Time article
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: RE: [LbNA] Time article

From: Debra Nickles (artndeb@horizonview.net) | Date: 2004-08-23 16:01:27 UTC-04:00
Yeah, journalism is pretty competitive as I understand,
and no one, no one, can be purely objective
(we study this in a freshmen writing class I happen to teach--
and the j-majors have an awful time with concept.)

Ryan hit it just right--the advertisers and, I say, the editors (those in
charge of "selecting" what people do and do not read) are usually the people
with
$$$ in their eyes. I'm sure the article in TIME held lots of marketing
value--notice the "Big Cats" issue on the stand now? Right when readers are
exhausted from election hype and war? Perhaps letterboxing functioned in a
similar fashion.

An informed audience is the best we can hope for right now. So, I hope all
newbies join this listserv and learn about the community, say, "first-hand."
That includes all the griping-- :-).

Sorry, to hear about your experience Rustypuff.

Froggiebaby!




> They may not have an agenda starting out, but more often than not, they
latch onto a facet of a topic that appeals to them and 'run with it',
because they think it is more likely to get them published or aired...it is
more sensationalistic....it's a better photo op...you name it.
>
>>
>>
>
> >
> >> >
>
>
>


Re: RE: [LbNA] Time article

From: Doodle & Deedle Bug (doodle_n_deedle@yahoo.com) | Date: 2004-08-23 13:07:24 UTC-07:00
Having once been involved with a reporter for almost 3 years, I like to think I have a unique insight into reporting without having actually been a reporter myself. From my experiences visiting the office, accompanying my then-bf on the occasional assignment ('cause I wanted to visit the place he was going), and even hanging out with him in the office late at night as he tried to work in quieter conditions, it's my humble opinion that it's the editors that are evil. The facet that reporters latch on to and run with usually is caused by their editor, "I don't like the slant of this story, start going in this direction." And if you want to get your stories published, keep your job, and not get yelled at by your editor and forced to do re-writes, you start doing what they want. I can't remember how many times he wanted to throw his office keys at his editor and scream, "I quit," simply because he was so tired of putting up with his editor's BS. He'd put his heart into stories,
trying to make them as factual, true to the nature of the people he'd interview, and then his editor would go "chop chop chop" with no regard. Concerning the Time article, I remember reading in someone's post that the original article space alotted for the article was changed, via the editor, to only 99 lines. Ouch! That's a lot of content that got chopped.

Or maybe it was just his editor that was evil and nowhere near in touch with reality. One story I love to share is about a play review that was written. There was a reference to a theatre placed in there...if you're from Cleveland, OH prehaps you've heard of the Cedar Lee? Named because it's on the corners of Cedar and Lee Roads. My then-bf's darling editor changed the line from "The Cedar Lee Theatre" and added "The Cedar Lee Theatre on Coventry." The theatre on Coventry that he was thinking of was called the Centrum, and I don't think was even operational at that point in time. What esp. kills me is that, supposedly when this editor was a mere reporter, that area was his beat. Ugh. So much for checking facts...

But, as you were...

Doodle.



hannahkat@cox.net wrote:

Sorry, I must disagree with you here.

I have dealt with many different types of reporters over the years, be they newspaper, television, magazine or what have you, and I have found the exact opposite to be true in many cases, with all manner of negative repercussions.

They may not have an agenda starting out, but more often than not, they latch onto a facet of a topic that appeals to them and 'run with it', because they think it is more likely to get them published or aired...it is more sensationalistic....it's a better photo op...you name it.

For instance, I was once interviewed by a reporter when I was a state park ranger. The article was supposed to be about the programs we offered for children in the park I worked at. Somehow she had gotten info on our salaries and then a simple question to me about why us environmental educators work for so little ("because we believe in what we are doing")turned into an article about how park rangers are disgruntled about their poor pay....when I had said nothing of the sort. Luckily my supervisors knew me better than that - otherwise I could have lost my job.

Most of my experiences with reporters has shown me that because many reporters are plagued by their deadlines and their need to appeal to the masses (rather than tell the whole truth), they tend to do very poorly at 'getting the whole story' or 'telling all sides'or 'exposing these stories to the world' - political or otherwise. They tend to be hurried, superficial and impatient.

I have learned that I need to tell reporters doing 'light' or 'family fun'-type stories exactly what they need to tell people and what not to put in.
e.g. "You MUST let your readers know that there is an admission fee" or "It is imperative that you tell your audience that letterboxing has a strong 'leave no trace' ethic".

Certainly, there are great reporters out there, but my experiences have taught me not to wholly entrust a story to them. If we have a story to tell, it is OUR job to make sure it is told correctly. I'm not leaving it up to anyone else.

Respectfully,
-Kim (Rustypuff)


>
> From: Kathryn Wolfe
> Date: 2004/08/23 Mon PM 01:10:53 EDT
> To: "'letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com'"
> Subject: RE: [LbNA] Time article
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links









~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Letterboxers wear Khakis. Or jeans. Or shorts, if they're not scared of poison ivy. And rainjackets when they're crazy enough to go 'boxing in a downpour. And sunscreen, bug spray, big backpacks to hold all those stamp pads and box first aid supplies and extra bug spray and their very important water, and good hiking boots, and...

Visit us on the web at www.geocities.com/doodle_n_deedle

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


RE: RE: [LbNA] Time article

From: Kathryn Wolfe (kwolfe@cq.com) | Date: 2004-08-23 16:10:54 UTC-04:00
Reporters do have a hand in story angles obviously. But this is right
more often than not, sadly. I'm in definite agreement with you here.

Longhorn

-----Original Message-----
From: Doodle & Deedle Bug [mailto:doodle_n_deedle@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 4:07 PM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: RE: [LbNA] Time article


Having once been involved with a reporter for almost 3 years, I like to
think I have a unique insight into reporting without having actually been a
reporter myself. From my experiences visiting the office, accompanying my
then-bf on the occasional assignment ('cause I wanted to visit the place he
was going), and even hanging out with him in the office late at night as he
tried to work in quieter conditions, it's my humble opinion that it's the
editors that are evil. The facet that reporters latch on to and run with
usually is caused by their editor, "I don't like the slant of this story,
start going in this direction." And if you want to get your stories
published, keep your job, and not get yelled at by your editor and forced to
do re-writes, you start doing what they want. I can't remember how many
times he wanted to throw his office keys at his editor and scream, "I quit,"
simply because he was so tired of putting up with his edi tor's BS. He'd
put his heart into stories,
trying to make them as factual, true to the nature of the people he'd
interview, and then his editor would go "chop chop chop" with no regard.
Concerning the Time article, I remember reading in someone's post that the
original article space alotted for the article was changed, via the editor,
to only 99 lines. Ouch! That's a lot of content that got chopped.

Or maybe it was just his editor that was evil and nowhere near in touch with
reality. One story I love to share is about a play review that was written.
There was a reference to a theatre placed in there...if you're from
Cleveland, OH prehaps you've heard of the Cedar Lee? Named because it's on
the corners of Cedar and Lee Roads. My then-bf's darling editor changed the
line from "The Cedar Lee Theatre" and added "The Cedar Lee Theatre on
Coventry." The theatre on Coventry that he was thinking of was called the
Centrum, and I don't think was even operational at that point in time. What
esp. kills me is that, supposedly when this editor was a mere reporter, that
area was his beat. Ugh. So much for checking facts...

But, as you were...

Doodle.



hannahkat@cox.net wrote:

Sorry, I must disagree with you here.

I have dealt with many different types of reporters over the years, be they
newspaper, television, magazine or what have you, and I have found the exact
opposite to be true in many cases, with all manner of negative
repercussions.

They may not have an agenda starting out, but more often than not, they
latch onto a facet of a topic that appeals to them and 'run with it',
because they think it is more likely to get them published or aired...it is
more sensationalistic....it's a better photo op...you name it.

For instance, I was once interviewed by a reporter when I was a state park
ranger. The article was supposed to be about the programs we offered for
children in the park I worked at. Somehow she had gotten info on our
salaries and then a simple question to me about why us environmental
educators work for so little ("because we believe in what we are
doing")turned into an article about how park rangers are disgruntled about
their poor pay....when I had said nothing of the sort. Luckily my
supervisors knew me better than that - otherwise I could have lost my job.

Most of my experiences with reporters has shown me that because many
reporters are plagued by their deadlines and their need to appeal to the
masses (rather than tell the whole truth), they tend to do very poorly at
'getting the whole story' or 'telling all sides'or 'exposing these stories
to the world' - political or otherwise. They tend to be hurried, superficial
and impatient.

I have learned that I need to tell reporters doing 'light' or 'family
fun'-type stories exactly what they need to tell people and what not to put
in.
e.g. "You MUST let your readers know that there is an admission fee" or "It
is imperative that you tell your audience that letterboxing has a strong
'leave no trace' ethic".

Certainly, there are great reporters out there, but my experiences have
taught me not to wholly entrust a story to them. If we have a story to tell,
it is OUR job to make sure it is told correctly. I'm not leaving it up to
anyone else.

Respectfully,
-Kim (Rustypuff)


>
> From: Kathryn Wolfe
> Date: 2004/08/23 Mon PM 01:10:53 EDT
> To: "'letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com'"
> Subject: RE: [LbNA] Time article
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links









~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Letterboxers wear Khakis. Or jeans. Or shorts, if they're not scared of
poison ivy. And rainjackets when they're crazy enough to go 'boxing in a
downpour. And sunscreen, bug spray, big backpacks to hold all those stamp
pads and box first aid supplies and extra bug spray and their very important
water, and good hiking boots, and...

Visit us on the web at www.geocities.com/doodle_n_deedle

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

ADVERTISEMENT

oups/S=1705065786:HM/EXP=1093378053/A=2319498/R=0/SIG=11thfntfp/*http://www.
netflix.com/Default?mqso=60185352&partid=5285298> click here

:HM/A=2319498/rand=687545165>


_____

Yahoo! Groups Links


* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/letterbox-usa/



* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: [LbNA] Time article

From: (DRSIL@aol.com) | Date: 2004-08-23 17:28:25 UTC-04:00
I thought the article in Time was well intentioned and informative. (which is
surprising given it came from someone in such a low life profession as
journalism).


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


RE: [LbNA] Time article

From: Kathryn Wolfe (kwolfe@cq.com) | Date: 2004-08-23 17:56:26 UTC-04:00
That's nice. Very neighborly of you.

Your friend the low-life,
Longhorn

-----Original Message-----
From: DRSIL@aol.com [mailto:DRSIL@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 5:28 PM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [LbNA] Time article


I thought the article in Time was well intentioned and informative. (which
is
surprising given it came from someone in such a low life profession as
journalism).


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

ADVERTISEMENT

oups/S=1705065786:HM/EXP=1093382929/A=2319501/R=0/SIG=11tq0u909/*http://www.
netflix.com/Default?mqso=60185353&partid=5285298> click here

:HM/A=2319501/rand=942249267>


_____

Yahoo! Groups Links


* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/letterbox-usa/



* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: [LbNA] Time article

From: seth mandeville (pokerman117@yahoo.com) | Date: 2004-08-23 15:09:08 UTC-07:00
How frighteningly thoughtful and friendly of you, sir.
Let me guess, a lawyer? Or some degenerate Rhode Island politician? If that's the case, then we know why you would make such a remark.

Happy thoughts,
Seth

DRSIL@aol.com wrote:
I thought the article in Time was well intentioned and informative. (which is
surprising given it came from someone in such a low life profession as
journalism).


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/letterbox-usa/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: [LbNA] Time article

From: Laura Taylor (laura9193@yahoo.com) | Date: 2004-08-23 15:12:54 UTC-07:00
HEY!!!! I'm from Rhode Island!! Oh nevermind they are degenerates.

seth mandeville wrote:How frighteningly thoughtful and friendly of you, sir.
Let me guess, a lawyer? Or some degenerate Rhode Island politician? If that's the case, then we know why you would make such a remark.

Happy thoughts,
Seth

DRSIL@aol.com wrote:
I thought the article in Time was well intentioned and informative. (which is
surprising given it came from someone in such a low life profession as
journalism).


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/letterbox-usa/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/letterbox-usa/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.




---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: [LbNA] Time article

From: rscarpen (letterboxing@atlasquest.com) | Date: 2004-08-23 23:17:52 UTC
> Your friend the low-life,
> Longhorn

The Rise of the Snails: Coming to a theater near you! =)

-- Ryan


Re: [LbNA] Time article

From: (DRSIL@aol.com) | Date: 2004-08-23 22:01:43 UTC-04:00
Sorry I couldn't help myself.

I once took a management course given by my employer,(before it was realized
that I had absolutely no career potential) and one of the subjects was dealing
with the press. The bullet points included things such as, In terms of money
and prestige journalism is second only to retail. The press are all angry
socialists, etc.... When I read these posts I just chuckled and recalled that
class. After all there are worse things, such as journalists who went to law
school.

Stewart


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: [LbNA] Time article

From: (DRSIL@aol.com) | Date: 2004-08-23 22:05:35 UTC-04:00
A Lawyer... them is fighting words. Most of my friends and family are lawyers
and now I am worried it is rubbing off. As far as being a RI politician, that
would require more ambition than I possess. I am a humble civil servant.

Stewart


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]