Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here UFOs | Paranormal | Area 51 People | Places | Random Top 100 | What's New Catalog | New Books Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Our Bookstore is OPEN Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1998 -> Feb -> Here

From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 1998 08:41:21 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 04 Feb 1998 10:33:08 -0500
Subject: Re: Rebroadcast of our Favorite Abduction


> From: "Steven Kaeser" <steve@konsulting.com>
> To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Rebroadcast of our Favorite Abduction
> Date: Sun, 1 Feb 1998 06:06:38 -0500

> >Date: Sat, 31 Jan 1998 01:38:24 -0500
> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Rebroadcast of our Favorite Abduction

> >>From: KRandle993@aol.com
> >>Date: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 13:03:27 EST
> >>To: updates@globalserve.net
> >>Subject:  UFO UpDate: Rebroadcast of our Favorite Abduction

> <snip>

> >>As we now know, no experts discussed the
> >>authenticity of the tape, just the reality of the
> >>abduction phenomenon. Their who promotion
> >>is misleading. This certainly isn't like Star Trek
> >>or the X-Files because no one is hinting that those
> >>programs are real.

> >>KRandle

> >Hi Kevin,

> >What we ought to do is sue 'em for equal time! If it was possible
> >to get you and Stan on the same podium I would do it with you.

> Sounds good, but impractical.  Equal time provisions were written
> specifically to provide equal access for political viewpoints
> during an election.  While networks strive to provide equal time,
> this is done for their affiliates, who are actually covered by
> the regulations.  Networks, like cable channels, are not
> federally regulated entities, per se.

> There is a lot of nonsense on television, and most of it we
> simply ignore. If Stanton (or any other participants) believes
> that their comments have been missused, he could sue to have them
> removed.  But, I would suspect that the best course of action
> would be to ignore the show, which is all it's really worth.

> Steve


I have contacted the FCC, Dick Clark Productions, and UPN.

UPN says its all DC's responsibility, I am supposed to hear back
from the FCC, and DC was very defensive and is supposed to have a
'big shot' contact me.. They blame stations for the split screen
at the end making it difficult to read the credits.

My focus was on wanting a disclaimer at the beginning saying that
none of the "Experts" had seen the video prior to being
interviewed.

I also expressed concern with the program being billed, at least
in some, locations as a documentary in the newspaper listings.

Yes it is a poor "dramatic production". It is an unpleasant
thought to wonder what it would have been like without the
experts..  Maybe everybody would have stopped watching halfway
through?

One good thing is that Dr. Michael Schermer, the skeptic,
certainly didn't appear very convincing to me. Research by
proclamation...

I will --ugh-- view it again to see if I have a cause of action.

I certainly agree that the UFO community can't sue or ask for
equal time. Perhaps the experts can for deception, wrong use of
our likenesses etc.

Does anybody know if anybody else, besides me, was featured in
the advance advertising?

Stan Friedman