RE: virus: Blah blah blah

Wed, 3 Feb 1999 11:23:11 -0500

		-----Original Message-----
		From:	Reed Konsler []
		Sent:	Wednesday, February 03, 1999 10:05 AM
		Subject:	virus: Blah blah blah

>Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 15:09:04 -0500
>From: William Roh <broh@ENERGYNEWENGLAND.COM>
>Subject: RE: virus: What's with Oprah?
>Of course I would go, I would much rather find her
interesting and
>enlightened. I see you only clipped my crudest remark -
what about the
>other remarks I made? I did not just decide not to like
her for no
>reason. I dislike her because she promotes a non-just
system that is
>based on poorly conceived notions regarding the rights
of people in this
Sorry, I didn't mean to misrepresent you. I figure anyone following the conversation can look at the posts from yesterday. The thing is, Oprah doesn't think all defendants are guilty *anymore*, and she let all of us in on her misconceptions and the experience which helped her to resolve them. That's good right? Granted Maybe I wouldn't support her for supreme court justice...but talk-show host? No still, for the simple reason that I have seen such
gross and poor judjement regarding these two issues that I would need to know a lot about her first - I would need to talk to her on a variety of issues to establish a basic trust before I would support her for anything.

And then she advertises for her movie on her show? Fie, evil woman!

She isn't a public official, she's an entertainer. If I show up on David

Letterman, you can bet I'll be endorsing something...a book, CD, or

movie. Does that make every guest on the show a "porkywhore?"

Porkywhore is only part of the word I made up. I do not think she is fat or a whore, I think she is a money whore getting fat by exploiting others. There are years of evidence to support that - from the trash she started with, to the softcore trash she does now. (in my opinion)

I have no problem with a guest talking about their show - that is not the issue. This show was dedicated 100% to advertising her movie and telling the viewers to go see the movie - never moving away from the subject. The show had one purpose only - to sell tickets to her movie. The station had no vested interest in the movie. This is a conflict of interests and should have had a disclaimer attached. Of course - it is Oprah - so rating were the only concern of the station. Money overpowers morals in most cases and she is in front of the line for the biggest piece of the cake. I don't object to her being successful or an entertainer - but these things are not a license for deception.

>I would love to talk to her and be wrong, I would
apologize and correct

>my thinking if shown to be wrong.

But the question is, given what you've publically said about her,

do you ever expect to get the chance?

I would never look for the chance - it would have to come to me. I am not interested in dealing with her in any way - If asked to be on her show - it would depend why. Richard's reason I like and makes sense to me. If I had such an opportunity to exploit myself or a cause that mattered to me, I would consider it. But the prospect of being associated with Oprah makes me sick to my stomach. It's not for me.

		Bill Roh


		  Reed Konsler