Sci-Fi et al sue NASA

[Mercule]

I read your previous post. I simply made the error of assuming that what you wrote was designed to fully support your position.

Nope. If you think there are documents the government/NASA is intent on hiding, and SciFi isn't primarily using the suit to generate PR, then it makes perfect sense and I'd never be able to convince anyone otherwise. My gut reaction is that it's a PR thing.

I don't think I ever said anything designed to persuade anyone. Just threw out an opinion and was attacked for something I didn't say (or didn't mean to imply). Everything else has been me trying to clarifying that I was irritated over what my gut reaction said their motives were. Oh, and saying that I may have a blind spot because of my own disbelief of UFOs. I figure that acknowledging a bias is pretty much the same thing as saying that I'm not looking objectively and you should take what I said with a grain of salt.

The SciFi lawsuit isn't exactly something I'm going to lose sleep over. It isn't the greatest sin I've heard about lately. It just happenned to be about the tenth "frivolous" lawsuit I'd read about in the past couple of days. This one, although the least of the offenders, had a "Reply" button next to it where I could rant about stupid lawsuits.

The main thing I forgot is that this may not be a "serious" lawsuit at all. Sometimes the only channel to get certain Federal documents is to go through the courts. If that's all this amounts to, then I've got no problem with it. Obviously, any PR generated over it is incidental and I can't fault their motives.

 

[Desdichado]

I'm not a legal expert, but you can't even take it to a court unless it's the only channel open to you was my impression. In fact, I think the article quoted above says as much.

 

[DaveMage]

I want to see whatever crashed, even if it was just a huge bag of horse$#!+ lobbed by a bunch of rednecks with a homemade catapult. There are documents about the findings of the investigation, although I'd agree that it's not likely to be something really exotic.

I'd like to know what it was.

I figure it was just Army weapons testing. Probably whatever landed was radioactive, or contained something that was harmful to the environment. Rather than invite public outcry, they try to bury it quickly.

 

[Desdichado]

Which is why I quoted it. It doesn't sound like it is you who is saying it, it sounds like it is me who is saying it (since I'm the one "insisting").[/i]

You did say it! You said the lawsuit was frivolous! OK, maybe you didn't insist that it was frivolous, but... heck, here's what you said:

Still, using the legal system like this is a travesty. I think a suitable response to such a frivolous lawsuit would be to count up the airtime this story receives (or best estimate) at SFC's expense, determine what the average prime-time news commercial spot costs, then double the whole sum. Fine SFC double that dollar figure. The fine should be put into a fund for fighting frivolous lawsuits.

I didn't take anything you said out of context that I can see, nor did I misattribute anything to you that you didn't say. Unless you're saying that it looks like you said that the lawsuit wasn't to force the government agencies to obey the law and follow the Freedom of Information Act? I assumed that was a given in the discussion.

 

[Mercule]

I didn't take anything you said out of context that I can see, nor did I misattribute anything to you that you didn't say. Unless you're saying that it looks like you said that the lawsuit wasn't to force the government agencies to obey the law and follow the Freedom of Information Act? I assumed that was a given in the discussion.

Just reread the article. Don't know what I was on when I read it the first time, but I'll just say that I gleaned a whole lot more information the second time around. I initially thought that it was a suit for "this event and any other UFO documents you might have around" and a couple of other incorrect bits.

Don't ask me where I pulled that from, but I hope it makes my objections sound a bit more sane. Now I can just look like an illiterate dork instead of an irrational moron.

I'll amend my statements to little more than "Cripes! I've seen entirely too many pointless lawsuits lately. Not related to this discussion, but I just wanted to vent."

Oh, and I agree that I'd like to know what fell from the sky. I suspect it's some sort of military test vehicle/device/thingy and that's way NASA, et al. are being a bit close-lipped.

So, apologies for derailing the thread. Move along now. Nothing more to see.

 

[Storm Raven]

and then Mercule who insists that a lawsuit to force a government agency to obey the law is frivolous, because he has no interest in UFOs.

Well, the lawsuit pretty much is frivolous, since classified documents are exempted from coverage under the Freedom of Information Act. The government agencies in question are obeying the law, the SciFi channel suit isn't going to force them to do anything more than what they are already doing.

 

[The Blue Elf]

Sci-Fi Channal did advertised shows such as the Mini-series Taken, also the New Battlestar Galaxtica series,Termors the series, Star Gate SG-1 on TV.Of course its not bigest network, but it manages alright, because it shows some old Sci-fi shows we all did like and others we didn't.


Sci-Fi Channal they are showing UFO investagation specials to get more ratings this is why they are sueing NASA the only thing I'm guessing is they are doing this as a publicity stunt, just to get more ratings on cheep low buget TV special.

 

[Desdichado]

Just reread the article. Don't know what I was on when I read it the first time, but I'll just say that I gleaned a whole lot more information the second time around. I initially thought that it was a suit for "this event and any other UFO documents you might have around" and a couple of other incorrect bits.

Don't ask me where I pulled that from, but I hope it makes my objections sound a bit more sane. Now I can just look like an illiterate dork instead of an irrational moron.

I'll amend my statements to little more than "Cripes! I've seen entirely too many pointless lawsuits lately. Not related to this discussion, but I just wanted to vent."

Oh, and I agree that I'd like to know what fell from the sky. I suspect it's some sort of military test vehicle/device/thingy and that's way NASA, et al. are being a bit close-lipped.

So, apologies for derailing the thread. Move along now. Nothing more to see.

Ah, it gave me something to look forward too between aggravating meetings or phone calls here at work today.

 

[LightPhoenix]

I mean, we've got LightPhoenix here, thinking that his personal tastes are the gauge of what a cable network should be showing...

You'll watch what I tell you to watch and you'll like it dammit!

Seriously though, I may be being a bit arrogant... a problem I've developed the last few years. Lo siento mucho. However, I just think (read: opinion) there's much better Sci-Fi and Horror out there that they could be persuing, writers and directors that they could be asking to create stuff.... Recently, especially the last year or so, all of their series seem to be low-budget crap. They didn't seem to be having this problem three or four years ago, so I have to wonder why they're taking this route.

And no, personally I wouldn't (and don't) watch a lot of the crap they show now. And I don't think (read: opinion) that the majority of the US would either. It seems awfully strange that a channel that wants to make money would show all this jreck, which I think (read: opinion) mainstream viewers are going to just write off.

Was I clear in stating that this is all opinion Joshua?

 

[Skade]

I can only conclude one of two things. One, that no one at that station gives a damn about sci-fi, horror, and the like. In which case, they're damned to fail anyway, especially with genres that aren't that popular on television. Two, that the executives over there have no clue what-so-ever how to run a station. Especially given actions that they have taken when they had stuff that was, for all intents and purposes, working.

I am afraid you would probably be right in both of these conclusions. They probably do not care about science fiction in any way, and sadly I have to think they really don't know how to run a TV station. SciFi's does not really advertise externally first of all. I rarely see any as in any case. Primarilly the rely on SciFi magazine, the website and the hard core sci-fi fans that will watch the channel no matter what crap is on.

In their defense though, prepare for blasphemy here, most sci-fi is crap. Sorry, but its true. Yes, any one of us can list off 20 classics of the genre, beautifully inventive imaginings of the future and past. On teh other hand, we have the multitudes of movies and TV that actually make Roger Corman look like the genius he is. So Sci-Fi simply fills their lineup with those crap programming. Including Antonio Sabato Jr movies, and anything that has Bobbi Phillips. Science fiction movies, even the succesful ones, very often have low budget, direct to video movies. And some of these direct to videos are quite good, just not good enough or marketable enough for the theatres.

Take Bobbi Phillips for instance. She made a series of movies called Chameleon, which I think Dark Angel ripped of something serious. It had such great potential, an interesting character, a good setting, some fairly realistic motives and a great looking lead actress. Unfortunatly it was doen cheap, with little special effects, and was marketed as a skinemax flick, which it really was not. This is pretty common. Go to Blockbuster sometime and look through the sci-fi and horror sections. There is a serious glut of crap in the field, but someone is watching it, otherwise it woudl not be made.

There are some great things on the channel though. I thought Taken was brilliant. I liked both Dune series, and though the Riverworld movie was very nice. I am seriously looking forward to Battlestar Galactica (BTW, did anyone notice how that was slipped in on the CNN article) and Stargate is the one show I watch religiously.

So, yeah there are some things I'd like to see changed. I'd like some anime in the lineup, something pretty good like Evangelion (not going to happen). I'd like to see a wednesday night movie, that was generally an older, but good sci-fi movie, and I'd like to see normal season blocks of shows, not random programming changes. This is especially true for the daytime programming which changes so often I have no clue what is ever on.

Those random changes are what really worry me, in regards to whether the execs know what they are doing. See, if they reallu had no clue what they were doing they woudl not change it much. They'd stick to standard program styles, and maybe even slip a talk show in there. Instead they use this completly nontraditional style of programming, switching from daily rooutines to blocks of single shows, to rotating lineups constantly. This is so unusual one has to hope there is a reason for it. Even shows liek the History channel have a basic lineup, sci-fi really does not.