- - - -
Now available for preorder:
The San Francisco Panorama.
- - - -
- - - - Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 19:05:37 -0400 (EDT)From: Paul L. Maliszewski Subject: most censored To: us@[domain], alison@[domain], andy@[domain], kristin@[domain] --- Alison Frane wrote: > Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 21:36:06 -0400 > To: mcsweeneysmail@yahoo.com > From: Alison Frane > Subject: most censored > CC: andy@[domain], kristin@[domain] > > Dear McSweeny person, whoever you are... > > It was brought to our attention that our most recent press release > had joined the illustrious ranks of your most censored press releases > of 2000 (so far). I'm just curious: what exactly does "most censored" > mean, and how do you pick them? We like the fact that you've put it > up, of course. We like all the publicity we can get. Chrononauts is a > great game, by the way. And pleae check out our website: > http://www.wunderland.com. I think you might like it. > > Have a great day! > > > Alison Frane, > Duchess of Retail (Contagious Dreams) > http://www.ContagiousDreams.com > Looney Laboratories, Inc. > [phone number] > > PLEASE SEND REPLIES TO: > [address] Dear Alison Frane and Other Interested Parties at Looney Laboratories, I'm in receipt of your e-mail of July 17, 2000. Thank you very much for writing to McSweeney's about our on-going (and highly popular) feature, "The Most Censored Press Releases of 2000 (So Far)." You pose two very interesting questions, and I intend to do my level best to answer both. But first I must tell you that "The Most Censored Press Releases of 2000 (So Far)" feature [hereafter abbreviated T.M.C.P.R.O.2K.(SF)] is one the magazine approaches with the utmost seriousness, gravity, and responsibility. Hardly a day passes that we do not consider some new (and worthy) candidate for inclusion. But our standards remain (necessarily) high, and the most censored press releases number not (very) many. You ask, "What exactly does 'most censored' mean?" Webster's Dictionary defines censorship as "the condition of being censored" and censor as "to employ or affect censorship on some form of expression or something." Now how we pick the most censored press releases and, moreover, how we came to choose the most recent press release from Looney Laboratories, Inc. (hereafter Looney Laboratories) concerns a far more complicated (but intriguing) matter. As I'm sure you can no doubt imagine, staying abreast of the thousands of press releases created everyday is no easy task; however, it is not one from which we at McSweeney's shrink. That's why we rely on the second-hand anecdotal reports that pour in non-stop from journalists and other members of the news media. The authors of these reports are men and women working all over the world who must daily bear witness to some of the most flagrant acts of press release censorship ever known. Not surprisingly, many of them fear on-the-job reprisals, merely for acknowledging that press release censorship still goes on in this day and age. I can assure you that all who request anonymity receive it. There are stories I could share here, Alison, a half of a dozen of them at least, all falling into the general category of out-of-control press release censorship, but I find them painfully difficult to relate. Suffice it to say that your Looney Laboratories press release, while undoubtedly censored, got off easy. Anyway, those reports are what alert us to the hundreds of imperiled or, if you will, endangered press releases. They serve as our early-warning system, if you will, and allow the in-house T.M.C.P.R.O.2K.(SF) department to step in and initiate their computer-aided tagging and tracking procedures for each endangered release. Deciding which press releases have been most censored is the time-consuming but treasured responsibility of the Committee of Six. A self-governing body within the T.M.C.P.R.O.2K.(SF) department, the Committee of Six is an elite, highly secretive body comprised of the five former chairpersons of the T.M.C.P.R.O.2K.(SF) department as well as the larger body's current sitting chairperson. The Committee of Six doesn't have a lot of time to play computer games. Each member of the Committee of Six brings his or her specific (and often career-long) experience with press release censorship to bear on the recommendations that members present in the body's exhausting, but well-catered bi-weekly meetings. Modeled in part on the operations of the Federal Reserve, the Committee of Six scrutinizes ream upon ream of statistics before making a single recommendation to the Executive Committee. The variables that body studies include but are not limited to the following: * Verified number of censorship incidents (hereafter CIs)
(Note: we've lately become aware and very concerned about the more difficult to follow small-market press release censorship and are beginning to track that as well.) No mere ineffectual rubber-stamp group, the Executive Committee of the T.M.C.P.R.O.2K.(SF) department has the power to overturn any decision made by the Committee of Six. Frequently they have no choice but to exercise that power in the interest of preserving and keeping safe what a number of today's major media watchdogs perceive as the integrity of the T.M.C.P.R.O.2K.(SF) service. The Executive Committee can also request further clarifications and more detailed reports. For example, they may want to understand the specific climate and media context from which a certain recommendation arose. Understandably. The bottom line is this: since we have taken it upon ourselves to stand up for the censored press release, we've made it our mission to make sure and double-sure we are standing up for the most censored ones of all. In other words, your Looney Laboratories press release has taken its place in very esteemed company indeed. Of course, one would prefer that Looney Laboratories was never censored. Of course, one wishes Looney Laboratories did not have to share the company of even one single censored press release. Of course, in an ideal world there would be no censorship of press releases or whatever else there is. Of course, we do not live in an ideal world. I'm glad to learn you are grateful for our decision to reprint the Looney Laboratories press release. Please know it is not a decision we made (or take) lightly. But, really, it was the least we could do, considering. I've forwarded your kind message to the mailrooms of both the Committee of Six and the Executive Committee and trust both bodies will welcome the confirmation that they've once again done their part to rescue another release from the jaws of censorship. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Truly, Paul Maliszewski
|
Red dot denotes content that is new today.
Black dot denotes newish content.