Kramer was not saboutaged.  Kramer was edited, as part of a normal media 
programme.

If Kramer thinks we can go around making mealy mouth statements to the 
press, in interviews and talking to journalists, and give the message he 
wants to give, without them working with what he says to work to their 
own agenda, he needs to wake up and never be interviewed again.  Only 
grown ups should be interviewed, who understand the media process, and 
make sure they remain firm with very strong, direct messages.

Kramer was not edited out of saying he felt there were two sides to the 
breastfeeding debate.  He was not edited out of suggesting that zealots 
make more of the scientific agenda than can be supported.  He was not 
edited out of placing himself as a rational scientist, on the fence, 
looking at two sides arguing it out.  He got a lot of air time, and he 
made very damaging statements in that air time.

Trying to point out that there were other things said, would not have 
made the least difference to the damage his style of discussion has 
wrought.  If every word he'd said had been uttered, it would have been 
just as bad as it was.

He should consider the dynamics of how the media works, and how people 
hear information before walking around being interviewed by 
journalists.  Maybe he should ask Nestle for some advice on this, given 
how he's worked with them in the past.  And if he still feels it's 
unfair for us to judge him on his actual words, and his actions, such as 
working with Nestle, then maybe he should consider why our opinion means 
so much to him?  After all, we're the zealots on the other side...

Media reporting is not a private chat in the tea rooms, whilst musing on 
info in a completely nothing to do with the real world manner.  If the 
heat from the microphones is too punishing, perhaps retiring from the 
news room would be more appropriate than screams of how they didn't play 
fair.  The complaint about the editing out of the Renfrew quote is real 
- and there would be kudos to Kramer if a similar direct point had been 
made by him, and lost.  But he didn't make any such equivalent point and 
what did come out of his mouth was utterly utterly damaging.  He only 
has himself to look at, in the mirror, for what he did say.

Morgan Gallagher


Evi Adams wrote:
> Kramer was sabotaged - .
>  
> regarding the recording of  Michael Kramer and Prof Mary Renfrew  on BBC Radio 4's Woman's Hour on 23rd July - please be aware that the interview was pre-recorded and the content was edited, and some important comments were not included. Michael Kramer made it clear that he was not only taken out of context but actually misquoted.  Mary Renfrew made the point that the argument was not 'breast is better', but 'formula is worse', but that was not included in the final interview as broadcast.  She has written to Woman's Hour to follow up. 
>   

             ***********************************************

Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
COMMANDS:
1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: set lactnet nomail
2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome