Geoff Carver recently responded:

> common complaint is that the press is full of idiots who don't know
certain
> portions of their anatomy from what we might respectfully call a hole in
the
> ground - that journalists etc. always get it wrong anyway, so why bother -
but
> how often do we take the time to point-out their mistakes (in a positive,
> constructive manner, i hope) so that - maybe next time - the reporters
might
> make the effort to get a few more of their facts straight - consider it an
> investment in PR if nothing else, or remember the old adage they should
have
> engraved on your first computer: garbage in, garbage out...

In agreement, it seems to me that the "PRESS" is part of the public that
needs to be "educated."  There are several reporters in southern Nevada who
delight in cultural resource issues.  And although they seldom get the facts
straight (is that artistic license?) as we perceive them, they are open to
reasonable, discussion.  For example, a leisure reporter some time ago
announced the location of a rock art site on public land as an isolated
(seldom visited), therapeutic location to relax and refresh the spirit.
After upsetting numerous local archaeologists (and Native Americans), this
reporter was invited to another site that has been thoroughly trashed by the
uneducated and was made aware of what his disclosures could potentially do
to his refresh-the-spirit site.  Seeing the damage first hand, he said he
had no idea and appreciated the comparison and enlightenment.  While this
person does continue to publish locations of sanctioned and controled sites
to visit, he no longer discusses sites that are off the beaten path.
Instead of flaming Dr. Gott, honoring him with the title of moron and making
an enemy (armed with a pen instead of a sword), wouldn't it be better to
establish an open dialoge and convert him, make him see the error of his
ways?  Is public education not a professional goal or are we just paying it
lip service?  Convert the press, convert the masses - well almost.
    Behold the power of PR (remember Nixon).  Look at it this way, newspaper
editors love controversy and in order to sell their version of the truth
they encourage their reporters to pursue such issues rather than admitting
mistakes or bad judgement (unless there is proveable negligence and then
they just drop it).  If the good Dr. Gott receives approval from his boss to
publicly respond to numerous flaming letters, just imagine the possibilities
for the bad press he could muster.  Take for example, POTTY PALACE
ARCHAEOLOGISTS TAKE ISSUE WITH MEDICAL ADVISE, ouch.  Now don't get me
wrong, I don't condon what advise he gave or the method he rendered his
opinion.  The bottom line is to get the man on our side, show him the
enlightend path, and drop the attack on his credibility.  Just a
thought.......