godinezzz says: I saw what you did there. Considering you have a high number of readers and do an awful lot of news coverage, I'm not too sure why it is you felt compelled to make a rape joke.
» SFB says: Wait a minute. We didn’t make a rape joke. Rather, we tried to phrase things carefully by using the term “child sexual abuse.” All we were trying to do was have a conversation. We were not trying to make any sort of joke on the topic, but rather discuss a serious topic. We felt uncomfortable about the way it was used in that piece. And we were just trying to make a point about finding a balance. We’re sorry if we disappointed you. We will do better. — Ernie @ SFB
23:57 // 2 years ago
holden421 says: You recently just replied to someones asking if you think the Wall Street protests are important enough to pay attention to. Your answer was "If more moments like this weekend’s macing take place, you can expect people to start taking them seriously." So my question to you is do you think the wall street protests should only be paid attention to when there is some amount of violence or civil unrest? Shouldn't these protests be getting full coverage by the media despite violence or unrest?
» SFB says: The problem with the protests right now is that they need a spark or a hook, something for an outsider to say, holy crap, I need to focus on this. You don’t have a rally-around-the-flag moment without a reason. It doesn’t have to be violence or over-the-top anger, but it has to be something that brings people together. For example, the Tea Party had a speech by Rick Santelli which was talked about on TV for a week. This movement doesn’t have anything like that. It doesn’t have a leader. It’s decentralized. This can be good, but it needs a spark. — Ernie @ SFB
15:55 // 3 years ago