Barry Fenchak and I respond to Masser's letter to the editor
- Thread starter B_Levinson
- Start date
Bill, I would have left out your last paragraph. You really didn't need it to make your point, and it risks labeling you as a "Joe-Bot" in the eyes of the public. Mind you, I don't disagree with the point at all--but sometimes less is more. Barry's letter makes his point succinctly. We want people to see that this board needs to go--independent of anyone's views on Paterno or the scandal. There's more than enough ammo for that without Paterno.
The letters that point out that the board stated one thing in 2011 and then contradicted those statements in their testimony is great and should be repeated at every opportunity. This shows the Board of Distrust to be untrustworthy at least and diabolical at worst. They are facts and it would be hard for anybody to honestly call anyone stating these contradictory statements as a "Joebot".
Sometimes one is in danger of saying too much at one time. Even if it is true. You mention Paterno, and a fair percent of the audience turns you off and never gets to your facts--an audience that you might be able to reach with the other stuff. It doesn't matter if they can do that "honestly" or not--they just will. In a full blown debate or a scholarly article, yeah, that's important. This isn't. It's a Letter to the Editor. It was the same advice Tom gave me when I drafted a letter to the Penn Stater and posted it here for comment. This is a short form of communication. You don't put all of your supporting points in. You don't have to.
The issue is more about lying to and on behalf of Penn State than just Paterno. The fact that Masser and every single one of his colleagues from March 2012 (except Clemens, who later distanced himself from it) told a very serious falsehood should be an issue.
The fact that Masshole and Frazier admitted that the Board published a knowingly false and defamatory statement about Paterno in March 2012 should prompt the Paterno Estate to sue Penn State, if possible. I know that Sue Paterno might be reluctant to do that, but she can always donate the proceeds (minus the attorney's fees and expenses) to Penn State to create a course in leadership ethics. Call it the equivalent of surgery or a root canal.
I well realize that, Bill (not sure if you remember me from our PSU days). However, it's possible to try to make too many points in one message. And there's no point in having that message automatically thrown out by folks that might otherwise listen. For newspapers, I advise brevity.
