Jim March just finished Filming "the debate show"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jim March

Take heart. Poor Mark is likely one of those people who thrives on human suffering for the entertainment of others. "Fear Factor", "Dallas", "Knots Landing", "Maury Povich", afternoon soap operas, etc are his constant bill of fare. If there is human suffering, disfunctional families, or unhappy wealthy citizens of Port Charles hopping from bed to bed to asuage their misery, Mark will be there.

It is your fault that he is miserable because you failed to suffer enough or thrall in your suffering for the entertainment of the masses. You Cad!

Do you realize the amount of suffering YOU have caused for poor Mark? He missed most of the best rerun of "Married with Children" to write that e-mail and the best you could give him in response to that gargantuan effort on his part was a "rolleyes" smiley? You have absolutely no appreciation for Mark's plight and you should be ashamed.

:evil:

While I know where we get these guys it still leaves the one burning question "Where do we get these guys?!?!?"
 
There's now a LOT of commentary all over the 'net on this situation. Sigh. Of the comments outside of the gunnie community, about 2/3rds or more is of the "even though this dude is a gun nut, he shouldn't have gotten hosed like that" sort.

But there's a sizable "why can't this guy just get the joke" contingent.

I've been googling for it, and many seem surprised to find me dropping in on 'em.

http://xforums.net/ib/index.php?showtopic=12509

...is a good example.
 
Curious about the legalities

I'm curious to see where Viacom goes with this. What seems to be different about the precedent of (for example) practical joke/hidden camera shows, and even some individuals (I'm thinking about a Brit in particular who's did a lot of "ambushing" prominent figures trying to catch them in ridiculous exchanges, or some of the Daily Show interviews where relatively ordinary people are getting asked ridiculous questions...) is the degree of obviously purposeful deception that went into securing guests. In a Jamie Kennedy Experience scenario, since people don't know they're being filmed you're going to have to cater their good will and get them to sign a release. Though they enter the situation not knowing what's going on, they sign the release aware of the real story. This is clearly not the same thing... but is it illegal?

Of course, if they really changed pages on the contracts that's just straight up fraud, but probably the hardest to prove. It would probably make the most sense for them to drop it and move on, but on the other hand it's got to cost a fair chunk to film something like that, so I'm sure some gang of lawyers and accountants are trying to figure how much it's going to cost them if litigation goes against them versus how much they stand to lose for canning this segment.

One good thing out of this should be noted- it's going to be awfully tough to fool anyone again. If you search google for debate show the first link that comes up is titled "Viacom/MTV Networks' "The Debate Show" Fraud." All this publicity and discussion has it way out in the open now.
 
Well, I recorded that Hannity and Colmes segment, but it's by approximation one of the most pathetic interviews I've ever seen. Oliver North sitting in for Hannity, trying (along with Alan) to make lame jokes with the unengaging show producers. If you missed it, you didn't miss much.
 
nanojath

"Candid Camera" was sued for far less that what these guys did.

http://www.power-of-attorneys.com/candid_camera.htm
Smile! You've Been Hit With A Lawsuit.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When Philip Zelnick was instructed to climb on top of an authentic-looking, but phony, X-ray scanner machine (though identical in appearance to scanners reserved for carry-on luggage, the fake did not emit real rays), he asked, "Okay, where's the candid camera?"

It seemed fishy, but Zelnick complied with the airport security official at the Bullhead City, Arizona airport. By the time the security guard (actually "Candid Camera" host Peter Funt) barked his trademark "Smile! You're on 'Candid Camera!'" the last thing Zelnick wanted to do was smile — instead, he wanted to sue.

In a suit filed against Funt, "Candid Camera," the Pax television network, the airport and the Mojave Country Airport Authority, Zelnick claims he incurred bruises and bleeding after becoming stuck in the fake scanner.

According to his lawyer, Andrew Jones, Zelnick's thigh was pinched in the machine, forming a red, fist-sized "raspberry." His leg was also punctured by a pen inside his pocket.

"It wasn't a deep wound," Jones told Courttv.com. But "anxiety, distress, and humiliation" were after-effects of Zelnick's experience.

Zelnick is seeking an unspecified amount in damages for battery, negligence, false imprisonment, misrepresentation, and infliction of emotional distress. Jones hesitated to speculate about the trial's outcome. "I am hoping for a verdict that will be fair to my client," he said.

Six other unsuspecting travelers took a trip down the conveyor belt that day. None, aside from Zelnick, suffered any injuries, and "Candid Camera" broadcast the stunt (without Zelnick footage) as planned.

To Zelnick and his lawyer, the ill-fated gag was a classic example of reality TV gone wrong.

"This was forcing someone to do something he didn't want to do," said Jones. "It was an attempt to humiliate [Zelnick] openly, so that people could laugh at him on TV, for personal profit and gain."

In response to a New York Times article alleging that host Peter Funt "did not express particular sympathy" for Zelnick, the company expressed a "relative lack of sympathy for a legal action that seeks to exaggerate and alter the facts of the incident." Exaggerated or not, Zelnick's complaint against "Candid Camera" — a 54-year-old dinosaur of reality TV— is, according to its Web site, the first the show has incurred.

As for Zelnick, his lawyer hopes that taped footage of the fateful scanner ride, in which a grumbling Zelnick passes through the X-ray machine several times, will hold enough evidence to sway Monday's courtroom. According to Jones, "the segment speaks for itself."

Source: FindLaw.com, Court TV, "Harsh Reality: Unwitting traveler takes 'Candid Camera' to court," June 20, 2003.
Click to expand...
 
I suppose I'm on the "Obviously this guy can't take a joke" list.

Such a big fuss over a little thing..... Spend some of that energy on something positive, and perhaps I'd be more inclined to side with him.


Some people are just sue-happy egotists....
 
From his website

May 18, 2003 to present:
Atascadero, CA.
Sick of Seattle, we moved to Atascadero, a small town in central California. We live in an apartment complex, Jessica goes to preschool, Jodie works in San Luis Obispo.
Me? I'm unemployed, as usual.
Click to expand...



Maybe you should spend some of that energy looking for a job?
 
Originally posted by JAD:
I suppose I'm on the "Obviously this guy can't take a joke" list.
Click to expand...
A joke pokes fun in a harmelss direction.
A joke does not damage your professional reputation.

If you were a Doctor and someone tricked you into appearing in an episode where the running joke was that you must have had to buy your degree from a Mexican website because no American website would sell you a certification, well, I guess you would not "take the joke" very well either.
 
Ruined his reputation? Gimme a break- I'd never heard of the nutter before this, and his reaction to it is the only insight I have to him and his so-called reputation.

To me (an average schmoe) he seems to now have a reputation as a self-absobed baby with a hair-trigger for lawsuits and court actions.

You know he's reading this right now, dying to see what anyone has to say about him. ..... Maybe he'll sue me next.


And in the end....Who cares? He's just another person in a world of people.
 
Yeah, I watch this thread...hey, who wouldn't, if there was a thread about them up?

No, I ain't gonna sue you, you're entitled to your opinion. So is Matt Besser and the Crossballs folks for that matter. What you're not entitled to do is deliberately con me into being a part of your commentary.

YOU didn't do that. So you ain't getting sued.

They are, if they play that episode. (Not the difference between my position and Zelnick's: they didn't put Zelnick on the tube. They're threatening to put me on over my objections. While I was treated pretty damn bad on the set, I'm willing to write that off ('cept they DO owe me $200).)
 
JAD

Get over yourself.
Click to expand...
Whose "self" are we supposed to get over?

Jim is not threatening suit for specious reasons. He is threatening suit for fraud and breach of contract. You seem to have no problem with either.

If someone told you that they were something they were not, and then, upon your appearance, you found they were not what they represented themselves to be, would you be a bit miffed?

If you were invited to speak at a religious conference and then, upon arrival for same, found when they turned up the audience lights that the "religion" you had just spoken to was "Christian Identity" -- and there were nothing but clan members and neo Nazis looking back at you -- what would you do? Your reputation is shot. You are now going to be known as the guy who addressed a "Christian Identity" convention. You will be labeled a racist, homophobic, Jew-hating, holocaust denier. Would you be a bit miffed?

You then find out that the contract for your appearance had been falsified to reflect that the group is called "Christians for Christ" when in reality they are "Christian Identity". Would you be a bit miffed?

You go home and re-read their e-mail entreaties for you to appear and speak. Maybe you missed something the first time you read them. Sure enough, they misrepresented themselves all along as being from "Christians for Christ". Would you be a bit miffed?

You have been defrauded and the contract is breached by its very wording. You signed in good faith but those you are dealing with are operating in bad faith. Would you be a bit miffed?

So now, you find out that the "Christian Identity" people are going to use your image in television ads and your voice in radio ads to promote the function you were tricked into attending. Had you known what the group truly was, you wouldn't have gotten with miles of the place, especially downwind. But here you are, voice and image being used to promote your speech before this group. Would you be a bit miffed?

Perhaps you need a primer in Jim's credentials; and how such an event as that which has befallen him affects his credibility. He is no small force in CA and people such as yourself have no appreciation for how this type of activity affects his ability to do his job effectively.

I'm sure Jim will be happy to direct you to where you might glean that information.
 
No need to "glean" further info on him..... Because as you've pointed out "People like [me] have no apprieciation".

And that's where I prefer to stay.... In the unapprieciative catagory.

Well, gotta go... F911 starts in half an hour.
 
Let the Liberals spend $8 to $10 to make this class warfare artist wealthy as he decries the rich. The smart money is HERE for those who don't want to enrich MM but want to see his lies; and they are many.
 
Well, I figure Moore is Ann Coulter's counterpart - but that's not the point, and there's no need to waste space criticizing a poster for something irrelevant that was probably trolling anyway.
 
What a zinger!

It's been what, ten years or more since we invented the term "Troll" over on usenet....
Maybe some day you guys can move on.
Until then, continue to impress your friends by endlessly repeating the mantra: "Troll, trolling, trolls, troll...." etc.


-Hey at least you seem to have gotten over LOL... This is good.
:rolleyes:

Maybe next time you could post a smutty cartoon to make you and your buddies laff. Wowsa.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
Jim March makes USA Today
Replies
23
Views
2K
Tharg
T
R
  • Locked
Jim Scoutten E-mail --> Shooting USA Debuts Tomorrow Night
Replies
19
Views
1K
vapor22
V
W
  • Locked
Wayne La Pierre and Janalee Tobias on Jim Dexter radio Show (UTAH)
Replies
7
Views
682
WAGCEVP
W
F
  • Locked
Gun shows to gunbelt leather
Replies
0
Views
405
funnybone
F
K
  • Locked
If you like to talk guns, this is the radio show for you! Tune in/listen via podcast
Replies
5
Views
715
KnightOfTheOldeCode
K
Back
Top