Movie News

In Regards To The Coming Attractions scoop on Jimmy Smits and SWE2 & 3

Published at: June 4, 2000, 4:24 a.m. CST

Hey folks, Harry here. Seems that ol Father Geek managed to anger Patrick at COMING ATTRACTIONS by writing his introduction for the piece rather unfortunately. In his introduction, he made it seem that Patrick was 'running the scoop by us' before the scoop went on to anyone else. The fact was Patrick had sent it out to a great many people all at the same time. He felt that it was a very important rumor/scoop and wanted to spread the word. It is the sort of scoop, that if it pans out, is a feather in his well feathered cap. And Father Geek seemed to have stepped on Patrick's feelings a bit and his introduction was inappropriate. Here's the original complete letter that Patrick sent...

From: Corona Productions

To: 'Brian Zoromski' bz@ign.com; 'Den@IGNMovies' den@ign.com; 'Eric Lurio' elurio@aol.com; 'Garth Franklin' garth@darkhorizons.com; 'Lincoln@Countingdown' lincoln@countingdown.com; 'Nick Nunziata' nick@chud.com; 'Sean Jordan' SeanJordan@aol.com; 'Stax' flixburg@yahoo.com; 'Steven Horn' steven@ign.com; 'TheForce.net' starwars@theforce.net; 'Harry Jay Knowles' harry@aintitcool.com; 'Chris Gore' input@filmthreat.com; 'John Shea' webmaster@tnmc.org; 'Brian Koukol' brian@chud.com; 'Bjorn Hundlan' bhundlan@online.no; 'Ian' ian@fandom.com; 'Tim Doyle' tim@countingdown.com; 'Coming Soon! Gang' future@comingsoon.net; 'Frank Kurtz' fkurtz@cinescape.com; 'Keith Herber' kherber@cinescape.com; 'Jeffrey Wells' gruver1@earthlink.net; 'Hollywood.com' news@hollywood.com; 'Jawad Mir' jawadmir@yahoo.com; 'Lew Irwin' studiobrf@aol.com; 'Widgett' widgett@needcoffee.com

Date: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 7:11 PM

Subject: Star Wars 2 casting news.

Hey gang,

I rarely do this, but I feel the importance of this piece of gossip is important enough to pass on to you all. CA's running the story that Jimmy Smits (yes, he of NYPD Blue fame, but I prefer LA Law myself) has been secretly cast in a role that'll have him starring in STAR WARS 2 as well as STAR WARS 3. I don't know the name of the character yet, but according to my source, Smits' deal is done and only requires a few days of filming. However, his role in SW3 is much larger and will require more time from the actor. I trust my source and his credibility, which I outline on the CA STAR WARS 2 page.

Details are on www.corona.bc.ca/films/details/sw2.html. If Lucas is serious about shooting this film starting next month, there should be some kind of casting announcement fairly soon, you think, right? Well, this is Lucas...

Patrick@CA

Harry here again, and as you can see... Patrick wasn't running this by anyone... He was... for all intents and purposes.... issuing a press release about a big scoop, so that the fans of each internet website online could partake of the knowledge instantly and easily. Bravo. And if that is where this ended... well, I'd pat Patrick on the back and say.... Great Job! But Patrick seems to want to somehow turn this into an embarrassing situation for me and Aint It Cool News, and is planning on Monday publishing the following letter to somehow get my attention:

From: Corona Productions central@corona.bc.ca

Reply-To: "central@corona.bc.ca" central@corona.bc.ca

To: "'Corona Productions'" central@corona.bc.ca, "'Brian Zoromski'" bz@ign.com, "'Den@IGNMovies'" den@ign.com, "'Eric Lurio'" elurio@aol.com, "'Garth Franklin'" garth@darkhorizons.com, "'Lincoln@Countingdown'" lincoln@countingdown.com

To: "'Nick Nunziata'" nick@chud.com, "'Sean Jordan'" SeanJordan@aol.com, "'Stax'" flixburg@yahoo.com, "'Steven Horn'" steven@ign.com, "'TheForce.net'" starwars@theforce.net, "'Chris Gore'" input@filmthreat.com

To: "'John Shea'" webmaster@tnmc.org, "'Brian Koukol'" brian@chud.com, "'Bjorn Hundlan'" bhundlan@online.no, "'Ian'" ian@fandom.com, "'Tim Doyle'" tim@countingdown.com,

To: "'Frank Kurtz'" fkurtz@cinescape.com, "'Keith Herber'" kherber@cinescape.com, "'Jeffrey Wells'" gruver1@earthlink.net, "'Hollywood.com'" news@hollywood.com, "'Jawad Mir'" jawadmir@yahoo.com, "'Lew Irwin'" studiobrf@aol.com To: "'Widgett'" widgett@needcoffee.com, "'Chris Bernier'" chris@ign.com, "'David Poland'" ladave@mediaone.net, "'Thomas Chau'" tom@cinecon.com, "'Suni Sidhu'" ssidhu@reachme.net, "'Rob Worley'" robworley@mailzone.com

To: "'Deadpool'" tcrf@hotmail.com, "'Roc Carson (Corona)'" roc_carson@corona.bc.ca, "'Steve Harris'" LowtekSH@aol.com

Subject: The letter.

Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 19:59:41 -0700

Organization: Corona Productions

X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211

Here it is. It's a first draft, and a letter that's meant to reflect a general sentiment of a large group of people. Please bear that in mind when you read it over and suggest changes/word replacements/issues that were forgotten that need to be addressed. Send the corrections in a reply to all parties; I'll act as wordsmith and edit the changes into the body once they're agreed upon. All changes need to be done by, let's say, Saturday 11:59 PM, PST. It should be sent off to AICN Sunday, allowing them a day. I'll be posting this letter on CA's Director's Cut on Monday, along with CA's personal issues. I think if there are specifics that pertain to each of us/our sites', let's post them on our sites along with the letter come Monday morning.

If you know of anyone that's been removed from this list or missing, please send this to them. If you do not represent your organization but wish to sign the letter, please do so using your recognized online name.

That's it.

Patrick@CA

* * * * *

To the webmasters of "Ain't it Cool News":

Ever since the explosion of the Internet, one of the highest-visible segments of it has been online film community. Today there are dozens of websites, columns, chat rooms and the like that allow movie fans the opportunity to discuss and read about the latest news from inside Hollywood. However, one of the areas that has not been approached in significant detail is the matter of what kind of professional ettiquette should exist on the 'net between the webmasters of these sites. A number of us, the site operators, writers, and webmasters feel that your site, "Ain't it Cool News", has been unfairly painting a picture that reflects poorly on the reputation of these other websites, and the public's perception of the Internet film journalistic community.

There have been numerous occasions where material that has been sent in good faith to AICN has been modified, or edited to make it appear that AICN has been the sole originator of this material. Many times appropriate credit for the original site or individual that broke this news story has been ignored, or down-played, or modified to make it appear AICN was the source of this news story. When feedback has been sent to AICN often there's been no retraction, no conversation, no recognition that an email has been received. When a rebuttal has been posted in the "Talkback" section of the website, sometimes it is erased from the conversation -- again, no explanation, no reason. When some of us have addressed these inconsistencies with the webmasters of AICN in private exchanges, excuses have been made that AICN doesn't need to follow the same code of conduct that adopted in the journalistic media. In the realms of journalism, this would be considered to be arrogant to its peers, its audience, and the medium in general. We feel that this is not an acceptable excuse.

The same practices and accountability should hold true to all of the online community. No one can doubt that AICN is perceived by the general media to be the largest, and most popular, film website of its kind. But when a site receives such accolades, shouldn't it be mindful of its audience and try and provide them with the most accurate reporting they can provide? Shouldn't its operators be held to the same level of accountability as television programs, newspapers, movie critics and so on? Shouldn't there exist some kind of ethical, moral code that makes it a part of the larger community, and not come across as an arrogant outsider? We believe so.

We feel that the actions of the webmasters of "Ain't it Cool News" perpetuate an image of unprofessional and unethical attitudes in web journalism that reflects poorly on the entire online film community. We hope that in the future this will change.

Signed,

[the undersigned]

Now, apparently on Monday, various folks that Patrick sent the letter to would sign this letter of greivances against AICN and my behind would be spanked publicly for all to see.... So, I figured what the heck, I'd scoop Patrick with his own editorial.

One of the 'issues' that Patrick brings up is the matter of 'CREDIT' for stories. And ya know... this is an issue. Everyday Patrick, Garth, Nick, Sean and a horde of other internet reporters get 'scoops' sent in. I do too. FOr arguements sake, let's take this Jimmy Smits 'scoop'. While Patrick did indeed send me/father geek/aicn, as well as all the people you see, a notice about the scoop appearing on his site. About 30 minutes before that time in my email I got the following letter:

hey harry, some news for ya

the actor jimmy smits is to appear in both ep 2 and 3 of star wars although his character is not known yet, my source tells me that he is only going to do maybe a week of filming as his role is not that big in ep 2 but will be expanded for ep 3. my source(who's brother DELETED TO PROTECT SOURCE) has promised to keep me up to date with any news he has.

the movie directed by former eurithmic Dave Stewart and starring girl group, the all saints has been withdrawn from cinemas in the u.k. because of its poor performance at the box office. The film has only managed to draw in £111 000, roughly $200,000 on its opening weekend.

thats all for now

keep it real

welshlad.

Now, the night I got this scoop I got a late start on the site, and by the time I had read this letter and Patrick's letter, I had already done my nightly surfing and had seen the scoop at not only Patrick's site, but Dark Horizons as well. Instead of writing up the story from WELSHLAD and not mentioning Coming Attractions at all.... I decided that the story was already going to be everywhere, so I'd rather focus my energies and efforts upon other stories that wouldn't be up on their sites that night. The next morning I awoke to see that Father Geek had decided to post the story himself, and thus the issue begins.

Generally the interactions between website owners and operators is pretty cool. Take Garth and I.... I've had the wonderful pleasure of writing Garth little heads up letters informing him that a story he was running as original had originally run on AICN a couple of days before, and vice versa... Garth has written me... and corrections were made and we did the ol internet shake hands, good job and moved on to the job of running our mutual sites.

Every now and again though there become these 'flame wars/angry email exchanges' and I try to always just be nice and take care of it by calm inquiries about what exactly the perceived problem is or was, and how we can come to a mutually happy conclusion on the issue.

Often times these exchanges will begin over a 'credit' issue. Sometimes it's caused by a reader out there that reads news on my site or one of the other sites online, and then writes a letter without originally sourcing the original location for the story. Sometimes they will go into creating a character and a pretty elaborate story. Now I try my best to read every website online, and I do read Dark Horizons, Coming Attractions, Hollywood Reporter, Variety, L.A. Times, IGN Movies, Filmforce and Cinescape everyday... and I try to drop in on TheOneRing.net and TheForce.net each day or two. However, I miss some of these. And the polite heads up letter from the site administrator/owner usually gives me the heads up.... and more often than that, it'll come from a reader that's a fan of that site writing first.

Then there is the ocassion of the same people writing the same stories and sending them to multiple sites, but so that it doesn't appear in the email. This happens all the time when publicity companies send press release emails (like ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY does with their cover stories) and whichever site owner opens the email first and posts it up... well they got it up first, but really there is no proprietary ownership to that scoop since the source sent it to multiple people all at the same time.

The main thing is, everyone running an entertaiment news/gossip/rumor website is painfully undermanned. I'm working on bringing more full time folks aboard so that AICN can do even better than it has.... but I've never had an issue with providing a link or a credit as long as I was notified or I had seen it somewhere originally.

But this stuff happens all the time, with a ton of sites. Generally it should be handled cool and calm. I remember my first major story I wrote online. I had driven to TEXAS A&M to watch Steve Sansweet show the very first footage, and report on the very first facts regarding the STAR WARS SPECIAL EDITIONS. I wrote up a big ol long report and posted it up in general film and Star Wars newsgroups. I was extremely proud of the story... I had adrenaline pumping through me as it was my first first hand scoop I had written. Two days later, someone emails me saying that someone else was taking credit for my story and they provided me with a link to the site in Question. This site was Corona Coming Attractions when Patrick was the sole operator. I wrote this letter to him basically saying.... what the hell? Told him that it was my story, refrenced the date and time I posted it to newsgroups and Patrick apologized for having not read those newsgroups and corrected the credit on the story as well as the context.

So Patrick, I'd like to apologize for Father Geek's unfortunate lead-in to the story. You do great work... be well

Harry

P.S. If you have a problem with the credit on any story on AICN... drop me a line. No need to get all in a huff about it. Just write and explain and I'll make the necessary corrections.

Readers Talkback

comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • June 4, 2000, 4:35 a.m. CST

    Phooey!

    by Boon

    Feh!

  • June 4, 2000, 4:38 a.m. CST

    don't worry harry, just 'cos other sites the scoops before you,

    by darthpsychotic

    Besides those who critise you are just PLAYER-HATERS. Oh whats the motherfuckin' deal I cant get into liveChat 'cos it says "banned from the server" =P

  • June 4, 2000, 4:41 a.m. CST

    Should this article be given a talkback?

    by YerAllAgainstMe

    This seems to be more of a personal and private issue that the web masters of these sites need to deal with. By exposing Patrick's editorial, I feel that it is, in all honesty, a slap in the face to him. Although he may not feel this way, and although you may feel your intentions on this letter were in good spirits, I'm not sure this is something we need to see here. I'm just your average joe talkbacker, and don't want to start any trouble. I just wanted to give you my take on this. If you really wanted to address your audience with the rules of proper etiquette, and giving credit where credit is due, then you should simply state your "P.S." section to us all. All you web masters do a damn fine job, and I visit each and every one of you guys each day. Keep up the great work, and may your quarrels remain in good faith to the online entertainment community.

  • June 4, 2000, 4:43 a.m. CST

    This guy needs an enema !

    by RobinP

    So, basically it's all right for him to plagirise and steal your work right at the beginning of your career, but throws a hissy fit if he doesn't get his own way with credit etc now that you're numero uno ? You took the more gentlemanly way of dealing with him, and I respect that........but I would've told him to go fuck himself.

  • June 4, 2000, 4:44 a.m. CST

    Who cares who gets the scoop first?

    by Aggie_Ed

    I mean, come on, who cares who the first one was? I only care about good, factual information...I don't care who got the scoop first. Sheesh, kids, deal with it.

  • June 4, 2000, 4:46 a.m. CST

    Hey, Darthpsychotic.........

    by RobinP

    re "The Whackpack"......is that all of us, or just a few of you ? I wanna join !!!!

  • June 4, 2000, 4:50 a.m. CST

    Hold on ...

    by Boon

    Harry, If your problem with Patrick is that he

  • June 4, 2000, 4:58 a.m. CST

    Hold on ? naaaaah !

    by RobinP

    When a guy's THAT anally retentive, he deserves to get the shit kicked out of him. Harry did right......oh, and Patrick....I sure hope you're reading this, imagine all the lameass open letters you can generate to people who don't give a fuck about you now ! The talkbackers are on your tail, baby, and ain't no hiding place ! AICN rules.......Paddy takes it up the ass ! MAN !!! I'm in a good mood today......NEXT ........!

  • June 4, 2000, 5:03 a.m. CST

    For Crying Out Loud...

    by Flmlvr

    ...This is just another case of "let's fuck with the big guy". And unfortunately...i'm sure more flamers will come out of the woodwork as AICN gets bigger. Like that whole Gladiator shit. Gimmee a break. Let's whine cuz we didn't get to see it first. Oh, and as long as we're talking complaints here...Impreove your fucking layout Patrick...It Sux...

  • June 4, 2000, 5:16 a.m. CST

    what a fuggin' pussy!

    by 18Buddahs

  • June 4, 2000, 5:27 a.m. CST

    Harry Great Scoop!! I bet he feels like shit now.

    by Duty

    Realy This is so funny, He must be poop'n in his trailer right now..heheh. And for that idiot who sayed that Harrys just embaring that idiot and that it's bad!! Blaa on you!! He was gonna post it on his own site on Monday!! this is great stuff!!! Out- Duty

  • June 4, 2000, 5:29 a.m. CST

    Harry Great Scoop!! I bet he feels like shit now.

    by Duty

    Realy This is so funny, He must be poop'n in his trailer right now..heheh. And for that idiot who sayed that Harrys just embaring that idiot and that it's bad!! Blaa on you!! He was gonna post it on his own site on Monday!! this is great stuff!!! Out- Duty

  • June 4, 2000, 5:45 a.m. CST

    Two words...

    by mephisto666

    WHO.CARES? I don't want to have to keep surfing the net for pissy little rumours. I want them here where we can all flame each other in the spirit of geekdom. Go Harry!

  • June 4, 2000, 5:49 a.m. CST

    aicn SCOOPS THEM ALLLLLL!!!!!

    by aboonig?

    yo, yo, my pussy cats....whats up??? Oh Hell yeah, Harry, aicn is on top of the world!!! On top of the pinchay world!!!!! baboso esta ti madre, buey

  • June 4, 2000, 5:56 a.m. CST

    Far-From-Cool news

    by solstiss

    Seems to me like AICN cast the first stone here, and *if* it wasn't the first time AICN then those guys have a right to be pissed off. If you get a story from multiple sources, why not just include a line in the article that says 'Thanks to...' and then list all the people who sent you the story, just to cover yourselves?

  • June 4, 2000, 7:33 a.m. CST

    Irritation setting in............

    by RobinP

    1) Patrick.......he's an irritating, insufferable little prick. But probably can't help it, he may have been the runt of the litter or something. 2 People who make cow noises for no good reason, thereby making the whole talkback turn to fucking VistaVision !!!!!

  • June 4, 2000, 8:06 a.m. CST

    I say you handle this like men...7 Card Stud, Deuces and One-Eye

    by Mully4Ever

  • June 4, 2000, 8:31 a.m. CST

    by SkyKing76

  • June 4, 2000, 8:32 a.m. CST

    FUCKING GIMP

    by SkyKing76

    Yes...thats right...his name is Patrick. Gotta admit though...posting all of those email addys was a BIG boo-boo...not that ANYONE would take advantage of such a thing... OUT

  • June 4, 2000, 8:49 a.m. CST

    Proffesional Journalism

    by Frank Enstein

    Harry - You would gain far more credibility as a journalist if your articles did not contain so many grammar and spelling errors. There is no excuse in the MS Word spell checking age to mispell words such as occasion ("ocassion"). It reflects poorly on your dedication toward journalistic accuracy and shows a poor attention to detail.

  • June 4, 2000, 8:49 a.m. CST

    Holy Sheeet

    by X-Mole

    Harry, get rid of those emails, now, whydontcha? If I was on that mailing list, I'd be mighty pissed at you right now. And to the person who said this was the 'gentlemanly' thing to do, and they would have just told him to 'fuck himself': no, this *is* telling him to fuck himself, only with a thin veneer of politeness over the top, to maintain moral superiority. Patrick & Harry are just acting like a coupla 14 girls, a-scratchin' and a-weepin'. Get a hold of yourself, man!

  • June 4, 2000, 9 a.m. CST

    that's one hell of a story Harry, but....

    by kingpin

    you still didn't mention the fact that sometimes talkback reactions are removed from the site. Sometimes fair, sometimes not. Could you inform us all on your policy?

  • June 4, 2000, 9:03 a.m. CST

    Do other media really always credit sources???

    by badboymason

    Just a thought, but when was the last time you heard a TV entertainment show tell you that a "scoop" was first shown on a rival show??? They always try to make it look like they're the first, people are just bitter at aicn's success.... And are looking for any excuse to attack the site.

  • June 4, 2000, 9:10 a.m. CST

    SQOTD

    by SimpsonsQuoteMan

    i don't care what anyone says...FAT BASTARD that was a fuckin funny post. Now for the quote: "I sleep in a racing car! Do you?" "I sleep in a big bed with my wife." -Mr. Van Houten and Homer

  • June 4, 2000, 9:17 a.m. CST

    Agree with kingpin

    by Pippins_Diamond

    Yeah Harry, what's your policy concerning deletion of posts? And why does Talkback order get all screwed up once a post (or more) has been deleted? BTW, publishing all those email addresses doesn't exactly help me believe you're being the bigger man here, Harry.

  • June 4, 2000, 9:30 a.m. CST

    Oh, please.

    by not_a_jedi_yet

    Harry: you, Patrick, and just about everyone else in the Internet film gossip scene need to just take a pill and relax. Patrick's letter, and your reply as well, are perfect examples of the fact that EVERYONE IS TAKING THEMSELVES TOO DAMN SERIOUSLY. Geez, like the world revolves around this stuff or something. I enjoy the site, Harry, but this whole post makes it sound like some ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN/FOX scandal, and I got news for all of you in Internet world--we ain't them.

  • June 4, 2000, 9:36 a.m. CST

    Ethics?

    by BoxCar

    Is it necessary to impose "ethical journalistic standards" on news sites that traffic half the time in rumor? This is not to say that courtesy shouldn't be an issue. But as a reader, the loosey-goosey standards of some brands of net journalism is self evident. Patrick's letter was overreaching and unnecessary.

  • June 4, 2000, 10:33 a.m. CST

    From one of the included sites

    by chud

    My site was among the included ones on Patrick's note, and one that also has been busting ass day in and day out for two years all the while trying to maintain some sense of integrity and respect. I think you addressed a very serious issue with aloofness and by making light of the issue it leaves embers hot in a fire that should be doused completely and with fear of a blaze that can go out of control. There have been a few situations where my site (HTTP://WWW.CHUD.COM) has been mentioned for one reason or another (including on the same page as Patrick's Jimmy Smits thing) and not LINKED TO. There are only a few deductions I can get from this: 1. You don't want readers to visit our site, and by having the name and not a link you're forcing them to take matters in their own hands and manually type it in, which is tantamount to giving them a nice new car with no keys. 2. You want to credit someone, but not enough to allow readers to leave your site. Regardless of that, Patrick's letter is a legitimate gripe. There's a certain degree of professionialism that HAS to be abided by by ALL the film sites that plan on reaching a higher level of respect and visibility. By putting AICN on a pedastal and not acknowledging the work of others, you run the risk of forcing yourself into extinction. It also, in my opinion, CHEAPENS the work being done when most of what people see about the online film news & criticism is negative or amateurish. Patrick was not trying to bash you or AICN, he was trying to step up the degree of professionalism, it just so happens that a few situations (The Spider-Man promotional items on EBAY, Jimmy Smits) that irked more than a few of us happened to occur at AICN. That is it. The plan was to give you the letter and allow you a day to respond and THEN address it publicly. AICN is not the be all-end all on the web for films news, and certainly not reviews. It's part of a robust group of websites run by passionate people doing work just as hard as you or me or Patrick or someone who we haven't met yet because his/her site gets 40 visitors a week. From someone who was once a nobody to the Internet readers to another, we are among the pioneers in a very embryonic business. By not treating serious issues with respect and honesty, you jeopardize ALL OF US. That cannot stand. You are the webmaster. If you give someone the power to post on your site news or scoops, pointing a finger elsewhere is a cop out. Ultimately, everything that appears on that site is your business. Patrick's letter was not a "huff". I'm sure that in principle, the British thought the idea of Americans putting together a "Declaration of Independence" was a huff and something that would blow over. We all read your site, and we all use stories from it, and we all LINK to them and give your site credit. The same goes for all of the sites involved. We don't create spies (and I know of a situation where a spy has been created on AICN) and we try to "spread the wealth" when it comes to allowing our readers to frequent a host of sites we either a. enjoy and find useful or b. have news we cover on our site. Ultimately this is about the readers. Their perception on our value in lieu of doing all the research themselves or waiting the two weeks to a month it takes for print media to catch up. We're a supplement and sometimes an alternative to watching ET or picking up the newest EW. By coloring outside the lines and building divisions and by not "playing well with others" we are BEGGING for our readers to find someplace else to look. There's only so much a reader will take before finding a new place to go. Me, I don't have enough readers to lose. Each one matters as much as the next, and who knows if a potential new reader is avoided by not including a link on a story on your site or any other. We're all busy, and all trying to find our niche. We all have aspirations that involve rising to a new level. WE ALL HAVE TO ANSWER FOR OUR PRACTICES. Including you. -Nick Nunziata http://www.chud.com http://www.fetalfilms.com

  • June 4, 2000, 10:33 a.m. CST

    The 3rd X-Men Trailer

    by Baba O'Reilly

    I know this is off the subject, but I was reading something over at upcomingmovies.com's X-Men page and they show something very cool from the trailer. He points out in the back what looks like could be the giant head of my personnel favorite villian. Go take a look, its very interesting.

  • June 4, 2000, 10:47 a.m. CST

    Who Gives a Fuck !?!

    by Jabba Papa

    Jeez : anal-retentive city ...

  • June 4, 2000, 10:56 a.m. CST

    Journalistic Ethics

    by Dmann

    This is really really funny to me. Not to step on anyones feelings, I can totally understand the people over at Coming Attractions getting upset. This is really setting your standard for scoops quite a few levels higher than your ordinary news orginization. Ive worked for at newspapers since 1989, from a large metro daily, to a small town weekly, and frankly, stealing scoops, passing others info off as your own and misleading the public as to who really uncovered info, is par for the course. Journalism is a down and dirty, cut your neighbor's throat before he cuts yours. What this retraction amounts to is setting the bar a little higher. I for one can't really say its a bad thing. Normally, in a "traditional" news organization, an apology/retraction such as this would be about 1 paragraph, admitting as little wrong as possible (they wont call even it an apology) and it would be hidden in the corner of the second page of a newspaper, on the letters column of a magazine or in the least watched portion of the newscast. Harry on the other hand decides to put this front and center, makes it a full disclosure of what happened, and apologises. Bravo Harry and Jay, you did the right thing, and that's rare in this business

  • June 4, 2000, 11:07 a.m. CST

    David Poland: Defender of Truth

    by Prankster

    Talk about taking yourself too seriously! Spike, I couldn't link to the other site, but the Rough Cut blurb had an almost Ollie North-esque intensity. Please don't lecture me, Mr. Poland, on truth and integrity as you make vague and nameless allegations about someone who could be Harry. Nothing you said in that article surprised me particularly; we all know Harry's M.O. by now. Let me remind you that you are the same shrill whiner who jumped on AICN's case for posting a positive review of "The Iron Giant". Yeah, talk about fake, eh? Boy, was that movie ever a stinker.

  • June 4, 2000, 11:23 a.m. CST

    What a loser!

    by Ridge-Runner

    Harry, just tell Patrick and Co. to kiss your ass and go on about your business. This is your website and you (and Jay) can post whatever you damn well please on it. Ridge-Runner

  • June 4, 2000, 11:30 a.m. CST

    AICN and Harry Knowles-- what happened?

    by TRIGGER95

    Harry, your behavior has become downright disturbing. Do you even know the meaning of the word "ethics"? It should be obvious to any regular AICN reader that almost all of your legitimate "scoops" are either taken directly from the hollywood reporter or Daily Variety, meaning they're only scoops for people who don't have access to these publications, or are simply lifted from other websites. The only reason I read AICN now is for the talkbacks, which can be hysterical, and your "reviews", which read like the works of an armed and dangerous retard. Maybe you should spend more time searching out your own scoops than accepting invitations to film shoots and rough screenings--invitations that every studio knows GUARANTEES a good review from you (is that why you're so down on the x-men, Harry? Because the filmmakers don't feel the need to kiss your ass?) Get your shit together, Harry. Give credit to other sites, report some real scoops, learn to write with complete sentences.... not... like.... this... AND SHOW SOME INTEGRITY.

  • June 4, 2000, 11:43 a.m. CST

    heh... We Ro0l3z...

    by angry

    Talkbackers are cool. Y'all can argue about anything and nothing. I mean, just this stupid little "patrick's got his panties in a twist" story, and there's a big ol' talkback in the works. Great stuff...

  • June 4, 2000, 12:02 p.m. CST

    Don't screw with Pops and the Big Guy.

    by Uncapie

    Just don't.

  • June 4, 2000, 12:20 p.m. CST

    Peace before pride

    by Hero For Hire

    I accept that this is an unfortunate collision of bad timing (AICN received the same scoop from multiple sources) and poor wording from Father Geek. Combine that with the fact that Harry's popularity makes him a large target (and that's not a fat joke) and now Patrick wants to start a flame war. Well that's just peachy. ***************************** Harry, even though you're in the right about this issue, it might be worth the time to make up personally with Patrick. The Internet film community is still in it's infancy, and the last thing we need is some sort of civil war over credit and scoops.

  • June 4, 2000, 12:27 p.m. CST

    Goodness!!

    by HFWeb

    Hello Harry and others: I thought the intention of movie sites and the occasional little fansite was to work together in the internet community. I'm sure with all the emails that people like Harry and Garth (dark horizons) receives, there is no way that every little tidbit from a source can be credited, nor should it be expected. Although many might like to think that the people who run these movie sites can work like robots, well, they can't..... I've even sent Harry little goodies that I've come across that might be of interest to him. He's never used them but SO WHAT!! That's his choice just as it's Pats, Garths, et all. I send them not to see my name up in bright bold letters, it is done in the spirit that this is one big internet community (based around movies) with many sites (not just the movie sites people)having the same goal--To provide site visitors with latest news, scoops, pictures..etc. NOW, WHAT IN THE HELL IS HARRISON's NEXT MOVIE GOING TO BE? That's the scoop I'm looking for :) ~Eileen www.harrisonfordweb.com

  • June 4, 2000, 12:32 p.m. CST

    Jay Knowles, relinquish your duties as a webmaster before you hu

    by Reverend Dave

    Seriously. This is not the first time Father Geek has committed a breach of Nettiquette, and his piss-poor wording has caused a major issue, and more shit for Harry to deal with. Do something else for the site, something that gives you less opportunity to screw up your son's life and reputation. And if this post gets deleted, how ironic would that be? Peace.

  • June 4, 2000, 1 p.m. CST

    Waaaaah!

    by Anton_Sirius

    Typical. All of you acting like whiny children- Harry, Pat, Nick etc. etc. At least Garth has stayed out of the TalkBack (so far, anyway.) It's true that the net sites are no better than traditional journalistic institutions in terms of credit etc. The difference is that most newspapers, TV shows etc. are impersonal corporate entities, and it's really difficult for corporations to take things personally. Not so the websites, which are small operations run by a couple of people. It's the same rules, just a different playing field. The question is, though: Does it need to be? Why not take this opportunity to get together and create a set of rules that are BETTER than the cutthroat crap that goes on in the 'mainstream' journalistic community? After all, there's a reason why jornalists rank only slightly ahead of politicans and lawyers in terms of public trust these days. In fact, what you guys need is a conference. Book a hotel for a weekend, get together in person, have some round-table discussions and SET SOME GROUND RULES. I'm sure Harry at least should know somebody with experience organizing a convention. Make yourselves BETTER than ET, not just their bastard cousins.

  • June 4, 2000, 1:02 p.m. CST

    patrick has better scoops

    by nitelife

    I have been a fan of both sites for over 3 years. I have to say that patrick is more reliable and through about his discovers and his website is easier to navigate. Harry gets way to personal"almost cried about Iron giant" and will post nearly any little item about a things not about movies suchas TITO PUENTE dying. nothing against tito i have seen him thrice in concert but other than the mambo kings he is not movie related. Harry is the kid and Patrick is the adult.

  • June 4, 2000, 1:06 p.m. CST

    Incidentally, Nick

    by Anton_Sirius

    I totally disagree that the movie websites are just 'supplements' to ET and EW- they certainly aren't for me. Thinking like that will keep you in the minor leagues. So long as you see yourself as a junior partner to 'traditional' news sources, then that's what you'll be. Harry, on the other hand, always saw AICN as something different and distinct from traditional news outlets, and that's what it's becoming- his public visibility is proof of that. Whether he has a clear vision of what the site is, rather that what it's not, is another question entirely...

  • Get on with reporting movie stuff! Not this dribble, "he's trying to destroy me boo hoo" dung pile.

  • June 4, 2000, 1:34 p.m. CST

    Scoops & Honesty

    by David Poland

    How ironic that I get shit at AICN for something I didn't initiate. And also ironic that a few days after I wrote the "Just Wondering" linked to above, I wrote another praising Harry for being honest about the Grinch thing. Funny, I got all this angry mail from Ain't It Cool folks about the negative one and NOTHING about the positive one (http://www.roughcut.com/today/hot.button/20000602b_fri.html). Typical. All of you guys who sit around masturbating to the idea of what and who you think Harry is need to refocus a little. He is a person. He has relationships with people. He has told me things on and off the record for years. And you know what? He expects to be given the courtesy of being able to speak (or write) off-the-record and within the basic rules of conduct... just like the rest of us. And when he screws his friends, he is not doing the right thing. It wouldn't make him a whinny bitch if I exposed something he told me privately and he complained. And it doesn't make Patrick a whinny bitch for expecting not to be demeaned by Ain't It Cool. If they wanted to claim that they had the info first, they should have done that. Instead they took a slap at Patrick. Uncool. But this is classic Ain't It Cool. The rules only apply when they want them to apply. Everything else is just whining. That is crap. And the excuse of "This is the internet" is for idiots. Harry wants a TV show and a radio show more than anything else. For him, THAT'S legitimacy. 5 million pageviews a day is a lie and everyone on the planet who knows anything about the web knows that. Which doesn't mean that Harry doesn't have the biggest geek-site following. Just that his readership is not anywhere close to what he claims and it never will be unless he makes the move to the other mediums which is where he is so focused these days. He's not some force for truth, justice and the American way. He's a human. A deeply flawed human. Everything he does isn't wrong. And everything he does isn't right. Grow up and smell the reality. (P.S. The only reason I'm anywhere neat this talkback is because my name was brought up, even though I have made clear to everyone involved that "scoops" are not an issue I really care about, though I support Patrick's right to be upset.)

  • June 4, 2000, 1:49 p.m. CST

    I'll add this to the fire, for now.

    by chant

    To the readers of AICN: remember, this is all about trying to instill a little bit of fair play into what Harry, Garth, Nick, Jawad, everyone working at film sites do: reporting cool movie news. You think I'm "whining" about having my original Smits e-mail modified, or having the story downplayed by the original AICN report? What if I told you there's been five years of this happening. Five years of me talking to Harry both in email, both face-to-face, telling him its not OK to get the facts wrong, give credit when its due, to not put a spin on some other's site's story, to try and do the professional thing. For those of you that think running these sites is just a hobby, you're wrong on two counts: it's a labor of love by everyone (AICN staffers included, as well as CA and the rest), and it's now turned into a business. You think studios are setting up contests, screenings, trips to LA and it's not business? C'mon! This is not about sour grapes, or which site gets the most scoops. This letter is meant to address multiple instances that AICN has played a story and it's affected other websites, intentionally or unintentionally. I think the Internet community needs to stand by a guideline of journalistic standards. If you don't believe in that, what you're saying is that it's OK for anyone running a website to steal other sites' stories, or downplay their involvement in breaking a story, or to be surreptitiously involved in promoting/critiquing a film. I don't care which site gets the scoop first, as long as the story is reported on other sites (if they choose to report the information at all) in a fair and unbiased manner. The straw that broke my camel's back was that the Smits story wasn't presented in that light on AICN, and the many times that I've spoken to someone at AICN about past instances, *nothing* has been done. I've kept quiet about this for almost five years, one year longer than this site has been in operation, back when Harry Knowles was a scooper to "Coming Attractions" -- and I think if it had been happening to your site for years you'd be feeling a little slighted too, don'tcha think? The rest of what I have to say about this, and other examples, will have to wait, until tomorrow when I address the matter on CA. Thanks to those who support the notion of fair and accurate reporting, and that there are ethics to be followed, even for such a "hobby" as this that gets millions of hits per day.

  • June 4, 2000, 1:52 p.m. CST

    "Whatever happens, let's be professional."

    by Zubalove

    I never thought I'd use a Ghostbusters reset to open an ethical arguement, but we seem to be approaching a topic that boarders on the surreal. The underground media of the internet is experiencing growing pains as certain sites establish themselves as the fore-runners of the next-generation of print media. Of these sites, Coming Attractions and AICN seem to be the most likely to cross the threshhold into professional sources of information. Unfortunately, neither site has shown the professional maturity needed to survive in such a hostile and competitive feild. I will grant that Patrick at CA is, at the very least, attempting to create some kind of ethical guidelines for the community of sites. However, Harry's childish posting of the article as well as the various e-mail addresses (please remove those Harry, nothing good will come of them there) belittles any progress that can be made and reduces the issue to a petty squable that damages the credibility of both sites. Quelling this childish and irresponsable feud should be what both Harry and Patrick do first, and then this loose conglomaration of sites should setforth guideleines so that this kind of thing is no longer such a major issue. Zubalove OUT.

  • June 4, 2000, 2:12 p.m. CST

    my seldom heard from two cents.

    by Thuran

    I think that this is ridiculous. but I do side with Patrick. These sites rely on the credibility of their webmasters, and if Harry and CO. don't give credit where credit's due, then they loose credibility. As the most public site for this genre, and the one with the most publicity, Harry should be aware that AICN is the site to which the HIGHEST standards should be held, not the lowest. If the public learns to expect Harry to lie, cheat, and steal, then the credibility of this fledgling scoop industry as a whole is tainted permanently. Unfortunately, I think both sides of this should've handled this better. Patrick should have communicated with Harry, then a mass mailing. Harry shouldn't have acted like a petulant child and "outed" patrick like he did.

  • June 4, 2000, 2:27 p.m. CST

    Hey Pat....

    by The Black Adder

    "I'd tell you to blow it out your ass but my dick's in the way," from the Limey. How's that for a reference?

  • June 4, 2000, 2:31 p.m. CST

    Watch Harry change his tune faster than a karaoke jukebox in the

    by Darth Taun Taun

    Harry may lack journalistic ethics, but we all know that Lincoln at countingdown is even worse. As soon as ol' Linc steals from, the big guy will throw his own tantrum, and will want the talkbackers on his side. Besides, this isn't journalism, this is a frickin' giggly bunch of teenage girls sitting at a lunch table. ("Well, I heard Jimmy Smits was in Ep 2!" "Ooooh, he's so dreamy!") Give credit where it's due, Harry. Grow a pair.

  • June 4, 2000, 2:35 p.m. CST

    You can't be serious

    by Hemlock312

    Give me a break, tell the sissy to stop the whining, life is too short for that crap.

  • June 4, 2000, 2:41 p.m. CST

    TAKE NO PRISONERS!!!

    by The Great Gazoo

    You handled that potential embarrassment well, Harry. Don't take crap from some snot nose bitch. Your site is what we REALLY care about.

  • June 4, 2000, 2:46 p.m. CST

    Garth still rules them all

    by Tokémon

    I still visit DH before any other site (even here) and I love Mr. Franklin's way of doing things. He puts a lot of effort in that site and he doesn't get as much recognition as he should. He has so much news on American film and he's not even an American! (neither is Bjorn from movie-page.com, he's awesome too)

  • June 4, 2000, 2:50 p.m. CST

    dmann, you're wrong!

    by All Thumbs

    Journalists are a step LOWER than lawyers and politicians, according to a national survey that was presented in one of my classes. I got extra credit on a test for answering that right, so I am an authority now. ; )

  • June 4, 2000, 3:02 p.m. CST

    THANKS for the EMAIL addys....YEAAAAHHH!!!

    by Malchizedik

    Cut and Paste a bit, and i'll NEVER Send aicn another SCOOP. Besides, i've mailed many that were not published, yet smart ones. Seems like Harry has some emotional problems. Maybe due to his lying and thieving, in the mad rush for a wanky, pilot only, TV show.

  • June 4, 2000, 3:08 p.m. CST

    What's the problem? Really?

    by Prankster

    I still await Patrick's side of the story at Corona. However, from what I've read here, I really don't think Harry has anything to apologize for. Whether this is the "capper" to a long line of abuses is irrelevant--this particular instance was not Harry abusing his power (or even "Father Geek", who seems to always be getting Harry into trouble). The original article makes it pretty darn clear that Corona had the information, so I don't see how Pat can complain he wasn't accredited. As for being the "originators" of the information, that's ridiculous. The "originators" were Lucasfilm (if the scoop is correct) or someone else (if it isn't). Why does Corona "own" that information? Especially if Harry received word of it beforehand. Now the detractors would continue their argument with "Harry's a big liar," but all this stuff is, I'm sorry, impossible to prove. And I include you in that, Mr. Poland. It boils down to "who do you believe?" and I'm not sure anyone in this debate has an ethical leg to stand on when it comes down to taking them at their word. So I don't see why we should listen to people who say, "Harry's my good friend, he tells me all his diabolical schemes, I have seen the blackness of his soul, so I'm going to tell you all about it on my own, less popular website, even though there's absolutely no evidence to back any of it up." And as for posting the e-mail addresses: look closely. None of those emails are "secret". They are all readily available on their respective websites. Now, I'm not saying Harry's blameless in this. I think dragging this debate out in the open to mock Patrick is in poor taste. But then, if we're to believe Harry, Patrick was about to take Harry to task publicly as well. I'm not saying two wrongs make a right, but this is the lesser of two evils, methinks. I have to say, for all the vile charges that get flung at Harry, I've never seen him take another website to task without being provoked in some way, which is why I still defend him...

  • I like that heading, I used it once before, and while it still holds true, I'll continue to use it. A quick count shows the talkbackers are in resounding FAVOR of Harry and his actions. There are comments like the fact that there should be some kind if deletion policy in place that makes it clear to us what we can and cannot get away with, and that is probably fair enough. There are some comments here like "Harry, nobody wants you around any more" and other, similar crap, harping on and on and on, at Harry, his alleged personal shortcomings, and the site etc, etc etc.........so I'll ask one simple question. Why the fuck are you STILL here ? Is it because this is the only movie fan site that'll tolerate your whiney ass moaning ? If you don't like this site, please.....don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out !

  • June 4, 2000, 3:19 p.m. CST

    I wish to state . . . .

    by ol' painless

    That I, ol' painless, will be starring in the SWII sequel. Jimmy Smits will be my slave boy who I lead about naked on a chain. And Patrick will be running around on set somewhere screaming "OH LOOK!! OL' PAINLESS JUST TOOK A LOX BAGEL FROM THE CATERING TABLE!! THAT'S MINE!!!! MY SCOOP!!!!! EVERYONE JUST SHUT THEIR FUCKING EYES AND TURN AWAY, CAUSE THAT'S MY EXCLUSIVE. I'LL SUE YA!!! I'LL DASH OFF SNIVELLING EMIALS ACCUSING YOU OF SCOOPING ME ON THE LOX BAGEL!!! HOW COULD YOU!!! I LOVED YOU!!!! I TRUSTED YOOOOOOOOOOOOOU!!!!

  • June 4, 2000, 3:21 p.m. CST

    Okay. Stop the bullshit. And Dave Poland, STFU.

    by Nordling

    Coming Attractions and AICN, and Dark Horizons, are RUMOR SITES. Say it with me, Hooked On Phonics people- ROOO-MERRRR-SEYE-TTTS. This is a Star Wars scoop, which automatically means that you can't 100% believe it anyway. So who cares who gets first? This isn't even all that important...and Dave Poland, if I were a one-time time traveler, I wouldn't watse it on the Declaration of Independence, of the death of Jesus, or the JFK assassination...I'd use it simply to perform your fucking abortion, you piece of shit hack. Fuck off and die, loser.

  • June 4, 2000, 3:25 p.m. CST

    I PULL FOR AICN!!!

    by NUXX4

    Just wanted to say that....NUXX OUT...

  • June 4, 2000, 3:32 p.m. CST

    yeah whatever

    by bignick

    your site is still falling into the internet news gutter by the day. The only saving grace of this site is Moriarity. you should be grateful he's still there because he provides the only worthwhile stories on your site.

  • June 4, 2000, 3:50 p.m. CST

    Imagine if the scoop had been something actually important

    by rjtapper

    Corona sucks ass! That site is so dull and uninteresting. AICN rules. I mean, where else can you get these wonderful talkbacks, where people always show the utmost respect and have useful things to say:)

  • June 4, 2000, 3:54 p.m. CST

    who cares?

    by essillee

    moral standards? higher level of integrity? WHO GIVES A SHIT? pAT you are very much mistaken if you think any of us care. ooh! harry misworded an intro..i'm not going to read his site again. i don't think so. get in the real world. i wouldn't even call it much of a scop anyway.

  • June 4, 2000, 3:59 p.m. CST

    CHUD 2: CHUD Harder

    by chud

    A quick addressing of folks' criticisms: 1. Our site is kind of jumbled. A redesign is in the works and the only reason it's jumbled is because we come with more info than most libraries. 2. I don't think of us as lesser than EW and ET, they cater to the general public and we cater to true film fans. We are creeping towards that acceptance, and you'd be hard pressed to find someone more ambitious than me, though I don't plan to step on other people to get where I want to. I'll be honest, if CA came under fire for the same things, not only would I attack them with the same venom, but I'd come harder because I EXPECT MORE FROM THEM. This isn't a bunch of wussies crying about spilt milk. It folsk trying to build a new industry. Thing bigger, people. The talkbacks are known for their opinions and fanaticism, but not for couth and a whole lot of inspired debate. It's always "Well if you don't agree with me, FUCK YOU!". I also hate the "Harry is a fatass" stuff because it isn't the reason a. The Site's popular, and b. we're at odds. Granted, by posting here, I'm asking for it, and am wide open as a target. Fine. I see it on our message boards sometimes too, but ultimately it isn't an issue of US and THEM. CHUD readers and AICN readers. CA and AICN. There is no reason that we shouldn't (the online film community) work in unison. NO REASON. Selfishness is futile. Segregation is futile. If we abided by a little ethical unwritten code, we would all grow and you'd see more acceptance up and down the board. PLUS, I guarantee if AICN were to be more involved and cooperative, their impact and readership would benefit as well. I don't know the demographics and average age (or I.Q.) of the folks that are reading this, but I frankly think it should be high enough to warrant discussion instead of cop-out insults and derrogatory remarks about us and our sites. -Nick Nunziata CHUD & The Fetal Film Report

  • June 4, 2000, 4:17 p.m. CST

    funny shit

    by TastyRadish

    I was talking with a friend after that Smits story went up and we both wondered why other sites dont get pissed when Father Geek starts talking shit...And now the storm breaks. This site seems to have gotten a holier-than-thou attitude over the past year or so. That bs about not posting pics of gollum because he didnt want to "ruin" it for the readers was laughable. Harry tried to scoop the oscar nominations before they came out, didnt worry about ruining anything with that! Funny shit. I made some comment months ago about not believing some star wars rumor posted here and ended up getting a letter from Jay telling me how much theyd known about EP1 long before anyone else. Good for them, I still think that story was bs and had a good time laughing about it. Bs is good, thats why I read talk back. Just quit trying to make it seem this site is always first with the bs. Speaking of bs what happened to that maori in ep2 story that was up for a few hours the other day? Oh, and RobinP, maybe in your quick count of who is responding in favor of Harry you counted all 4 or 5 of your own postings. Doesnt really matter if most of these talkbackers support Harrys argument though, this is his site so its to be expected. If you went to the republican convention youd find that the people there support Bush.

  • June 4, 2000, 4:19 p.m. CST

    Who cares?

    by essillee

    journalistic standards? moral integrity? WHO GIVES A SHIT? and Ooh! harry misworded an intro! you think he outraged the internet community? get real. NO ONE CARES WHO SCOOPED WHAT OR WHERE OR HOW!!! Who ever told you that you could work with men? you fairy. you fucking child. it wasn't much of a scop anyway.

  • June 4, 2000, 5:55 p.m. CST

    Coming attraction VS aint it cool

    by The jackal

    Well, nice subject for MTV claymation deadmatch.(i cant spell cellebrety) I tried to read it but i guess i got a blind spot for anything that looks like website envy. Sorry guys, you all got a big zwortch. I mean as a over-oceaner i like to read what cinematics develops in tinseltown and out. and somehow got stuck on aint it cool those new and coming attractions sites. (the mysterymen didnt get released here not even on tape to mention a underdevelopment) Just keep the good things coming and all is cool and dont fight please? (jeaz, its like if your parents are fighting)

  • In my opinion, CA is a true news site while AICN has devolved into something else. CA credits all of their sources, which is appropriate because, the fact is, in this line of work the people with the connections are the ones that win at the end of the day -- those are the people that end up with the big scoop. Harry's legitimate sources, as of late, seem to be waning. When these guys try to play the "I'm just a film geek like you" card, they're bullshitting. Maybe not ENTIRELY, but that is not the truth when your fanboy interests take second seat to your business interests. These guys are always going to be at war with each other, but as far as I know until this incident CA has kept it very civil, and THEIR credibility has never been questioned. Like most people, I come here now to read TalkBacks and voice my opinions, not because of the alleged "news", because frankly, it's few and far between. AICN is banned from Fox, they're banned from Lucas Ranch, the whole Oscars list debacle was very embarrassing, and now this. Harry is hanging on by a string, and I think he's realized that by posting incendiary items (like THIS ONE), he can keep the hits coming and the attention focused on the Talkbacks which really are the big draw here -- let's face it. And as the studios start to back further away, and the sources go to other more reputable sites, I don't see how it cannot all fall apart.

  • June 4, 2000, 6:12 p.m. CST

    Screw you guys, I'm going home.

    by Quatermass76

    To C.H.U.D. that is, home of the smarter and funnier internet jounrnalists and fans. All of you self-absorbed jag-offs over here can kiss my metal plated ass. This used to be a semi-cool site, then Harry started calling in favors from his so-called Hollywood pals and showing up in places he had no business being in the first place. I mean, what the hell was he doing in that crap-ass The Faculty? Probably getting thanks for praising that hack Rodriguez... Get a clue, Harry. No one gives a shit about you and double about your f**king family. Why the hell would I send your sister a gift for her shower? Why should I care what happened to you during your trip out west? I shouldn't and so I don't. Now to all you geeks in Talkback, get a life. You guys are even worse than Harry, who at least is trying to follow his dream of being somebody in the industry. Its because of you that Harry's got this swelled head in the first place. And you'd better believe you guys are geeks, as much so for reading and responding to this as I am for posting it in the first place. Harry, offical remove my ass off this site...

  • June 4, 2000, 6:31 p.m. CST

    Coming Attration

    by Cpt. Matt

    I used to read the Coming Attraction website a lot, until I started reading AICN & Dark Horizons. I came to realize CA is a buncha fanboy geeks who'll post anything in hopes of being first to post it. They have movies being "rumored" or in "development hell" that have NEVER been seriously discussed by anyone in Hollywood. For example, the "Bladerunner" sequel. I know this one has never been talked about because I know the person who started the rumor just to see how far it would go. The only ones who picked it up was Coming Attractions. They chide Harry for unprofessionalism, but never update or delete false info or remove movies from the list that have been out so long, they are on video. Not to mention, they never answer email, when I have gotten replies from AICN & Dark Horizons. Now it turns out they are thin-skinned dorks who have no concept of someone making a mistake. Methinks its a lots of jealousy that Ebert's invited Harry on TV but not them.

  • June 4, 2000, 6:35 p.m. CST

    What's CA/Patrick bitching about?

    by nelson

    Recently CA (coming attractions) posted that they had exclusive pics of the "Pearl Harbor" bombing re-enactment. BULLSHIT!!!!! These pics where on Nick Medranos' Pearl Harbor site & michaelbay.com MONTHS ago!! These pics belong to some guy working at the Arizona memorial...who by the way, had given me permission to post it on michaelbay.com. So, CA: stop bitching. he who lives by the sword, dies by the sword.

  • June 4, 2000, 6:36 p.m. CST

    Poland: A Country Never Worth Hearing From

    by mrbeaks

    I'll never forget the day, earlier this year, when I included one of Poland's "Hot Button" columns in our press clippings because he deigned to write something regarding our company. The most common response to his article was, "this guy has *no* idea what he's talking about," which is why, with each column, I now regard "The Hot Button" as a most enjoyable, if unintended, satire of bad industry reportage. Keep up the good work, Dave!

  • June 4, 2000, 6:49 p.m. CST

    Long live Harry (Internet RobinHood)

    by kayo

    Harry's site rocks because it's one of the few websites where fans can post their true opinions (mispelled words included) about the film industry as we know it today. Instead of always getting the candy coated version from E.T., etc. The only armed and dangerous retards are the people (pimps & hookers) in the film industry who keep pumping out CRAP movies for the last ten years! Thank goodness for the internet so fans not in the Biz can discuss whatever we like or dislike about movies and every other facet it entails. I am sick of butt kissing showbiz columnists, studio's, movie stars and their lackies and assorted PR people hovering over every website like mobsters using intimidation to squelch any kind of communication between fans because it might upset their grossly inflated *Fragile* egos. Too damn bad! *F*#%* YOU! They want to control and be the center of attention on every website by and for FANS! Get over it A**holes! You don't control the general internet viewers. You showbiz a**wipes are so pathetic. The more you put down or try and intimidate Harry the more you make him look like Robinhood of the filmnet forest which will make more readers side with him. Hahahaha, Kayo (Momma said I'm gonna knock you out!)

  • June 4, 2000, 7:15 p.m. CST

    CHUD PARNK laughs at Harry. You were warned of this.

    by CHUD PARNK

    Harry, Harry, Harry. CHUD PARNK has been hounding you for a while now. You have deleted our posts. You have banned us. You have ignored what has been shouted at you from many directions and in many ways. And now you are paying for it big time. You thought your fat-ass was in the fire over your plain stupid attempt of revealing the OSCAR nominations. This is muc worse. You have now lost the respect of your peers; the people who support each other because they work in the same field and love doing that. And in ine swift, vain move you screwed one of them over in a big public way. None of them will forgive you for that, and none of us will forget. A lot of eyes have been opened up with this. CHUD PARNK smiles and says " CONGRATS, HARRY!"

  • June 4, 2000, 7:25 p.m. CST

    ooh... what fun.

    by chromosomecowboy

    I am certainly enjoying this. As a first, I agree with all parties on this issue. But above all, let it be known that the true sentiment does belong to the Talkbackers, without them this site would be shit. (Hey Harry, why not do a story about how we all deserve goodies for Xmas, since it's us that made you.) My point is, even though this "industry" is still in it's nascent stages, it has become increasingly sloppy and sophomoric. Patrick did the semi-right thing by complaining outright that something needs to be done about this flagging business right now. I am damn sure that he has legitimate selfish reasons for doing the thing he did but maybe there is a shred of popular thought within his complaint. We all hate the unprofessionalism, the sloppy grammar/spelling, the bad reviews. And thank goodness for Talkback because even though we don't think it means much, it actually does make this medium a little better. It's the counterpoint to the bullshit. Anyway, this competition is great because hopefully it will inspire someone out there to combine the best aspects of all the current entertainment websites (Harry's popularity, Talkbacks and easy layout, Garth's accuracy & common sense and Patrick's professionalism) and create a site that will trounce the present. What sites you are bookmarking and checking daily will not be

  • June 4, 2000, 7:28 p.m. CST

    ooh... what fun.

    by chromosomecowboy

    I am certainly enjoying this. As a first, I agree with all parties on this issue. But above all, let it be known that the true sentiment does belong to the Talkbackers, without them this site would be shit. (Hey Harry, why not do a story about how we all deserve goodies for Xmas, since it's us that made you.) My point is, even though this "industry" is still in it's nascent stages, it has become increasingly sloppy and sophomoric. Patrick did the semi-right thing by complaining outright that something needs to be done about this flagging business right now. I am damn sure that he has legitimate selfish reasons for doing the thing he did but maybe there is a shred of popular thought within his complaint. We all hate the unprofessionalism, the sloppy grammar/spelling, the bad reviews. And thank goodness for Talkback because even though we don't think it means much, it actually does make this medium a little better. It's the counterpoint to the bullshit. Anyway, this competition is great because hopefully it will inspire someone out there to combine the best aspects of all the current entertainment websites (Harry's popularity, Talkbacks and easy layout, Garth's accuracy & common sense and Patrick's professionalism) and create a site that will trounce the present. What sites you are bookmarking and checking daily will not be the same sites you will be reading in 5 years. I PROMISE YOU THIS. So if its you that are fed up with Harry's ego and carny mentality, the lack of reporting on certain subjects, and/or the weakness of other sites then you talk the helm and fill that niche. All the people that are bitching now will be your readers in the future. Isn't that inspiration enough?

  • "JUST WONDERING: What enormous-ly popular Web personality has been flown into L.A. to see two summer movies at Sony sitting with the head of the studio while writing about how hard it was to get into the screenings? And why is this person threatening to sue anyone who dares to suggest that such red carpet treatment (which he receives primarily based on well spread lies about the popularity of his Web site) could skew his site's treatment of the films of those who kiss his posterior? And when the same said personality appears on TV tonight, will he thank his new, high-powered agent from a major Hollywood agency for the booking? Or will he continue to pretend he's an outsider so that no one can assail his many conflicts of interest, though he continues to complain that others (like myself) are in an advantaged position, even though we freely admit our relationships while he hides his? And please note, I have no problem with this person succeeding, frankly, based on lies. If the studios are too disinterested to find out the truth, they deserve what they get. But I hate the lies told to his readers and I hate the lies thrown in the direction of others to get people off the scent of the truth about the most compromised Web "outsider" I know."

  • June 4, 2000, 8:17 p.m. CST

    Also...

    by Toe Jam

    I can't speak for EVERYONE else out there, but I think 99% of the talkbackers will agree that they come here for the very very occasional scoop and the ability to chat, interact via talkback, etc. I really don't come here for anything else than that. Other than the above, AICN is just seems like an outlet for Harry and his hack friends to post their irrelevant and non-constructive opinions about films that they don't even have the balls or talent to make in their fucking dreams. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Harry just a former convention seller turned "webmaster" (and I use that term loosely)? Sometimes, it seems like Harry doesn't even give a shit about films. It seems more like he's into the glitz, if you could call it that, of being flown out to studio screenings and shit like that. Wow, I better not say stuff like that...it might make me considered a "jerkwad loser." And I can't forget, "being a jerkwad loser will get you banned."

  • June 4, 2000, 8:17 p.m. CST

    Also...

    by Toe Jam

    I can't speak for EVERYONE else out there, but I think 99% of the talkbackers will agree that they come here for the very very occasional scoop and the ability to chat, interact via talkback, etc. I really don't come here for anything else than that. Other than the above, AICN is just seems like an outlet for Harry and his hack friends to post their irrelevant and non-constructive opinions about films that they don't even have the balls or talent to make in their fucking dreams. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Harry just a former convention seller turned "webmaster" (and I use that term loosely)? Sometimes, it seems like Harry doesn't even give a shit about films. It seems more like he's into the glitz, if you could call it that, of being flown out to studio screenings and shit like that. Wow, I better not say stuff like that...it might make me considered a "jerkwad loser." And I can't forget, "being a jerkwad loser will get you banned."

  • June 4, 2000, 10:10 p.m. CST

    What the Fuck Is A "Corona" Anyway??

    by Duty

    Beer??........Shit if you ask me. Harry Is great at what he dose. Corona posts Soooo mutch shit that thay have to be right some of the time. God the only good site's are ACIN, Dark Horizons, IGN sometimes. Man just get off it. Harry puts his soul it to this sight and his reviews, There full of prespective and life. Thank you Harry.

  • June 4, 2000, 10:19 p.m. CST

    you guys are such fucking losers

    by devil0509

    I can't believe what I saw in the talkbacks I cruised through. All that pissing and moaning about Harry being unprofessional, Harry not being a real journalist, Harry can't spell...who GIVES A SHIT? AICN is a fan website, made by a fan who happens to get into cheesy horror, sci fi, kick ass kung fu, etc. Harry started this site, none of us pay a fucking penny to read it, and therefore Harry can write whatever the fuck he wants to write on it! I've never met the guy, and if AICN closed up shop tomorrow no big fucking deal to me, but it pisses me off just on principle to see a bunch of whining jack-asses like just about each and every one of you log onto a free site, get a load of free info and entertainment, and then insult the guy who runs it and his FATHER! Who the fuck are you assholes to piss on Harry for making his sister's baby shower a headline? Is it your fucking site? Did you pay to read this fucking site? Harry can post whatever the fuck he wants to on this site and if you assholes don't like it, LEAVE! If Harry wants to turn AICN into a site devoted solely to the daily lives of his friends and family, who are any of you dickheads to criticize him for it? Do you pay to come here? Do you pay him to run the site? NO, so SHUT THE FUCK UP WITH ALL YOUR BITCHING AND MOANING.

  • June 4, 2000, 10:21 p.m. CST

    Harry Knowles report to the principal's office!

    by felixclub

    Oh the insanity. Has anyone actually gone back and read the post that got this ball rolling? It's not the stolen scoop that's offensive (after all the big guy claims to have gotten the scoop a mere 20 minutes ealier). Steal if you wanna steal bro. But he did worse. What was posted was words to the effect that Coming Attractions was somehow asking big red for advice. Like he was the internet Godfather. And then he added a bit about how it was only a rumor and he didn't wanna run with something so flimsy -- thereby implying Patrick at CA was a loose cannon doing just that. THAT'S what sucks. Scoops are stolen all the time. But the slap -- and further slap of publishing a private letter show how low Harry will go when he needs to. Too bad for everyone involved. This probably gave him another million hits alone. Nice to see David Poland drop in to throw a link to his column though. Anything for hits people!! Here's another link since we're all advertising today .. www.geocities.com/spoofthis/

  • June 4, 2000, 10:29 p.m. CST

    My take on all this as a member of your audience...

    by Kikstad

    Whatever the situation, obviously mistakes happen. The point is that all of you online "reporters" are gaining respectability now. The stories and news you report are read by a lot of people, so some professionalism needs to be brought into the picture. Sure, all these sites are just glorified rumor mills and fan speculation havens, but real fans are visiting them and believing what they read. So rather than fall into the trap of becoming Internet versions of tabloid newspapers, you all should try your best to adopt professional journalistic methods. I'm a big fan, obviously, of AICN, and think you and Father Geek are awesome -- I also visit Cinescape, Another Universe's Daily Buzz, Coming Attractions, Dark Horizons, IMDB's Studio Briefing, Counting Down, Mr. Showbiz, etc., etc., etc. The competition is great and it should spur you all on to greater things. But I don't think there's anything wrong with respecting each other as peers and admitting when mistakes are made and working together to set standards so that past mistakes aren't repeated in the future. Keep up the great work but I see nothing wrong with asking for some professionalism. -- Respectfully, Nick.

  • June 4, 2000, 10:41 p.m. CST

    Banned?

    by Moonwatcher1

    I'm not about to weigh in on who's right or wrong here. I suspect it must be very difficult to create an entirely new industry without occasionally feeling the temptation to act like a robber-baron... MY IMMEDIATE CONCERN... is why the hell I can no longer get into the CHAT ROOM? I keep getting a "BANNED FROM SERVER" message! I can only deduce 2 things from this. A) Harry has hunkered down like the President in his bunker, preparing for WW3... Cutting off all non-essential communication B) There's a GLITCH. C) He's mad at me because I didn't send him the little Spaced Invaders toy I promised him. SO? HARRY? HERE'S a problem WORTH worrying about! WHY CAN'T I CHAT??

  • June 4, 2000, 10:50 p.m. CST

    The Clone Wars

    by Hoge

    Let's face it. Lucas had no fucking idea what the clone wars were gonna be all about when he made Ep4. He just through it in their to give Ben a sense of mysticism and history. Plus it just sounds cool. It makes you wonder how much of SW is strictly accident. Now, he is going back to explain the CW with 'midichlorians' and what seems to be leaning towards a genetics experiment or at the very least cell concentrayion nonsense. I always liked the OT for its almost religious sense. The fact that the Force was harnessed by tapping into yourself and into nature. Now it has to have some unecessary bullshit explanation. I think Ep2 will suffer if all this kinda shit has to be explained like midichlorians does. Lucas is just trying to make a base for all the shit he pulled out of his ass in the OT. The thing that made the OT great was the character interaction. Sure, it revolutionized special effects but nearly every line in the OT is quote worthy. That in itself marks its greatness. I look at Ep1 and sure some quotes are there but not like in the old days. Are we to be forced to utter "yipeeeee" "mom, you say one of the biggest problems in the universe is people dont help eachother" ...what the fuck...darth maul could of had some sick lines during the fight...the reveal quote was cool but i mean did any of you hear his dialogue from the duel of the fates preview on MTV...the thing about fear, fear is my ally, fear attracts the fearful, the weak, the corrupt....i would have given up the whole gungan battle scene and half the sabre duel just to hear that line and see the reactions on Obi's and Qui-Gon's faces. What makes the Ep4 duel cool? "Ive been waiting for you Obi....." and in ESB "...you are not a jedi yet"...and even all the ROJ battle dialogue was cool...Godamnit!....anyways that is my rant...feel free to fire back

  • Go over to CA if you want to read the entire scoop from 'The Source'. Granted, it is totally obvious....but there are some slow people out there. Most people think this is bullshit, but I would not put it past His Holiness to make Palpatine Anakin's father. I guess this entire storyline is indeed about bringing balance to the force......now, if Lucas could get Ridley Scott or David Fincher to direct one of these last two films I wouldn't care if Jar Jar, Boss Nass, or Harry Jay Knowles turned out to be Anakin's father.

  • June 4, 2000, 11:36 p.m. CST

    The facts

    by EddieFive

    everyone should realise some the facts before they go jumping and support Harry for being Harry 1) Patrick of CA didnt address this issue in a public forum.. he voiced his concerns privately to Harry and Harry is the one who decided to go public with it..and make Patrick look like a villain 2)We have only Harry's word that the official reprimand by CA and the rest of the websites would have been public and Harry's word doesnt carry the mileage it used to. If you have read the post by a CA member, they would have waited a day for Harry to respond before going any further..public or otherwise 3) This wasnt the first time this thing has happened..this happened numerous times over the past 5 years. This, my friends, is the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. 4)Harry's poor handling of the situation.He decides to dredge up an old mistake by Patrick publicly even after they have apologised for it long time ago and that was genuine mistake and not some conniving underhanded thing Harry is capable of. 5)Harry intercepting a mail that was obviously not meant for him and publishing it for all to see and using this opportunity to pre-empt his reprimand by making it public thinking it will make him look good. His obvious reasoning is that better that this story makes its appearance here before the other site. Even now at this moment he steals...the leverage the other sites would have had if they made it public but that wasnt their intention, they were about to privately reprimand Harry but Harry being Harry was worried if the story leaked out...he was gonna look really really bad and decides it would be saferto make this public and to at least dampen the blow. 6)CA arent the only ones complaining about this issue, its the rest of the sites so there is credence and precedence here. 7) i've said it once and i'll say it again...harry is the one who went public on a very private matter and not them. They were pursuing this privately until Harry decided if this somehow hit the fan publicly, he'd be be busted and hence the story is out publicly. He does a brilliantly manipulated apology that isnt. 8) by doing all of the above, he has shown to be petty, amoral, sneaky, unethical and without conscience. what has happened to u,man. its a sad day allright..i'm disillusioned.u were once pretty ok in my book..not anymore. i'm just a reular reader who has been watching this unfold for the longest time.

  • June 5, 2000, 12:53 a.m. CST

    Everybody just back off!

    by LesterB

    Good Lord, someone make the bitching stop! Patrick, you're ridiculously pretentious. Get off of Harry's back. So what if he's unprofessional? You know what? He's right. AICN doesn't have to conform to other journalistic sites' standards because AICN was the first and the best and the innovator. Harry made the rules and he can break them. If it weren't for him, none of the rest of you would have jobs. Like it or not, Harry Knowles is the originator, and you all owe him your careers. AICN forever!

  • June 5, 2000, 1:48 a.m. CST

    Credit, no credit? What is AICN really?

    by SithScorp

    AICN is a wonderful source of info regarding rumors and facts relating to subjects we all enjoy reading about. Who gives a god damn about "WHO" has made the scoop. I for one DO NOT. I feel that Harry and FatherGeek do a GREAT job running this site and filter as much BS out as possible. Get the hell off their backs!!! If you want credit, make your own web site. Stop bitching you namby-pamby wusses!!!!!!!! I for one will still be here, reading what I enjoy. AICN forever!!!

  • June 5, 2000, 7:53 a.m. CST

    The Showbiz industry is underhanded,sneaky,

    by Hals_pal

    "by doing all of the above, he has shown to be petty, amoral, sneaky, unethical and without conscience" >>> rotfl! THAT IS A PERFECT DESCRIPTION OF THE SHOWBIZ INDUSTRY! Thank you for bringing those truths to light. You industry a** lickin androids are such hypocrites. The ShowBiz Industry is F'ing "notorious" for what they accuse Harry of being. What goes round comes round. Get over it. Fans aren't going to sit back anymore and eat the garbage Hollywierd tries to hand feed the public. The consumer rules!

  • June 5, 2000, 8:01 a.m. CST

    ShowBiz Industry is underhanded,sneaky,

    by Hals_pal

    "he has shown to be petty, amoral, sneaky, unethical and without conscience" >>> rotfl! THAT IS A PERFECT DESCRIPTION OF THE SHOWBIZ INDUSTRY! Thank you for bringing those truths to light. You industry a** lickin androids are such hypocrites. The ShowBiz Industry is F'ing "notorious" for what they accuse Harry of being. What goes round comes round. Get over it. Fans aren't going to sit back anymore and eat the garbage Hollywierd tries to hand feed the public. The consumer rules!

  • June 5, 2000, 8:49 a.m. CST

    Screw Corona!!!!!!!!!

    by splat

    Jeeze, this seems just like something these jerks would do. I HATE the Coming Attractions website, and have for many years. They post every freaking rumor they come across, without crediting their sources, no matter how absurd. They are nothing but rumor-mongers, and a kind of website that the Internet simply does not need. -Dan

  • June 5, 2000, 11:10 a.m. CST

    Smits will play Quinlan Vos

    by Salacious

    Jimmy Smits will play Quinlan Vos who is a jedi master in the comic books. He fits the discription exactly. Just give him long hair and a tattoo across his face.

  • June 5, 2000, 12:56 p.m. CST

    ruffkut

    by ziranova

    whinny --- v. - "To neigh, as a horse, esp. in a gentle tone. To express in a whinny. ***** To Harry, keep up the good work - I LOVE this site.

  • June 5, 2000, 1:45 p.m. CST

    Harry, it's all on you, don't let us down...

    by David Lopan

    Harry, I do like the fact that you relate your reviews to personal experiences. It give an advantage over plain reviews because it allows the reader to see where you are coming from. This is your site and you have free reign over it, but don't start becoming a diva/godfather of all movie info. Your comments in this post seem a bit condescending. Your site stands on its own reputation and performance, not on how other sites do. If other people are assholes, don't feel the need to sink to that level. (Not that I think the CA guy is, just in general) Your site gains a reputation on how you act and write. If you lower yourself to rebut other sites or act better than, our image of you and the info reported here degrades. Similar to things you have said about Harrison Ford, he gets an earring, takes no-effort, non-challenging roles, and all of that adds up to a decrease of your view of him as an actor. Don't let that happen to the site. Much like the TalkBackers can smell a studio plant, we will smell any type of smugness, selling-out, or anything else that would degrade the site and we will not accept it one bit. Good luck!

  • June 5, 2000, 3:42 p.m. CST

    Coming Soon...Harry & Moriarty ARE..."Studio Suckbugs!"

    by Eli Cross

    Referring to the writing on this site as "Journalism" is a bit much. I don't come to AICN with the intention of getting my fill of the filmic fifth estate. I go for geekdom. Yet, very recently, I have growing resentments about AICN. The banning of people from TalkBack. The bizarre lapses & surges of Harry's ethics. The stupid byte-and-time consuming animations. The whole early sneak of The Grinch smacked of Harry & Moriarty's transformation into studio suckbugs. The last straw has to be the American Pie pop-up ad. No. Pop-up bad. Lose pop-up or lose cred. If Dark Horizons had a TalkBack...well, I still have a certain allegiance to AICN. I just hope Harry makes it worth my effort. Continued Peace.

  • June 5, 2000, 3:55 p.m. CST

    Does AICN have a mission statement?

    by Kikstad

    In other words, how does Harry and crew view their site? I hear a lot of Talkbackers saying this is Harry's "personal site" so he can write anything he wants, use whatever standards he wants, etc. Which certainly is true to an extent. But now that it's grown into such a success, this site is attracting advertisers and a larger audience and industry attention, so if we the audience find the standards poor or lacking, eventually the audience will start going to other sites or will remain here but for other reasons (entertainment factor, etc.) I think Harry wants to be taken seriously and I think he contributes a lot of positive things to fandom, and that's why I'm one of the fans who's been encouraging him all along to adopt some more professional journalistic standards to his site. This doesn't mean he has to "change" his personality or not post highly questionable rumors, it just means that he's now a content provider for Internet users, and he has to take that into consideration. What does his audience want? He was one of the first, but now that competitors are coming out of the woodwork, if he wishes to remain on top for the longrun, he (and other fansite creators) need to re-examine their strategy if in fact this is their business instead of just a personal hobby. From all I've seen and read, AICN certainly has evolved into a business. So when questions about standards arise, I think they need to be seriously addressed and talked about (not necessarily with us, but certainly with his peers.)

  • June 5, 2000, 5 p.m. CST

    by hello_lunchmeat

    I'm sickened by the amount of people in the Talkback that are just here to kiss Harry's huge, pasty ass. Kids, this guy doesn't need your ass-kissing. He can do that all on his own. Learn to kiss ass to people who actually matter -- people who sign your pay checks, for instance. Or who dole out your allowance, judging by the grammar and spelling levels of some of you out there. But I digress. Just wanted to say that I'm glad to see some support here for Patrick et al. It's refreshing to see someone concerned about ethics in this day and age. Their professionalism regarding this matter is astounding and impressive, especially compared to Harry's actions. Quite frankly, Harry is behaving like a child. A whiny, petulant child. And I'm so glad that he IS behaving like a child. Harry behaving the way he is just makes his opponents look that much better.

  • June 5, 2000, 5:03 p.m. CST

    Go on, delete me.

    by hello_lunchmeat

    I'm sickened by the amount of people in the Talkback that are just here to kiss Harry's huge, pasty ass. Kids, this guy doesn't need your ass-kissing. He can do that all on his own. Learn to kiss ass to people who actually matter -- people who sign your pay checks, for instance. Or who dole out your allowance, judging by the grammar and spelling levels of some of you out there. But I digress. Just wanted to say that I'm glad to see some support here for Patrick et al. It's refreshing to see someone concerned about ethics in this day and age. Their professionalism regarding this matter is astounding and impressive, especially compared to Harry's actions. Quite frankly, Harry is behaving like a child. A whiny, petulant child. And I'm so glad that he IS behaving like a child. Harry behaving the way he is just makes his opponents look that much better. I sure hope this site gets you laid a lot, Harry. It's sure not going to do much else for you in the long run.

  • June 5, 2000, 5:05 p.m. CST

    Do I understand correctly?

    by CHParker

    Let me see if I get this. All this recent flap is because a bunch of websites who deal almost primarily in rumors, and rely upon insiders/thiefs betraying their employers, fancy themselves as legitimate journalists??? And they talk about ethics and morality when they engage in theft (or at least the encouragement of theft) and rumor-mongering? That's quite a high horse to be sitting on. I hope there's still room for the New York Times and Washington Post up there. I'm sure when the NY Times runs the Jimmy Smits "scoop" they will give credit where it is due.

  • June 5, 2000, 5:14 p.m. CST

    Any hot chicks out there want to chat?

    by Devolver

    Yes, it does sound as though he is trying to embarrass Harry. It wasn't really a good idea to change the greeting, but big deal. Harry is running a website that is now how he makes his living. He's not doing it for fun only. Neither is Patrick. Why wouldn't Harry want to down play the fact that Corona posted the story first? They are in competition. There is no community where money is involved. It's now a business ethics question. Don't you think there is a reason there is the term "business ethics"? If business fell under the same thing as ethics, you wouldn't need that term. MONEY! It's all about the Benjamins baby. Big deal. Business isn't personal, it's business. I think that Harry has been very fair with other websites, particularly Coming Attractions. I read both sites every day and have often noticed that they have the same stories. I have seen Harry cite Patrick and provide a link to Corona's website on a number of occasions. I thought that was very big of him. Patrick does the same thing. From my perspective the two sites have always been very fair to each other. It's not like every story that goes up on Corona, gets copied to AICN with no citation. That would be unethical. I think Patrick is jealous of Harry's site and looking to lash out at him. Blowing a small thing out of proportion. He should quit whining. Father Geek most likely did have prior knowledge of the rumour anyway, as AICN usually gets all the juicy bits first anyway. Harry is winning, so others are whining. Just goes to show as I've said all along, the bigger Harry gets, the more people are going to try to bring him down. Fuck em if they can't take a joke Harry. And it's all a joke. BTW, please get rid of those fucking popup ads. They suck ass and make me think of straight commercial sites. Which you are not. Even though this is a business. That is all. Devolver.

  • June 5, 2000, 5:25 p.m. CST

    CHUD PARNK thinks everyone should read Patricks article at Coron

    by CHUD PARNK

    HERE IT IS Do ethics and morals apply when it comes to the realm of Internet movie websites? That's the question that's been asked this past weekend by webmasters around the world. Harry Knowles, the webmaster at Ain't it Cool News, ran a story on his website that impacts both this website and AICN as well as the rest of our community. It might affect what future direction these sites take; in fact, it may impact how online journalism is performed across every website as a whole. With such a new medium as the Internet, should there be rules that site operators follow when it comes to posting stories on their site? And if so, shouldn't the bottom line of such websites be that they deliver an accurate, unbiased and fair means of sharing news information to their audience, if they indeed pretend to be considered an online news source? To understand what's behind this question, it's necessary to understand what set this debate off. In fact, it's been a debate that I as Director of Coming Attractions have been having with Harry Knowles for more than four years. The straw that broke my resolve occured last week... Last Thursday Coming Attractions broke an unconfirmed story that actor Jimmy Smits had been secretly cast in Star Wars Episode Two. We ran this story after holding back on it for more than a week to aquire additional information. Shortly after posting the story on CA's SW2 page, I wrote a press release to the online community notifying them that we were running this story. The body of this message read: Hey gang, I rarely do this, but I feel the importance of this piece of gossip is important enough to pass on to you all. CA's running the story that Jimmy Smits (yes, he of NYPD Blue fame, but I prefer LA Law myself) has been secretly cast in a role that'll have him starring in STAR WARS 2 as well as STAR WARS 3. I don't know the name of the character yet, but according to my source, Smits' deal is done and only requires a few days of filming. However, his role in SW3 is much larger and will require more time from the actor. I trust my source and his credibility, which I outline on the CA STAR WARS 2 page. Details are on http:www.corona.bc.ca/films/details/sw2.html. If Lucas is serious about shooting this film starting next month, there should be some kind of casting announcement fairly soon, you think, right? Well, this is Lucas... Patrick@CA Some hours later the story began appearing on other websites across the 'net. However, when it ran on Ain't it Cool News, the e-mail had been slightly modified and the story altered in such a way that I felt Coming Attractions role had been downplayed, that the efforts of AICN were more notable than CA's work in delivering this scoop. Here's the beginning of the AICN news item about the CA story: Smits lands a small role in SW #2 and 3 OK so this isn't a cutting edge scoop, I (Father Geek) am posting it for the benefit of our readers that DON'T have the time to surf around to all the different film sites out there on the web. Actually Patrick over at CA ran this by us here at AICN before it went up on his site and then instantly everywhere else, but, Stone me if you like, Father Geek was waiting for some more info to expand it into a story not just an unconfirmed sound bite, however it seems no expanded story is forthcoming. This DOES seem to be fact not rumor though, any way here is what is KNOWN at present... By choosing to write it up this specific way, AICN paints a picture that it was holding onto this information (that they claim to have also possessed, but chose not to run on their site) to expand into a larger story and not just an "unconfirmed" sound bite. If this had been a one-time incident, it wouldn't be worth the bother to address in any sort of column. But this has been an on-going method of reporting other sites' news on AICN. I've seen similar instances where a story run on CA is "downplayed" by the intro the AICN webmaster writes for their audience. I ask the question to AICN, why is this done? What purpose does it suit to put this kind of spin on another site's story, if not to make the efforts of the other site seem secondary to what kind of stories appear on AICN? There's been other recent examples of this sort of reporting. For instance, this exclusive photo of Rogue from the X-Men movie that I e-mailed AICN to credit CA as the source, and I was promised that it would be looked in to. It never was. This article that addressed the coverage CA gave to a sneak-peek of The Patriot makes a point of saying why the AICN guys didn't think it was worth attending for them, but isn't really supposed to be about when the film's latest trailer is coming out? CA doesn't do this when we report other sites' stories. Does AICN know how hard two of our CA writers worked on following up these stories? Did they stop to think about what kind of effort we may have put into getting these scoops, that we cared about trying to confirm sources, maintain contacts within the business, and try and report the story in the best means possible? When I read "intros" like this for CA stories on AICN, I don't get that sense at all. Now to the second part of the AICN story that disturbs me. You might consider it a small item in scale of its importance, but after hearing stories from others who seem to have had similar experiences, I think it matters greatly -- and it offers further evidence that AICN is trying to downplay stories to promote their superiority. My original message started off with the words "Hey gang," mainly because I was addressing about two dozen sites/individuals and wanted to keep it loose and show no favoritism. But when it appeared on AICN, the webmaster who chose to write up this story edited my e-mail. Instead of "Hey gang," now I'm reading the words "Harry, etc." Check AICN's original story for yourself. Those two words, no matter how slight they might seem to you...I had chosen the former addressment for a specific reason. This wasn't a scoop specifically geared for Ain't it Cool News and everyone else was secondary. Why had the AICN webmaster done this? Did he figure his audience was too dumb to figure out what I was trying to state...or as I was wondering, is it mearly another subtle way that the webmaster chose to make AICN seem more important in the scheme of things than the other sites? As I said earlier, this isn't the first time CA has had a grievance with something AICN writes. Both Harry and I have had on-going debates over the years all about the nature of what we do. We've rarely seen eye-to-eye. Ultimately, his site is run the way he sees fit. I make it no secret I dislike the way he reviews movies, that he includes personal stories about his movie-going experience that don't relate to the picture itself; Harry doesn't see a problem with it. But I think it matters. Five years ago a CA reader named Harry Knowles wrote to me and said he wasn't being properly credited for a news item about the Star Wars Special Edition movie. I wrote back to him and added his credit to the CA page. Soon after Harry began his site. I remember in those early days that he took a couple of sly swipes at CA, about how his site would be updating more regularly than that other site. I took it in stride and addressed my complaints privately. While I didn't like the way Harry set about reviewing or addressing news stories on his site, he had all the right in the world to run his site using his own voice. But AICN is acting in a public medium, and like it or not, it's considered a form of journalism. Just because AICN chooses to print its reviews or news stories in a different method than traditional media, I still believe that there should exist certain lines that you don't cross. I had debated with Harry in the past over moral boundaries that I think webmasters shouldn't cross, and I would e-mail AICN when I felt something appeared on that site that didn't match up with the story that appeared on CA. I also tried to address the other problems I felt brought down my respect for AICN. Unfortunately, our debates didn't ever seem to resolve any of these issues. Which is how we arrived as last Friday and to the letter. Last Friday I sent out another e-mail to the names on the SW2 notice. This time I addressed the changes to my original e-mail that had appeared on the AICN news story, wanting to make sure that everyone understood where CA had been coming from when I originally sent off the e-mail. I also said that I wasn't going to let this go unnoticed; private e-mails with AICN were getting no results, and I was going to address the matter publically in today's Director's Cut column. What happened next was a flood of e-mails from webmasters who also had similar stories to share. It's not my place to speak about anyone else's experiences save what's happened with CA, but the e-mails seemed to indicate that other sites had been burned in the past by AICN, and that they wished something could be done. It was then suggested by another person that perhaps a intelligently written, non-emotional e-mail could be sent to AICN and signed by the individuals who felt the site was casting a poor light on the public's perception of Internet movie websites. Like it or not, the public does perceive what AICN represents as the entire picture of the 'net. For AICN to maintain it's not bound by journalistic ethics or boundaries, yet be seen in a wider public spotlight as an online source for movie news and reviews is a conflicting message, don't you think? To save us from uncertainty, I agreed to draft the first version of the letter. It seemed right, since my e-mail had sparked off this debate. Everyone seemed to agree, and I wrote up what I thought was a fairly written letter to explain our grievances to AICN and how we believe it affects us as a whole community. This is the letter I wrote: To the webmasters of "Ain't it Cool News": Ever since the explosion of the Internet, one of the highest-visible segments of it has been online film community. Today there are dozens of websites, columns, chat rooms and the like that allow movie fans the opportunity to discuss and read about the latest news from inside Hollywood. However, one of the areas that has not been approached in significant detail is the matter of what kind of professional ettiquette should exist on the 'net between the webmasters of these sites. A number of us, the site operators, writers, and webmasters feel that your site, "Ain't it Cool News", has been unfairly painting a picture that reflects poorly on the reputation of these other websites, and the public's perception of the Internet film journalistic community. There have been numerous occasions where material that has been sent in good faith to AICN has been modified, or edited to make it appear that AICN has been the sole originator of this material. Many times appropriate credit for the original site or individual that broke this news story has been ignored, or down-played, or modified to make it appear AICN was the source of this news story. When feedback has been sent to AICN often there's been no retraction, no conversation, no recognition that an email has been received. When a rebuttal has been posted in the "Talkback" section of the website, sometimes it is erased from the conversation -- again, no explanation, no reason. When some of us have addressed these inconsistencies with the webmasters of AICN in private exchanges, excuses have been made that AICN doesn't need to follow the same code of conduct that adopted in the journalistic media. In the realms of journalism, this would be considered to be arrogant to its peers, its audience, and the medium in general. We feel that this is not an acceptable excuse. The same practices and accountability should hold true to all of the online community. No one can doubt that AICN is perceived by the general media to be the largest, and most popular, film website of its kind. But when a site receives such accolades, shouldn't it be mindful of its audience and try and provide them with the most accurate reporting they can provide? Shouldn't its operators be held to the same level of accountability as television programs, newspapers, movie critics and so on? Shouldn't there exist some kind of ethical, moral code that makes it a part of the larger community, and not come across as an arrogant outsider? We believe so. We feel that the actions of the webmasters of "Ain't it Cool News" perpetuate an image of unprofessional and unethical attitudes in web journalism that reflects poorly on the entire online film community. We hope that in the future this will change. Signed, [the undersigned] Any changes to the letter were to be included in a later draft. Then the letter was to be sent off to AICN, and if no response was heard, we would post the letter publically on the sites that signed the letter. Unfortunately, someone in the mailing list sent the letter (before it had been seriously discussed, reviewed, and revised to a final agreed-upon form), off to AICN. AICN then decided it was appropriate to post the letter, including the names of the participants on the mailing list -- participants who at the time did not decide to sign the letter -- publically on that site. Not only was this action in incredibly bad taste for AICN, by printing only a portion of the dialogue between the e-mail participants, it painted an incomplete picture of the entire situation. Of course, no one at AICN sees any wrong in posting the e-mail addresses of thirty people, nor was there any e-mails sent to these individuals asking why this debate was taking place. Instead, AICN brought it out into a public forum -- and presented the subject to its readership incomplete. After all, why should such matters as following up on the story matter to AICN staffers when they say they're not journalists, right? Yet it's no secret that there are plans for a Ain't it Cool News TV show, or that AICN hosts screening of movies by studios, or that AICN staffers are given the same treatment as mainstream reviewers. So if they're not journalists, they're not bound by a code of conduct. So that means anything goes, right? What's most curious is that Harry Knowles, when he addressed the matter yesterday (Sunday) on AICN, chose only one topic from the letter: the matter of credit. Nothing was mentioned of the claims that peoples e-mails have been modified from their original content, or that feedback has disappeared from his site. Nothing was made mention of the rebuttals that are sometimes made in the viewer feedback part of the AICN site that disappear. In fact, Harry went out of his way to again, make a point that AICN had received the Smits casting rumor "about 30 minutes before." Again, why do that? What's the point in doing that when the topic Harry has chosen is, as Harry states, scooping me with my editorial? Instead, why not keep the matter on focus and address these issues if they're wrong? Why change the subject? And again, this isn't the first time AICN and controversy have butted heads; the incorrect Oscar nominee list from last February is a prime example, or the reversal of Harry's review of 1998's Godzilla. I believe these are important points to be addressed if we're supposed to treat AICN as a respectable peer in the online movie news biz. They are not sour grapes; they are about mutual respect and integrity. One of the aspects of CA that I'm most proud of is the way we try and strive to play fair with everyone, including material that AICN breaks first. We would expect the same sort of respect in return -- and for our audiences. I think everyone agrees there shouldn't be no games going on behind the scenes, no ulterior motives to posting stories or breaking news items. In the future I plan to vigorously defend CA if its online reputation is attacked again. AICN is only painting a picture of it being an outsider to the web community, that it's not held accountable. It's important that CA's side of the story was told, and if there are others out there with similar stories, perhaps it's time to start telling them. And if someone at AICN is up for it, let's have a forum at the San Diego Comic Convention this July where Harry Knowles is a Guest of Honor. I plan to be there. Perhaps it's time we started talking about an online rule of ethics that movie news sites should follow. It can only benefit everyone.

  • June 5, 2000, 5:55 p.m. CST

    More places to let your opinion be heard!

    by hqxp

    No Extra Day -- http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a.tcl?topic=No Extra Day CHUD -- http://www.chud.com/board/ubbhtml/Forum1/HTML/000844.html Go there. Read. Talk. Have some coffee.

  • June 5, 2000, 5:58 p.m. CST

    It's about time Harry...

    by Richhay

    ...I've been waiting to catch you at it. Expected immature behavior on your part.

  • June 5, 2000, 6:33 p.m. CST

    I dunno Harry...

    by Duke

    it's a little half-ass of you (first time anyone has used "half" in reference to your rather large ass) to issue this back-handed apology. It appears that you want to paint yourself as the wronged party here and are hiding behind the "golly, gee whiz, I'm sorry...don't get your panties in such a wad" defense. Fact is, you screwed up and you don't want the bad press, because you really really want that television show to work out. That's fine, but the problem is getting that show going makes you a journalist whether you like it or not and you need to take a good long hard look at your ego. It's getting in the way of what you want to become. Lastly, the new Talk-Back rules off to the side are interesting. Seems like this "apology" of yours violates them.

  • June 5, 2000, 6:37 p.m. CST

    My $0.02 on this whole mess...

    by Shadowstar

    First off...Let me state that for the record, I am a passive reader of all of these sites. I grab a quick view during my lunch at work. Today, I did not get a lunch and only decided to take a peek at a few of my favorite movie sites before going home to my beloved and the child unit. Little did I know that I would see this... Without regurgitating the same stuff that has been said here, at Corona's site, CHUD and a few others...Allow me to state that everyone in this situation is wrong. Patrick should not have tried to gather a lynch mob...Harry should not have charged a dollar a piece for people to see Patricks' panties....and all the other so called 'on-line journalists' should not have jumped on the collective bandwagons of either of these two. I have more respect for Garth at the moment...cause his site is the only one devoid of this stuff...(hoping he keeps it that way). Now, having graduated with a degree in Jounalism...and after having interned in the industry...and then later working a little bit in it before selling out to the corporate machine...I feel like I can comment a little on 'journalistic integrity'. The dirty truth of the matter that the alphabet companies of TV and the news papers and magazines that have any competition is this...News is not reported objectively... There, I said it...you can deny it all you want, but it is simply a fact. Now, since all of these news outlets, including these on-line outlets...are in competition for the same news...the same 'audience' the same noteriety...the same prestiege (if you will)...Some sh*t is going to go down...If businessmen were all honest...the whole friggin' economy would break down. This lovely country of ours thrives on doing ti better, faster and first...and sometimes that drive gets in the way of good judgement. There are countless stories in the TV media ranks of stories getting 'stolen' and newspapers getting 'scooped' on stories they are already working on...It is the nature of the beast. It is naive of you to think that just because you are 'on-line'...you are immune to the ills of other media. It is all the same...it just happens faster here. So Harry downplays your scoop...Hell, just downplay his...So Patrick wasn't the first to relay a story to you...Throw him a bone anyway...just a little "...this scoop was also reported on CA..." wouldn't hurt,would it? Patrick...You don't have to get all the other kids to gang up on Harry...Geesh! Just produce the goods and let we (the consumers) figure it out for ourselves. Harry has his folowers just as you do. Maybe he was first on the block...or maybe not...Maybe he has marketed himself better...maybe not. The bottom line is that if your site is as good as you think it is...Then people will notice. You guys are wasting bandwidth with this childish argument. Concentrate on making your sites as good as they can be...and let the best movie/web geek win. That goes for the rest of you guys as well...Stop complaining and just go out there and win, baby! If you make a better product...poeple will patronize your sites more. Harry may have "brand loyalty" but that did'nt stop MCI from knocking off AT&T...Ya dig? Harry, if indeed you spend any time reading all of these...All I have to say is I do enjoy coming to visit your site...as I do the others. They all offer something unique...and variety is the spice of life. But for goodness sake...and hear me Harry and Patrick when I say this: THIS POINTLESS DIATRIBE IS NOT PROFESSIONAL...IT IS CHILDISH! There is not, that I am aware of...any legal recourse you can follow...but you are both (directly or indirectly) growing dangerously close to putting yourselves in litigation for slander and libel...just thought you should know...(I have relatives that are lawyers...so sue me) Now, stop this bickering and get back to getting movie scoops. ...and I'm spent...

  • June 5, 2000, 7:13 p.m. CST

    Playa-hatahs

    by wash

    Patrick: Damn, you sure are a whiny bee-otch. Same with you, Pollard. Sure, Harry FUCKS UP (A LOT), and his reviews are pretty much worthless now, but all the stuff you guys are spouting appears to be ENTIRELY self-serving. From what I've seen, Harry tries to be honest about when he's getting comped and tries to correct errors when he's wrong (although I was never satisfied with his Oscar explanation). But still...It's obvious that you two runts are never going to be happy until you're successful in overthrowing the Knowles Regime. "Waaahhh...Harry edited my email so it made more sense in context"...."Waahhh...Harry lies(?) about the amount of hits he gets so therefore it will be my mission in life to personally destroy his every career aspiration"...Get over it, twits.

  • June 5, 2000, 7:33 p.m. CST

    It's Official

    by Gosgol

    I got it all figured out. Patrick is an infamous studio plant, sent by the evil ones to cause dissention in the ranks of the movie sites. Finaly the truth comes out. Now where's my jungle juice?

  • June 5, 2000, 7:47 p.m. CST

    I'd just like to say....CHUD With A Vengeance, CHUD: Tears Of Th

    by Hell's Cigarette

    Can't we all just get along? Hell no. We have to have conflict. Also, change and expansion are not necessarily good things. This is only going to get worse my friends, and it isn't going away any time soon. It may even escalate into cutthroat activity in terms of getting scoops etc. I'm also sorry to say that it only makes things interesting for us, the common reader. The bickering between Harry and Patrick will only serve to heighten awareness of the two sights in circles that wouldn't normally give a rats ass about "two-bit internet journalists" who are primarily film geeks with a license to do whatever they want and get away with it.

  • June 5, 2000, 8:03 p.m. CST

    Delete my ass......I hate this retarded ID anyway!!!!

    by Maul99

    There aren't any personal attacks or abuse in this posting. Why doesn't Harry respond point by point to what Patrick has outlined in his eloquent letter? It is because he knows that Patrick is right and he does not want to start a war. Harry is beginning to exploit AICN for his own personal gain. AICN is a tremendous asset for Harry. Getting roles in films, guesting on late night talk shows, not to mention the advertising dollars that he must be racking up by now. He isn't telling the readership the truth about what studios, producers, directors etc. expect in return for seeing extremely early prints of their films or being allowed access etc. It may not be directly stated, but they expect certain things from him and in many cases he provides it. The reversal on Godzilla that Dave Poland points out is one example, but Armageddon is a far greater example. Harry's trip and visits with Bay, Willis, Affleck etc. culminated in his orgasmic review of the film. He cannot be objective in these cases because he takes these factors into account when he reviews the film. This is just part of Harry's geek nature.

  • June 5, 2000, 8:08 p.m. CST

    You're an errand girl, sent by grocery clerks, to collect a bil

    by Hell's Cigarette

    Go Harry, it's your birthday!

  • June 5, 2000, 8:13 p.m. CST

    by PoxyVonSinister

    >>AICN doesn't have to conform to other journalistic sites' standards because AICN was the first and the best and the innovator. Harry made the rules and he can break them. If it weren't for him, none of the rest of you would have jobs. Like it or not, Harry Knowles is the originator, and you all owe him your careers.<<

  • June 5, 2000, 8:20 p.m. CST

    THIS time I'll actually comment....

    by PoxyVonSinister

    >>AICN doesn't have to conform to other journalistic sites' standards because AICN was the first and the best and the innovator. Harry made the rules and he can break them. If it weren't for him, none of the rest of you would have jobs. Like it or not, Harry Knowles is the originator, and you all owe him your careers.<< Yeah right, and I suppose the first mob boss shouldn't have been prosecuted because he did it first and best.... Look, we're not talking about people who are performing life-saving operations or putting out fires here. We're talking about people who have parlayed hours of web-surfing and newsgroup browsing into relatively sedentary careers. Yeah, Harry seemed to be apologizing, so maybe CA shouldn't have gotten all fired up, but then again Harry really didn't need to go public with that e-mail. This is just an electronic version of a pissing contest and everybody's getting wet.

  • cause the geeks who read this site think they're having conversations with people while they bitch out harry (who doesn't care) you're not making friends here, you're not having a good time... go steal fightclub and ride your goddamn bicycle... get healthy be happier, ignore all this BS and have lives... i think based on this info, i'm gonna quit reading this site... CA has all this without the annoying talkback... goodnightall

  • June 5, 2000, 8:47 p.m. CST

    Prankster's comment

    by PoxyVonSinister

    >>The original article makes it pretty darn clear that Corona had the information, so I don't see how Pat can complain he wasn't accredited<< Ah, but it was more than that. The way it was presented made it seem like CA was running the scoop past AICN, almost as if to see if it was okay for them to do so. And it also made it seem like AICN had this story a whole lot longer than 30 minutes previously and thought it baseless, so there's an implied criticism of CA for running it. If Harry is going to set himself up as the 800-pound gorilla in this area, he'd better be prepared to be buzzed by the bi-planes.

  • June 5, 2000, 9:16 p.m. CST

    This is pretty damn sad

    by elryano

    Okay both sides have points! Harry is wrong for posting the email before giving the others the same warning they tried to give him, and yes it does give Harry a kind of "Nixon" vibe. But come on people when it's all said and done who gives a shit!? You talk about Journalist ethics. Well u do realize that u are complaining about a rumored story!!!!!! What would happen if NBC Nightly News ran a rumored story, then CBS picked it up...I wouldnt happen so don't worry answering that! Real journalist check and confirm the story beforehand. They don't post it and then get mad when someone else takes the story. I'm sure everyone on here has personal reasons on why they are pissed. Obviously Harry is still miffed about what Corona did awhile back and everyone else seems pissed becasue this little up-start here gets all the press and gets to go on talk shows..so to make themselves feel good they write bad things about him. Don't try to pretend u only want justice here, please! You pretty much backed him into a corner! What did u expect to happen. That he would read your letter and be caved in with emotion and then shut down? That wasn't gonna happen! And also it wasn't Harry who did this it was Father Geek..the man who has made many enimes and commited many fuck-ups in the past. A simple Harry please give the proper credit would have sufficed, instead u did what u did. And u know what, its not gonna hurt him at all...sure a long time ago a boy could slay a giant by throwing rocks at him but those days are gone and for a guy of Harrys size that bastard sure is agile! Just give it a rest! Move on okay! No one cares..We will always have arguments against each other because that's how internet "journalist" work..they are childish people who want to feel that they have purpose in the world....

  • June 5, 2000, 9:38 p.m. CST

    Everyone seems to have an opinion...

    by Mr_Sinister

    ...so I'll add mine as well. All you people can dismiss this as bullshit just because Harry's site is for 'fans' and 'personal'. Whatever. While maybe all parties involved have grubby hands, what Harry did was despicable. Anyway, I've been checking both AICN and CA for awhile now, and the latter is far better. The occassional exclusive here is good, but in general I loathe Harry's reviews. Richay you said he's finally shown his immature behaviour? You've been missing it all along. His words and the way he chooses to review movies reek of immaturity. But then again, this IS only a 'fan' website right? *LOL* And actual studios are afraid of what Harry might think? God, I wouldn't. The best (and sometimes only) thing about AICN is the talkback. It's hilarious.

  • June 5, 2000, 10:02 p.m. CST

    And while I'm here...

    by PoxyVonSinister

    ... why the %@$@##!! isn't there anywhere on this damn site to change your e-mail address so, oh, I don't know, if I forget my password it doesn't get sent to my CANCELED AOL ACCOUNT?!?!? And don't tell me I have to register a new user ID, it shouldn't be this complicated. You store these things somewhere, you should give us the option to change it. And if you DO have this, well, it's about as easy to find as the proposal to bulldoze Arthur Dent's house.

  • Why not explain all of the problems I made mention of in my Director's Cut message Harry? Why aren't you deciding to tackle this head on if you've got nothing to hide? Why not address this on AICN in a new story if my charges and allegations are so terribly unfounded? An apology isn't in order Harry. *Explanations* are the only thing you have left to say. I'm waiting.

  • June 6, 2000, 1:57 a.m. CST

    Out of line

    by Mardoek

    I think Harry was way out of line to make this whole conversation public before talking to his internet-peers. I think he lost a lot of respect because of that

  • June 6, 2000, 2:16 a.m. CST

    ethics, anyone?

    by dern

    why is it that some readers think that AICN was the founder of movie net rumors? Harry himself points out that he used to scoop for Coming Attractions (the site that actually was the first, and is run by the patrick being talked about). Also, there is a reason why credit should be addressed, and that's ethics. Until the net beigns to develope a broad-based ethics policy, the sites won't be considered legit, even though they've got the tools to be legit now. The third issue is on emails being altered - and a highly disturbing thought. Just imagine getting interviewed by a newspaper, and then having the reporter change your quote into something you didn't say but worked better in the story. That's putting words in your mouth, and it ain't cool at all. So why not gather heads, hold a forum, and develope ethics. it's the RIGHT thing to do.

  • June 6, 2000, 3:07 a.m. CST

    YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!!

    by Joxer_the_Myt

    okay, soory to start off with that, but it seems appropriate for what is an opening salvo in a war of words the likes which we haven't yet seen on the net. Christ! Between this and all that Napster crap, the whole idea of "internet community" is going to hell in a handbasket. I know a lot of readers here that are replying to this whole fiasco are youths who have never done any kind of reporting or worked in any type of industry where credit for something is just as important as the item in question(not a dig to any of you kids out there, just a likely fact...but I'm not finished yet). I know because I have worked for newspapers before, which doesn't make me an expert, but at least I CAN say I know what Im talking about. Hell, even a school newspaper has scoops, and credit must be given to THAT PERSON for that scoop, or you have broken a tenent of journalist morals. So, my first extended middle finger is to you little morons who want to say STOP WHINNING or whatever. If any of us EVER want to expand internet reporting into another viable and important resource for news, on a level the likes of CNN, or, at the least EW and Rolling Stone, we MUST follow these codes of conduct. Now, if you come here just for rumors and whatnot, this whole issue really isnt your concern anyway. I mean, do you really care about whoever reports the stories in your local paper? But there is another group of people out there who read sites like AICN or CA or wherever as a sort of internet Daily Variety to see what kind of things are going on in the industry above what kind of kung-fu traning they might use for the next Star Wars. WE might want to know about the new fall schedules, or whos going to produce Spiderman, or whos currently working on a script for the next Die Hard(well, i'm not dying to read that, but someone might be) and these kinds of information, the really good industry-insider stuff is treated with importance in any reporting media in the real world, and the parties involved are properly credited.Internet sites dedicated to the same goals should be EXACTLY the same. Sure, the net offers freedom to be a little sneakier, where we are not constrained to studios' best interests, but that's not the issue. Anybody who thinks otherwise, I got a middle finger for you, too. I dig Harry. I like the guys who write for his site, and I like his personal reflections, though I think they should be confined to editorials and reviews, which Harry mostly does. And I visit CA, and DH, and some others. And Mostly, I see Harry give credit to the proper people. I'm not an insider in Tinseltown, so I can't say who's getting stiffed on credit, or when, but if it is happening, whether it's by Harry, or one of his reporters, Harry should take responsibility. In the real world, if something is wrong with a story, the reporter has to answer for it, but so does the Editor-in-Chief. As Webmaster, thats basically what Harry is, and that's what he should do...that is to say, if it does happen and Harry is aware of it. If that's a reality, well, Harry, its not a middle finger, but I do wave one finger to you in shame. Every scoop should be properly credited, not matter the signifigance. That way, if its great, that scooper will get a better internet reputation. And if its bad, we can all look out for the guy. Its a risk any journalist takes, and internet reporters should share that risk. Imagine if Watergate happened today, in our modern world. And lets say YOU(the reader) got a "scoop" about the incidents at the Watergate hotel. YOU decide to post it to your website, and email it to some other like-subject sites. A day later, you check up and see that some bastard has changed the text and made you a little guy and the poster takes more credit. how would YOU feel if people bitched that its just the internet, just some website, nothing that important? You'd feel like shit, plain and simple. Regardless of anything I say here, I'm not taking any sides... not yet anyway. I hope everybody can get some kind of conference and get this resolved. With the net still trying to find itself, we need people like Harry and Patrick and all the other guys out there who are unafraid to ruffle feathers, to do the kind of reporting that we only read about nowadays in the age of litigations. We need those "Lois Lanes" out there. I'm not an expert. And I'm not some newspaper journalist with 20 years experience. I'm just a man who watches the world moving so fast that its not seeing what its passing by, what its forgetting, what its letting fall behind, what its not enjoying. In a few years, it probably wont be the same wired world we helped build. It'll be another thing we wrangled into the "real world", tagged, defined, organized, and(worst of all) owned by someone. If we can make our own rules now, in unity, we might be able to save what WE built. I hope all you guys get this worked out, and I hope readers here understand all sides. Whether its the new Spiderman, the artwork for LOTR, of the possibility the Jimmy Smits will be in SW2, someone worked hard to find it out, possibly putting their jobs on the line, or more. Wanting to be credited for that, I REALLY dont think thats whining. --(---That's What Joxer Says---)--

  • June 6, 2000, 6:22 a.m. CST

    I just wanted to say i was here the day the geek king died

    by McKenzieFrenzy

    just foolin with ya, man Harry, you couldnt pay for this kinda advertising for your site. Hey, am I part of your "WhackPack" psychotic? i want more geek love, this is my collective now!, lol, this is all a surreal melodrama and i love it, long live the burnt orange, go fuck yourselves you corporate sellouts. But on another note, whats up with the fuckin piece of crap American Pie flash page that keeps poppin up, loose it now. Dont sell out Harry, i dont care what those studio exects promise you, no amount of blow jobs will equal the value of your credibility. Ok, i've said enough. See you all in the chat my fellow geeks.

  • June 6, 2000, 12:12 p.m. CST

    Damage control

    by Kikstad

    Is it so hard for everyone to just pick up a phone and call each other to resolve this? All Harry has to do is say, "hey this is all a misunderstanding. Let's have a forum at a future convention and discuss this like professionals." Even mainstream "more legitimate" media have incidents of questionable ethics and disagreements about the way they handled stories etc. But at least they discuss it afterwards. Although this medium is relatively young, certain standards need to be established. When someone is being quoted and the words are changed (for clarity, etc.), you have to let the reader know that the original words were changed, no matter how seemingly trivial. Place the changed words in parenthesis. Crediting of sources, scrutiny of rumors, all of this is expected by your audience. I don't want to see AICN viewed as the National Enquirer of the Internet. I've said this for a while -- it's about time the online community started discussing these issues like professionals. But sadly, it'll probably take a major story in the mainstream press before you guys sit down and talk about it. You're all pioneers, so look at the mistakes you've made, acknowledge them, establish methods to keep them from happening again (and to keep others from making the same mistakes) and move on, building on all the many positive things you've done. Respectfully yours as always, -- Nick, movie buff and fan.

  • June 6, 2000, 4:25 p.m. CST

    I agree to the man next to the man named McKenzieFrenzy...otherw

    by Shadowstar

    Although I tend to ramble quite a bit...I think your suggestion is one of the more constructive that I have read here. These long e-monologues of Patrick, Nick and Harry are not doing anything to resolve the issue. It is just pointless pontificating at the expense of the various parties invloved in this little party. YOU GUYS WANT TO DO SOMETHING TO IMPROVE THE STATE OF 'PROFESSIONALISM' IN THIS MEDIUM...THEN WHY DON'T ONE OF YOU HOT SHOTS ORGANIZE A SUMMIT, FORUM OR WHATEVER THE HELL YOU WANT TO CALL IT. Then you can "attempt" to act like professionals and negotiate some decent terms. This mindless 'flame war' is just as I said in my last post...a friggin' waste of bandwidth. I leave you with some words of wisdom from my dear deceased grand-pappy...dispensed over a case of Stroh's....."If you got the goods....You don't have to advertise!" And to modify it to fit this situation..."If you got the best scoops...the fans will take notice!" Now go back to the voodoo you do so well...and I'm spent...

  • June 6, 2000, 6:12 p.m. CST

    What is the real issue, Patrick?

    by BatTat

    After reading your treatment of this issue, Patrick, I am curious what exactly the "important points" are? Harry addressed the issue of credit - which you dismissed. The other issues you bring up all seem to pertain to Harry editing the content he posts on HIS site or the removal of Talkback posts. Frankly, I don't see a real problem. This is Harry's site. He can choose to post what he wants. He obviously tried to give credit where it is due (otherwise a great many people would never have heard of your site) and he has a right to edit the content he posts as he sees fit. What is wrong with that? As for deleting Talkback posts - when you sign up for a username, there is a very clear message which explains that Harry has the right to edit, remove or ban entirely any posts he sees fit. You have to accept that before you get a user name. I am reading it as I write this. If you don't accept that, if you don't like it, don't accept a user name and don't post here. Post on your own damn site. Is it so hard to grasp that this is HARRY'S SITE, and as such, he has every right to control the content on it? I know full well that he is under no obligation to publish this post. What is wrong with the fact that Harry is able to make enough money on this site to support himself and a small staff? What is wrong with exercising a little editorial discretion? So your feelings have gotten hurt in the past. Big deal. If you are going to demand journalistic ethics, you need to accept the first, simplest fact of journalism: the media does not own the news, they just print it. Harry, don't let the bastards get you down.

  • June 14, 2000, 11:48 a.m. CST

    Hmm..

    by abeger

    Somewhere among all these posts, someone mentioned "Father Geek, who always seems to be getting Harry in trouble...". I smell a sitcom...

  • June 26, 2000, 9:18 a.m. CST

    Bad form, Harry

    by moviet00l

    It seems that Ain't it Cool News has found an unfortunate side effect of popularity - accountability. It's clear CA was trying to handle this issue privately and appropriately, but AICN couldn't return the courtesy. Publishing all of the recipients of CA's e-mail is a particularly underhanded move, showing not only bitterness, but also downright nastiness. I'm amused at how many of you don't think that integrity is important. The same thing happened to newspapers printed at the beginning of the USA's history. They didn't find it necessary to deal ethically with people, had no problem "embellishing" their stories, and generally did whatever they want. What happened? They became known as sources no one could trust, and went away, or they became the shameless rags we call "tabloids." AICN seems to be headed in that direction. Some of you will love it, and never question the site's integrity, but eventually no one will really believe what Harry's site posts until the "real" movie sites confirm it. And then, much like the tabloids, AICN will boast about how it "got that story first," ignoring the fact that 90% of its "scoops" were total BS. A toast to Ain't it Cools News: the future National Enquirer of internet movie sites.