scouts-l Mail Archive for June of 2000: Re: Anyone Out There From The BSA
Mike Montalvo (mike_montalvo@YAHOO.COM
Mon Jun 19 2000 - 02:36:26 CDT
> Secondly, there are many BSA professionals, Board members and
> Committee members who regularly monitor Scouting lists.
> Just as Rolling Stone magazine has been doing as evidenced by advance
> story copies being circulated on this forum. They use it to better
> understand what is on the minds of Scouters just as Rolling Stone is
> doing it to embarrass the movement.
1. Your assumption re: "Rolling Stone" is incorrect. Dozens and Dozens
of people (that I'm aware of) were contacted (over the past six months)
by the author (that wrote a commissioned piece) and they knew that an
article was coming out, just not when... :)
I found out the actual release date by continually visiting the Rolling
Stone site & monitoring the picture of the covers they store & seeing
the story on the cover a few days before the release date.
The excerpts that I posted in this forum came from a copy obtained from
Tower Records which got the Rolling Stone 2 days before the "official"
mass-market Friday release date.
Record stores that receive huge shipments of these types of magazines
usually get daily deliveries as opposed to the weekly ones at
7-Elevens, Eckerds, etc... I received email from some folks in Canada
that got it even earlier!
2. As far as I know, neither "Rolling Stone" nor the author monitored
any Scouting forum.
3. Rolling Stone did not do the piece to "embarass", they did the piece
to educate and examine the Boy Scout issue in light of the Dale case.
4. What parts did you find embarassing? Were they untrue?
> Personally, I thought the Rolling Stone article as a whole was
> flattering to the scouting movement. It was especially supportive of
> the BSA volunteers who are actually working with youth.
> YIS MIck Cole SM, Troop 62
Many people stressed to the author just how critical, important and
noteworthy were the contributions of these volunteers.
>From my understanding, Chuck had little or no knowledge re: the BSA
prior to doing this article.
It is a credit to the volunteers (and to the Scouts) that this aspect
shined through so strongly and made such an impression on the author.
(MAJ) Mike Walton (settummanque, the blackeagle) said:
> Now this is where I disagree with you on Rolling Stone "embarrassing
> the movement". The writer of the ten-page article, which examined
> the BSA in detail and as far as I can tell with my resources here,
> has been accurate on ALL sides of the issue, tried as hard as he
> could to get interviews with either the former Chief Scout Executive,
> the Deputy Chief Scout Executive, members of the BSA's External
> Communications Division, and with the BSA's spokesman (a gentleman
> who is from a public relations firm on retainer to speak for and
> provide information about the BSA). All had refused his more
> than 5 written requests and upteen telephonic requests for an
> interview or even a statement. Chuck then went to Scouters like
> myself, asking to place my comments within the article.
You're absolutely correct.
One item is especially telling:
"Not a single current BSA official agreed to be interviewed for this
story. When the organization's public-relations department learned of
my inquiries, I received two calls informing me that I was banned from
contact with any troop in America, and to stop calling anyone connected
to the Boy Scouts." - Chuck Sudetic
The Boy Scouts had numerous opportunities to contribute to the story.
It is simply *amazing* that Greg Shields would seek to somehow "ban" a
reporter from having contact with individuals when they were doing a
I *think* Mike Walton would agree that even reporters you don't like
and are a *pain* and *might* be working on a story that didn't put you
in the "best of lights" - you work with them.
You tell your side and sometimes do the "no comment" thingie...
I find it very hard to believe that a person doing a story that
examined some of the aspects of the duality of an organization would be
positively influenced by such a reception as Chuck Sudetic received.
Stop and think about this for a minute...
What if someone like Mike Walton were the "PR" firm for the BSA?
Someone that would communicate, respond & set people straight on items
that might appear slanted due to no input from both sides?
Would you have been happier with the balance?
Do You Yahoo!?
Send instant messages with Yahoo! Messenger.