The other side of the lens
That was me, on Sunday morning. MSNBC called me in (I've done this a few times now) to share an opinion on whatever they think needs an opinion. I've done the Fall TV season, I've done James Bond. (Well, that was for CNN.) (And I wish I'd done James Bond in other ways, see below posts.)
Sunday they had a burning need to know about the O.J. show that was supposed to air on Fox on November 27 and 29. I called up our resident TV expert on Saturday and got a few good tidbits over the whole thing to flavor the report, one of which was "there's a 10-15% chance they won't even air the show."
Which, saints preserve us all, they have just now announced they won't. Also, the book is being pulled.
Truth is, once the decision is made — the devil gets his signature — to do something like that O.J. book and TV show, I actually support airing/publishing. (I'd prefer if nobody decided to do it in the first place, but once jeopardy has attached, so to speak, I believe in the concept.) I don't like him, or what he has to say, but he does have the right to say it. As we should have the right to publicly shun him. Censorship in any form hurts us all. If what can be said is so damaging to your beliefs, it might be time to re-address your belief system.
What I wanted, I detailed here: Get the jurors from the case to talk. Any regrets? Even one says, "Well, I've had a few," you've got gold. And if anyone says "No, I firmly believe in what I did," you've also got gold.
And now that the book and show are history, I still think the juror show is one worth pursuing.
Yours sounds like an exciting life…and re: the OJ thing…so glad it’s not going to happen. I’d love to hear about your writing sometime.