I read both your posts and thought your personal views were extremely well
written. Unfortunately, others make light of it and do not read the full
post, or perhaps just read the hit words that gives them, or what they think
to be right, to post an uneducated answer. If it was their job, it would be
a different kettle of fish.
This is the very reason I prefer NOT to post much on here at all. Ignorance
is bliss.
All the best
Marie
On 5/31/07, Andes, Donald <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Posting a personal opinion in a public forum has far reaching
> implications, and I would hope that we all appreciate that. Posts cannot
> be retracted or edited, only amended to via additional postings, which
> unfortunately are not referred to in an original post. While this may
> seem like a minor annoyance for some, it can mean a long lasting mark
> that one may have to answer to in the future.
>
> In regards to my personal retort to David Breneman:
> I contained my original post to a review of the ARTICLE that was
> written, NOT the positioning of the company.
>
> I referred to the author, Norman Lebrecht, by name and selectively
> attempted to differentiate (for the benefit of everyone else on the
> list) what was publicly known fact, and what was speculative.
>
> My problem with David Breneman's post is that if someone was to ONLY
> read his post (the one in which he quoted me), without reading my
> original post OR the original article, it COULD be misinterpreted that
> the Speculation I was trying to deflect could actually be taken as my
> own words.
>
> Couple this with the fact that I am an employee of said company, which
> is transitioning from one owner to the next, and you may be able to see
> my perspective to David Breneman's reply, and my level of concern.
>
> Those on this list who work in Corporate or Government institutions may
> have a clearer idea of what I'm talking about, but I assure you that
> most interviews conducted nowadays are precluded by a quick Google
> search of your name. I don't want a search on my name to state opinions
> opposite to what I believe.
>
> I appreciate that David was making a joke, and I wasn't (nor am I now)
> commenting on that, but rather the way his joke may have put words in my
> mouth. Words that I was in fact trying to dispel.
>
> Had he either quoted my complete post, or omitted my posting completely,
> I would have had little interest in a retort.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Don Andes
> Director of Archives
> EMI Music
>
> - --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> Music from EMI
>
> This e-mail including any attachments is confidential and may be legally
> privileged. If you have received it in error please advise the sender
> immediately by return email and then delete it from your system. The
> unauthorised use, distribution, copying or alteration of this email is
> strictly forbidden. If you need assistance please contact us on +44 20 7795
> 7000.
>
> This email is from a unit or subsidiary of EMI Group plc.
>
> Registered Office: 27 Wrights Lane, London W8 5SW
>
> Registered in England No 229231.
>
>
> - --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
|