Talk:Merrell Williams, Jr.

September 15, 2008 - This article was one of the ones ported over from TDO with much of the information intact, and with poor referencing. After reading the comments on this article (below) which were presumably made by Merrell Williams, I went through the article and removed some of the more inflammatory and opinionated-sounding material.

August 02, 2009 - The noted appendage is remarkable in that the site www.tobacco.org has, with some degree of misunderstanding, spent years with a consummate notion of reporting what she is saying. Here, she is "adjusting" what is said, but still adds insult to injury. The editing attempt by Landman, who apparently did not exist in tobacco issues until 1997, has pulled up one of the spiteful pieces of this spiteful site TDO. The "Landman edit" was the original work, so it was known, of Michael Tacelosky, who freely uses the St. Petersburg Times out of context. While it may or may not be true, there is now contact with the editorial staff at St. Petersburg Times,[ having a copy of the original printing], and intend to go over what is written line by line in an up-coming appointment. I don't know why the benefactors of Merrell Williams go so far out of the way to do what they do, perhaps because I disagree with "tobacco advocacy groups" as pawns who are very often misguided in their effectiveness to "help" and therefore do quite the opposite, or, more contentiously that they are simply there for the usefulness of what is actually believed, or, in some cases, as the final analysis of the Master Settlement proves, in it for the money. Whatever it is, there's no objection to the truth IF it is the truth. In the appended item which user Landman adds in the site, there is no truth, and, if the article remains,[it's still ON the page, so what's the admission of 'correction'? None.] the ultimate footnote shall be improved upon by the sources, particularly the St.Petersburg times. If "Mr Butts" is corrected, there isn't any reason to blur the image further by allowing the Landman/Burton content to morph the www.tobacco.org (TDO) ambiguous, false, and malicious content which is highlighted in color. The content below, assumed written by Landman, is response to set "Mr Butts" right. However, in the means of so doing, it was the point of the whole original www.tobacco.org article - not to augment it's falseness. Certainly if it's kept as it is in some form, it isn't changed.

Anne Landman, TobaccoWiki editor

Comment
The following note was added to the article page by User:Merrel123. --Bob Burton 16:15, 14 September 2008 (EDT)


 * Edit: there is no fact in the paragraph concerning "Mr. Butts". Is it o.k. if I try to get it right since you're putting this up, and have done so, for years? I really think it would serve the public interest if the person who has the most knowledge in this matter, in this case you're writing about myself, which indeed I know, that the expectation falls at least within the concept of reality and has certain limitations. History doesn't have to be revised, but it does have to be as close to correct as possible. As a journalism student, and with a Ph.D., as a University educator, as a person who actually can be the voice for the best and most reasonable account of a "bio", much more, an actual history, it would be helpful to add the sum total as I alone can do. I'd appreciate it because as the mush reads in the non-accountability, but use of footnotes which are in themselves not fact, I want to straighten this out. Let me. Having written a dissertation, I know that all I can see here is some odd, malicious trivia, which can be quite simply fixed. I have to make the attempt to get you straight, and get it straighter [sic]. First thing, there are whole and half pieces which were written by Pulitizer prize journalist, David Barstow, and I can't help but think that David's NY Times respect for journalism would like some of this taken in context of his own work which is published in the St. Petersburg Times; second, the product of his work is intellectual property per se, and, as this document loosely cribs from Barstow's feature stories (there were two), the context, which often was brilliant, is tongue-in-cheek, and very often humorous. The effect of not using fact-check dictates that inadequate and even malicious data is assembled, put on the web, and certifed as truth. It's not a by-product of democracy to resourcefully recreate history. Mr. Butts, for example, is a pivitol disguise, most likely associated with Don Barrett, but what is the purpose in allowing misinformation?