[lit-ideas] Re: Amanda Knox
- From: Andy <mimi.erva@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 11:49:39 -0700 (PDT)
I would wonder who funded the book. It's very possible that she really is
innocent. But, and again I'm not taking a position one way or the other, but
it's standard procedure, quite literally, definitely on the part of
pharmaceutical companies and oil companies, to ghost write studies and other
important literature. P.R. companies routinely hire 'scientists' and other
'experts' to make their case, and they do, to where climate change (spearheaded
by ExxonMobil) is now belief based rather than data based. Look what happened
with the wild goose chase called Whitewater, prosecuted BTW by the New York
Times. (That I think was pure journalistic fiction which ran for five years.
I don't think a P.R. company had anything to do with Whitewater, it's just an
example of how anyone can write anything.) I think if one goes to a P.R.
company they offer a package. With something this sensational, I wouldn't be
surprised if a book/movie contract
wasn't part of that package, and *of course* they'll try to prove her
innocent. So...call me cynical, but I'd need to know how unbiased the authors
were before I believe their conclusions.
Andy
________________________________
From: David Ritchie <ritchierd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, October 1, 2011 1:05 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Amanda Knox
For interesting background on the case, I recommend Douglas Preston and Mario
Spezi, "The Monster of Florence." The last section of this is dedicated to an
analysis of the prosecution case in the Knox trial. The authors think she's
innocent.
David Ritchie,
Portland, Oregon
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
