KDKA tease drives man to suicide.

[Bureau Chief]

KDKA should be ashamed of itself. I hope that management got reamed by corporate lawyers for this. For those of you who have not heard about it, KDKA aired promos aluding to a possiblity that a local pastor may ...and I repeat may have been doing something against his religion.....and maybe even illegal and then failed to include him in the actual report. But they showed his face in the promos. The situation drove the pastor to commit suicide. Heres the link to the Shop Talk article.

http://www.tvspy.com/shoptalk.cfm?page=1

In my opinion, this kind of crap is one of the prime reasons that local tv news is losing credibilty with its viewers. I sincerely hope that the other stations in town take the opportunity to kick KDKAs behind on air. If the pastor had actually done something illegal, then maybe.....and a real weak maybe, there was a story there. But there was no proof that what he had done was illegal. Maybe against his religion, but not illegal. This was a cheap shot plain and simple. Nothing more than a typical small minded attempt to regain their former status as a great station, in reality all it did was tarnish that rep all the more. I expected better from them. I hope that a huge profit eating law suit comes from this and somebody is sent to the beach for a few years. Disgraceful.

[The Mockingbird]

1) Whoever at KDKA thought this report was a good idea is an asshat.

2) KDKA didn't kill the minister.

3) Religious people need to get a grip about sex, namely, that it's not a big freaking deal.

[Chief]

The station isn't responsible for anyone's death. They're responsible for a story, and how anyone can say it's irresponsible when it didn't even air is ridiculous. If they're guilty of anything it's sensationalism.

This has been going on since the fictional Elmer Gantry.

It may sound harsh, but it you're looking for someone to blame try somewhere else. The pastor committed suicide because of his actions, not the station's.

[Bureau Chief]

They used his image in the promos without a story to back it up. They are not going to air it because theres nothing to the story other than this guy was visiting a porn shop. Theres nothing illegal about it BUT THEY ALLUDED to that, all for the sake of a few ratings points. Heres a suggestion for them....if they want ratings points, try taking the basic journalism textbook down off the shelf and reading, then put those lessons to use! Real news as opposed to teases, gotcha headlines and stripping anchors. OOOO theres a concept that hasnt been tried in a while! I have done some work for these weiners in years past, and I am ashamed to be associated with them. Nothing more than jerry springer tv news.

[MarkPA]

Why was the story killed, then?
Because it was Marty Griffin, so it was probably wrong.

[zeppelin42]

Originally posted by Mockingbird with cranberry sauce:
1) Whoever at KDKA thought this report was a good idea is an asshat.I agree.

2) KDKA didn't kill the minister.I really disagree.

They irresponsibly pushed him toward suicide in order to make a few bucks. I don't care what way you celebrate God. That's wrong in any religion.

3) Religious people need to get a grip about sex, namely, that it's not a big freaking deal.I disagree here, too. Sexual morality is an important part of how we all live. People who don't profess any belief in God are inclined to kill each other and themselves over a failure to understand and deal with their own sexual morality. If religious people don't have a grip on sex, it's because they're not really religious. It is immoral for a religious person to kill himself because of his own sexual conduct. God would simply not approve of that in any way.

If you want to go on and on about the different facets of sexual morality and how the vast majority of atheist and Christian Americans think they can just ignore it as a topic altogether, I think you and I will have informative, thought-provoking interactions on the topic, though I doubt we'll agree on anything.
-zep

[The Mockingbird]

People who don't profess any belief in God are inclined to kill each other and themselves over a failure to understand and deal with their own sexual morality.Actually, they are more inclined to kill each other and themselves over territoriality, which is a byproduct of human evolution.

There's also a big disconnect between biological and social evolution when it comes to sex.

Finally, the "hushed tones" and lack of frank discourse and honesty surrounding sexuality are the biggest precursors to infidelity.

[Creative Cutie]

As a former promo writer producer, I can tell you that this smells of lazy journalism (or non journalism). The lamer the piece actually is, the more we are told (by news directors and sometimes creative services directors who don't want to argue with news directors)to hype it up to get people to watch. If you have a great story, it sells itself. You don't have to use terms such as "possibly" or "at the very least" which scream "LAME STORY - DON'T WASTE THE TIME TO WATCH!" I was given the task of promoting an "investigative" sweeps story such as this. Before I wrote the promo, I read the story. It was clearly that reporter's way of trying to make a story out of nothing, rather than come up with and execute a real enterprising story. I brought the issue up to the news director and my boss, who both agreed that it did not warrant promoting. The reporter was not too pleased with our decision not to promote his piece, but I really couldn't have cared less. The piece still aired, but I was glad we did not try to placate the reporter by making the story out to be something it was not.

[Michigan J. Frog]

No one can make another person kill himself.

[adam & doctor drew]

the station didn't run it because it had info the guy was about to harm himself?

that GM is totally full of s**t.

memo to anyone who ever does anything wrong in Pittsburgh: just threaten to "harm yourself" and this station will never cover it.

[CleanBreeze]

Don't blame the station. Unless they gave him the pills....

[Signature on File]

Michigan J. Frog
Open Line Veteran
Member # 4050

posted November 06, 2006 01:35 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No one can make another person kill himself.

#################################################
You,Sir,! Haven't met my wife!!!!!

[Diplomat]

Originally posted by Michigan J. Frog:
No one can make another person kill himself.Correct.

[Pro]

Originally posted by Diplomat:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michigan J. Frog:
No one can make another person kill himself.Correct.</font>[/QUOTE]Well, hold the presses - Froggie and Dip agree on something!

Guess what? I agree, too. Sinners repent! :D

You can't hold the station responsible for anyone committing suicide. Now if the guy hadn't offed himself and wanted to file a demamation lawsuit, he MAY have had a case - depending on how a judge and/or jury saw a minister as being a "public figure". Some are, some arn't.

[CKMD]

If what he did wasn't bad, why did he off himself just because of a promo?
This begs the question...if it was just a porn shop, why get so concerned?
Maybe the station only had this guy at a porn shop...but he thought the station knew all the other crap (possible, alleged etc.) and he got scared.

It's sad, but the station is not at fault.

[DoctorDepends]

This columnist thinks a bit differently then you TV foofs who want to wash your hands. He raises many good questions. Remember, just because you can air a story, doesn't mean you should air a story. Sometimes it isnt even a story and the purpose is not to serve the public but to serve the ratings at the expense of the public.

###############################


Tuned In: After suicide, stations should rethink 'gotcha stories'
Monday, November 06, 2006

By Rob Owen, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

The "sweeps" months, when local TV news promotions and "special reports" are at their most over-the-top, have become a routine annoyance to discerning television viewers. Less than a week into the current November sweeps period, they've taken a tragic turn.

The Rev. Brent Dugan, pastor of Community Presbyterian Church of Ben Avon, committed suicide last week after KDKA-TV aired a series of promotions for a Marty Griffin report that suggested Dugan was involved in illicit behavior.

Some viewers sent me understandably emotional e-mails that were as hyperbolic as the TV news promos they decry (one subject line: "KDKA's Assassination of Ben Avon Pastor"). That goes too far. It was Dugan's choice to overdose on aspirin and alcohol in a Mercer County motel. But this tragic outcome ought to make reporters and news directors in all newsrooms, particularly KDKA management and Griffin, take a contemplative look at the impact salacious, fear-mongering sweeps-month promos and reports can have.

TV news has an obligation to uncover wrongdoing, but too often stations appear to be more excited about reporting stories that bring themselves attention. Were the accusations in Griffin's investigation true? Did the report merit airing? There's no way of knowing because the story never aired.

KDKA general manager Chris Pike said the station would have no comment beyond a statement released Friday night that expressed condolences to Dugan's family and friends and explained that KDKA had "conducted a monthlong investigation into reports of public and illegal sexual behavior by Pastor Dugan. The results of that investigation were scheduled to air [Thursday] evening. ... That evening the station received information from someone close to Pastor Dugan that indicated that he was considering doing harm to himself. As a result, the station made the decision not to air the story."

News director John Verrilli would not say whether Griffin's story will air; on Friday afternoon Pike said it was unlikely to air. Griffin did not respond to a message on his work voice mail seeking comment.

Promos for the report were broadcast for several days last week. They showed Griffin confronting Dugan about his alleged visits to an adult bookstore. It was unclear from the promos what other details the report would reveal.

During the 11 p.m. news Thursday, Griffin said his investigation "uncovered illicit, possibly illegal, activity by a local minister, activities which, at the very least, violated the rules of his denomination."

It's the use of key words -- possibly illegal, at the very least -- that call into question whether the report was worth doing in the first place. If the best Griffin could dig up was a trip to an adult bookstore (not illegal) and violation of church rules, then there's not much in it to serve the public interest. It comes off looking like another "gotcha"-style story designed for no benefit except the TV station's ratings.

What aired Thursday did not mention Dugan by name; he wasn't shown on screen. His church and denomination were not named. But Dugan was pictured in promos that aired for several days earlier on KDKA. The damage was done.

Even if you give station management the benefit of the doubt that they were unaware of Dugan's threat to himself when they chose to air the promos, you have to ask, do TV station promos for stories of wrongdoing have to be so licking-their-chops sensational? They're designed to lure viewers, but clearly they can have unintended consequences as well.

The possibility of the harm they can cause -- not only to the person under investigation, but to his family and community -- needs to be considered. (It should be noted, someone could just as easily be provoked by newspaper stories, but, tabloids aside, you don't usually see the print media stoop to scare tactics to promote upcoming reports.)

And why did KDKA air the promos and Thursday night's non-report and choose not to cover Dugan's suicide? Verrilli wouldn't comment on that, either.

For Griffin, provocative reporting is nothing new. During last November's sweeps -- a four-week period during which Nielsen Media Research measures viewership so stations can set advertising rates -- Griffin ventured onto Port Authority property while reporting on lax security at a bus garage. He was eventually found not guilty of trespassing on appeal.

Griffin worked at KXAS-TV in Dallas in the 1990s, when he reported on sexual assault allegations against two Dallas Cowboy football players by a former topless dancer. She later recanted, according to a 1997 Dallas Morning News report, and the players sued KXAS and Griffin. The station settled with the players for $2.2 million, according to the Dallas paper. Griffin's attorney told the paper that the reporter admitted no wrongdoing as part of the settlement.

One would hope the death of a human being would cause station management and staff to re-evaluate the way they cover and promote news, particularly sweeps- month features. Disgusted viewers may choose not to watch KDKA, but there's a problem with that approach: The lower that stations' ratings go, the more desperate for attention they tend to get and the greater the lengths they'll try. (Remember the tawdry tone of WPXI's newscasts when they were a perennial third place?)

With a thirst for profit driving media conglomerates' news coverage, this sort of thing could happen again. That may be the greatest tragedy of all.

[CKMD]

If this wasn't a story, why did he kill himself, then?
If it was false, he could've sued and owned a TV station.

And, yes, the writer of that article has a point...sweeps are stupid. That's why some stations do investigations all year round and don't just wait for ratings. Does that make them bad?

And I am not a "foof"! tongue.gif

[Pro]

Now hold on. No one has said that the station did NOT act irresponsibly. They may very well have. I said earlier that the station could have opened themselves up to a defamation lawsuit (had the guy lived - the dead cannot sue for defamation).

But as far as holding the station responsible for a suicide? No way. Just try that in court. It would get thrown out, post haste.

[Mom]

The whole thing reeks of smarm (if that's even a word). If the station ran the promo, then pulled the story because the man killed himself, it was a chickensh!t thing to do and suggests that the news dept. is taking some responsibility for the man's demise. They should have run their story as written/produced and at its conclusion, stated that the subject of their investigative piece committed suicide. It's part of the story. By dropping the story altogether they might as well admit, "Uh, it was never a story to begin with and we're sorry that someone is dead because of it." Is that how they feel because that's how it comes across.

[MarkPA]

Originally posted by Mayflower Mom:
The whole thing reeks of smarm (if that's even a word). If the station ran the promo, then pulled the story because the man killed himself, it was a chickensh!t thing to do and suggests that the news dept. is taking some responsibility for the man's demise. They should have run their story as written/produced and at its conclusion, stated that the subject of their investigative piece committed suicide. It's part of the story. By dropping the story altogether they might as well admit, "Uh, it was never a story to begin with and we're sorry that someone is dead because of it." Is that how they feel because that's how it comes across.Mom, is the realm of fairness, the story was pulled on Thursday, the station reported that, and the pastor killed himself Friday morning.

[DoctorDepends]

If there was no crime and no proof of a crime but merely a minister going into an adult bookstore, is that a story? How does that serving the public to "out" someone? I think the columnist was questioning the news value of the story itself. It seems to be gossip and not news. But so much of news seems to be gossip these days. There is more newstime to fill than news to fill it. Or at least the kind of "news" producers like to report. We get so little real news these days because its boring. Instead we get these investigative reports where the reporter is part of the story and it has very little value, IMO.

[Michigan J. Frog]

Originally posted by DoctorDepends:
This columnist thinks a bit differently then you TV foofs who want to wash your hands.Wait until the day he "drives" someone to commit suicide with one of his columns. Odds are, he'll see things very differently at that point.

[Diplomat]

Originally posted by Pro:
Now hold on. No one has said that the station did NOT act irresponsibly. They may very well have. I said earlier that the station could have opened themselves up to a defamation lawsuit (had the guy lived - the dead cannot sue for defamation).

But as far as holding the station responsible for a suicide? No way. Just try that in court. It would get thrown out, post haste.Morally responsible, perhaps.
Legally responsible, no.

[The Mockingbird]

Originally posted by Diplomat:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michigan J. Frog:
No one can make another person kill himself.Correct.</font>[/QUOTE]Well, actually... a more correct statement would be that no one can SAY SOMETHING to make another person kill himself.

There are torture techniques that will make people kill themselves as a means of escape, for instance. graemlins/eusa_shifty.gif

[zeppelin42]

Originally posted by Mockingbird with cranberry sauce:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />People who don't profess any belief in God are inclined to kill each other and themselves over a failure to understand and deal with their own sexual morality.Actually, they are more inclined to kill each other and themselves over territoriality, which is a byproduct of human evolution.</font>[/QUOTE]People who profess a true belief in the real God have washed themselves of their territorial attachments because they fully believe in the superiority of their spiritual attachment. You're right to say that non-believers are more inclined to kill each other and themselves, but so are non-believers. As for being a byproduct of human evolution, it may be the case, though I haven't see it conclusively proven one way or another.

There's also a big disconnect between biological and social evolution when it comes to sex.Not necessarily. The differences in biological and social evolution are due only to the interaction between the two and other outside forces. Allow me to use a linguistic example. The German word for "night" is "nacht", pronounced with a hard "ch" sound like in the end of "Bach". The English word "night" used to be pronounced with a similar sound because the Angles, Jutes, Saxons, and Frisians all spoke some form of German at the time they settled Celtic Britain. But because of the invasion of the Normans, who spoke French, the hard "ch" disappeared into and "ee" sound. Simply put, English would have been pronounced almost exactly like German if it weren't for the influence of French.

Similarly, our social view of sex would be synonymous with the biological view if it weren't for the construct of society, whatever that may specifically mean for any given situation. In some parts of Nepal, polyandry is in practise, a remnant from an earlier societal structure in which a dominant female led the society, revered for her obvious ability to give life - which was considered magickal - and her assumed ability to remove life just as easily. However, in Northern Africa (specifically Egypt) several thousand years ago, a patriarchal monothestic cult developed around the Sun, eliminating the female-worshipping elements of society and through diffusion eliminating those societal cults of their neighbours. We see this evidenced in the Bible, which advises the followers of the single sky-deity to avoid worshiping "Ashtoreth", the name of the single maternal Earth-deity of earlier times.

The development of sexuality in this patriarchal cult - to which Western civlisation traces the origins of its core sexual morality - was such that it focused solely on the sexuality of a family head, who was predominantly, but not exclusively, male. As a result, female homosexuality is not mentioned or discussed in the Bible, and society's current morality regarding it is based entirely upon inference from the laws regarding male familial heads. Furthermore, Western civilisation betstows moral/legal sexual restrictions upon the lower castes by inferring from the rules set for the upper caste in the Torah. For the mnale head of a family, it was forbidden for him to engage in anal intercourse with another man because it was his sexual "duty" to society to reproduce with as many women as possible so that his descendants - who would be his army - would grow strong in number.

Furthermore, it was illegal for any of his sons to engage in intercourse with his father's concubines or wives because doing so would interfere with the "natural" hereditary rank conferred upon that man's household on his death. We see similar family structures in populations of animals, notably in North America's deer. However, because the idea of "society" is not rigid in deer society as in human society, homosexuality is permitted to a larger degree. It is also permitted for the son of a buck to challenge his father and take his father's harem as his own, something that would have been considered anathema under the rigid societal structure developed 5-3KyBP

Finally, the "hushed tones" and lack of frank discourse and honesty surrounding sexuality are the biggest precursors to infidelity.They certainly encourage it. My father was never frank about my sexuality, but my mother was. Unfortunately for me, this initially led to me having a strongly feminine sexuality which angered my father. Only when my father was able to deal with his own sexual problems was he able to guide me back into the order he intended for me. I have a feeling, though, that the problems he experienced had been experienced by at least the three generations before him, and had been handed down without maternal interference until my father found the courage to stop it.
-zep

[facts]

Okay, just so I have this straight:

1. station has information.
2. station plans to air information, but DOES NOT because person threatens to hurt himself.

This alone, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, hurts the station's argument that its story has no relationship to a person's suicide, either before or after the fact.

we continue:

the person DOES commit suicide. Now that the airing of the information could in no way physically harm the person (he's dead), the station DOES NOT air it?

I respect the arguments above for and against a free press, that people have to take personal responsibility, etc. However, your arguments (and the station's) hinge on the timeline. Your argument runs counter to itself when you move backwards or forwards in the timeline.

[Paper Trail]

Tuned In: Griffin's baffling report on church boggles even its stewards
Friday, December 01, 2006

By Rob Owen, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06335/742591-237.stm)

The Marty Griffin Reputation Rehabilitation tour continued unabated last week with the KDKA reporter's second pro-church story. It comes in the aftermath of the Rev. Brent Dugan's suicide following KDKA promotions for a Griffin report that accused the minister of "public and illegal sexual behavior."

The Dugan incident was mentioned on ABC's "Good Morning America" Wednesday (and picked up by WTAE in its 5 p.m. news that day) in a story on TV reporters who take justice into their own hands and the sometimes deadly consequences.

Griffin's latest church report had no such tragic outcome, but it did raise some other questions, including: Why was it reported in the first place?

"Tonight one of the area's most hallowed churches, the mother church of the Catholic church, is the scene of a crime," said Patrice King Brown, reading the newscast's top story on Nov. 22. "Thieves have stolen everything from the vestments of the priests to the poor boxes from St. Paul Cathedral in Oakland, virtually anything that was not nailed down."

Problem No. 1: By using present tense, this script left parishioners with the mistaken impression that all these things had been stolen recently, said the Rev. Thomas Burke of St. Paul. Burke was interviewed for the report and said he was asked to list the things that were stolen, including Oriental rugs, a bride's honeymoon tickets and candle money. But the way the report presented the information, it appeared to have all happened recently and within a short period of time.

Problem No. 2: "Thieves started hitting this church a year ago," Griffin reported.

The reality: The Oriental rugs were stolen more than five years ago, the bride's tickets were taken three years ago. The vestments were stolen last year and theft of poor box and candle money has been going on "since eternity," Burke said.

Problem No. 3: "Back in the day when I was growing up, when I was an altar boy, I could do this with no problem, come up to St. Paul's [sic] Cathedral 24 hours a day, seven days a week and go inside. Not anymore," Griffin said, yanking on the locked church doors at 6 p.m. "They have to lock the doors."

In reality, the church doors are normally open from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m., but because it was the day before Thanksgiving, the church staff left early and the doors were locked at 5:30 p.m. The usual 8 p.m. closing time has been in effect for at least three years, and Burke, 36, doesn't remember the doors ever being unlocked 24 hours a day.

Problem No. 4: In the report's introduction, anchor Stacy Smith read, "In fact, the situation has gotten so bad the Pittsburgh diocese has now hired undercover officers to patrol." Griffin also mentioned this.

Not true, according to Bob Lockwood of the Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh.

"I have no knowledge of the diocese ordering anybody to do anything," Lockwood said. "That would be a parish decision."

Burke said the church does have plainclothes security guards, but they've been employed there since 2001 and are not recent hires, as the KDKA report implied.

"They're not undercover," Burke said. "They're part of our staff."

Lockwood said he was surprised when he saw teases for the report.

"I wondered, what crime occurred? What did I miss?" Lockwood said. "I was ready to run back to the office, and then I realized they were just dealing with things that have gone on. They go on anywhere."

Burke said he's been fielding concerns from parishioners, including a woman from Washington County who wanted to come to the church and wanted to know if it would be open.

"I just want people to know the real story and not sensationalize," Burke said. "It's not fair to the public. It totally twists one story and sound bite and turns it into something else."

So how did this report come about? Griffin did not return a call for comment. Burke said that after a newspaper article reported on recent thefts at local churches, he appeared on Griffin's KDKA-AM radio show to discuss the problem. When Griffin called back and asked for an on-camera interview for TV, Burke agreed.

KDKA news director John Verrilli said only that the station could have worded its "scene of a crime" introduction better.

Burke said he called Griffin after the report aired to express his concerns about the picture it painted and Griffin responded, offering an apology, and blaming producers for describing the church as a crime scene.

"I told him I do accept his apology, and I don't have any bad blood against him," Burke said. "I just want people to know our church is safe, and it is open, and they can come in here without getting robbed."

Burke said he, too, wondered if Dugan's death had something to do with this report.

"With his situation with that pastor, that was the first thing that came to me. I think he's trying to redeem himself," Burke said, noting that he did not know Dugan. "I guess that's what you call the November sweeps, right?"

[Fargin Icehole]

Originally posted by Can't Keep Me Down:
If it was false, he could've sued and owned a TV station.
Why on Earth would anyone want that?

[Legally Blonde]

Originally posted by Chief:
The station isn't responsible for anyone's death. They're responsible for a story, and how anyone can say it's irresponsible when it didn't even air is ridiculous. If they're guilty of anything it's sensationalism.

This has been going on since the fictional Elmer Gantry.

It may sound harsh, but it you're looking for someone to blame try somewhere else. The pastor committed suicide because of his actions, not the station's.Let's do a news story about the GM's sex life, make all his private moments public, and see how he reacts to that one! This was cheezy and uncalled for, no one deserves a media flailing for what they did in bed. If it's a sex crime committed, that's what courts are for!

[Pro]

The point is not if what the station did was "right" or "wrong". Only if they caused a suicide. Which is a misnomer, nobody or nothing can "cause" a suicide, other than the person killing themselves.

[ISTHISTHINGON?]

Originally posted by Mockingbird with cranberry sauce:
1) Whoever at KDKA thought this report was a good idea is an asshat.

2) KDKA didn't kill the minister.

3) Religious people need to get a grip about sex, namely, that it's not a big freaking deal.Well said.

[Another side]

Originally posted by Pro:
The point is not if what the station did was "right" or "wrong". Only if they caused a suicide. Which is a misnomer, nobody or nothing can "cause" a suicide, other than the person killing themselves.So if there had been no teases, if his picture hadn't ran in conjunction with a story where a preacher might have been photographed walking in to a porno store ... you believe he STILL would have committed suicide?

Can the station be accused of handing him the aspirin and booze and forcing him to drink and swallow? Of course not.

Can it be shown it "might have,", you know, "in the very least" pushed the aspirin and the booze just a little closer to him? You bet.

[facts]

Again, the station's decision not to run the story (while the guy was still alive) shows even the station disagrees with your thought that one cannot "cause" (or in some way contribute to) a suicide.

[The Mockingbird]

You know, you must be a Reverend with really strong convictions if some gossip is enough to lead you to commit the one sin in your faith that is an express ticket to Hell.

[rootboyslim]

Originally posted by Another side:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Pro:
The point is not if what the station did was "right" or "wrong". Only if they caused a suicide. Which is a misnomer, nobody or nothing can "cause" a suicide, other than the person killing themselves.So if there had been no teases, if his picture hadn't ran in conjunction with a story where a preacher might have been photographed walking in to a porno store ... you believe he STILL would have committed suicide?

Can the station be accused of handing him the aspirin and booze and forcing him to drink and swallow? Of course not.

Can it be shown it "might have,", you know, "in the very least" pushed the aspirin and the booze just a little closer to him? You bet.</font>[/QUOTE]Good luck getting an answer from this guy. By the way, You are right on here.