Invasion of Privacy
- Thread starter Tim G.
- Start date
- Status
porsche
Member
need to approach a gun friendly state legislator and ask him/her to sponsor a confidentiality bill patterened after another state's. basis would be the paper is publishing the names of gun owners, their addressses can be easily determined and they can be robbed. imagine the NYT PUBLISHING THE NAME OF EVERYONE WHO BOUGHT EXPENSIVE JEWLERY AT tIFFANY.
TEDDY
Member
LIST
funny for all of Mass gun laws one is prohibiting the publication of gun owners
names and adresses.
.
funny for all of Mass gun laws one is prohibiting the publication of gun owners
names and adresses.
.
Seminole
Member
This is already in the works.
What came of the allegation that the list had been adjusted to remove names of staff & staff's family before publication?
If it could be proven that they removed their own names or the names of loved ones then it would be obvious that they consider publishing the information to be a punitive action and not merely born of a desire to keep the public informed.
I would think that would put them in an indefensible position.
If it could be proven that they removed their own names or the names of loved ones then it would be obvious that they consider publishing the information to be a punitive action and not merely born of a desire to keep the public informed.
I would think that would put them in an indefensible position.
and it continues:
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2009/feb/14/editorials-another-attack-on-open-files/
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Encouraged by adverse reaction to a database on this newspaper's Web site, some Tennessee legislators want to make the list of gun-carry permit holders an exception to the state open records law.
Passage of the exception, one of several bills dealing with gun laws that have been introduced this year, would constitute a hasty retreat from the effort to make state government more transparent.
The list of gun permit holders should not be equated with medical records, investigative notes of the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, plans for how to handle riots in state prisons and other legitimate exceptions to the open records law.
The public, for any number of reasons, simply has a right to know who has been issued a permit to carry a handgun in public, just as it has a right to know who's licensed to practice medicine and who knows enough about the law to represent clients in court.
Making the list confidential would erode Tennessee's progress on the open government front. It would be a knee-jerk reaction to the recent discovery of a searchable database that has been posted on The Commercial Appeal Web site for two months.
The database drew little notice until the owner of a handgun-carry permit was charged with a shooting death that ended an argument over a parking space last week at a Cordova restaurant.
Protesters include those who believe it raises the risk of a home burglary for people on the list and those who say it makes a burglary more likely for those who aren't.
Proponents of the exception also raise the argument that, like the confidential information on driver's license records, information on gun carry permit records can be used for illegitimate purposes.
This page believes the public's right to the information outweighs those considerations. Handgun-carry permit holders have been granted a privilege that not everyone in the public enjoys, and without the list the public has no way of determining whether permits are being granted to people who shouldn't have them.
Are dangerous felons somehow obtaining permits to go about armed in public? The public has no way of finding out without access to a list of who has them.
Neither does this page support a flurry of bills that have been introduced this year to allow handguns to be carried into restaurants that serve alcohol, state and local parks and schools and to exempt from criminal prosecution people who shoot others in the protection of their property.
Such measures have always had the powerful support of the Tennessee Firearms Association and the National Rifle Association. They're said to stand a better chance of passing this year as a result of the new Republican majority in the General Assembly.
But police annals are filled with too many arguments that escalated to deadly violence to justify further proliferation of handguns in public. The cost in lives would be too high.
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2009/feb/14/editorials-another-attack-on-open-files/
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Encouraged by adverse reaction to a database on this newspaper's Web site, some Tennessee legislators want to make the list of gun-carry permit holders an exception to the state open records law.
Passage of the exception, one of several bills dealing with gun laws that have been introduced this year, would constitute a hasty retreat from the effort to make state government more transparent.
The list of gun permit holders should not be equated with medical records, investigative notes of the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, plans for how to handle riots in state prisons and other legitimate exceptions to the open records law.
The public, for any number of reasons, simply has a right to know who has been issued a permit to carry a handgun in public, just as it has a right to know who's licensed to practice medicine and who knows enough about the law to represent clients in court.
Making the list confidential would erode Tennessee's progress on the open government front. It would be a knee-jerk reaction to the recent discovery of a searchable database that has been posted on The Commercial Appeal Web site for two months.
The database drew little notice until the owner of a handgun-carry permit was charged with a shooting death that ended an argument over a parking space last week at a Cordova restaurant.
Protesters include those who believe it raises the risk of a home burglary for people on the list and those who say it makes a burglary more likely for those who aren't.
Proponents of the exception also raise the argument that, like the confidential information on driver's license records, information on gun carry permit records can be used for illegitimate purposes.
This page believes the public's right to the information outweighs those considerations. Handgun-carry permit holders have been granted a privilege that not everyone in the public enjoys, and without the list the public has no way of determining whether permits are being granted to people who shouldn't have them.
Are dangerous felons somehow obtaining permits to go about armed in public? The public has no way of finding out without access to a list of who has them.
Neither does this page support a flurry of bills that have been introduced this year to allow handguns to be carried into restaurants that serve alcohol, state and local parks and schools and to exempt from criminal prosecution people who shoot others in the protection of their property.
Such measures have always had the powerful support of the Tennessee Firearms Association and the National Rifle Association. They're said to stand a better chance of passing this year as a result of the new Republican majority in the General Assembly.
But police annals are filled with too many arguments that escalated to deadly violence to justify further proliferation of handguns in public. The cost in lives would be too high.
If this weak, confused argument is the paper's justification, and they're proud enough to actually print it, then logic is irrelevant in America, and socialism, complete socialism, is just around the bend.
I emailed this junior high editorial to a buddy, and the paper's sending page has written on it that my email won't be shared because the fishwrap "values my privacy." Yah, right, you hypocrites.
I emailed this junior high editorial to a buddy, and the paper's sending page has written on it that my email won't be shared because the fishwrap "values my privacy." Yah, right, you hypocrites.
cassandrasdaddy
Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2006
- Messages
- 4,206
time to put his kids address out there and make sure he knows it is
and it gets even better
this is from today's (Sunday) editorial page
sounds like they are starting to feel the heat:
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2009/feb/15/inside-the-newsroom-case-for-gun-permit-listings/
Inside the Newsroom: Case for gun-permit listings trumps emotional opposition
By Chris Peck (Contact), Memphis Commercial Appeal
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Misunderstandings with people who carry guns can turn ugly.
This past week it has been ugly at the newspaper, after passionate gun owners latched onto three very wrong ideas about why The Commercial Appeal's Web site now lists all those in Tennessee who have a permit to carry a concealed weapon.
--Wrong idea No. 1: The newspaper is against the Second Amendment that gives Americans the right to keep and bear arms.
-- Wrong idea No. 2: The newspaper is invading people's privacy by posting the permit-to-carry-guns list on its Web site.
-- Wrong idea No. 3: Posting the list is empowering criminals.
The Tennessee Firearms Association and others have fanned the frenzy against our Web site posting of the permit-to-carry list. Pro-gun groups orchestrated a protest campaign that has spread nationwide. By late last week, Commercial Appeal executives were receiving as many as 600 e-mails a day, along with dozens of phone calls at home, at work and on their cell phones. Maps to their houses, with ominous warnings, had been posted online.
Our crime? Putting up a Web-only database that allows people to search by name or ZIP code for those who have a permit to carry a concealed weapon in Tennessee. The list came from the Tennessee Department of Safety and is available to anyone who wants it, simply by contacting the agency's office. The state of Tennessee, to this point, has decided that the right to carry a concealed weapon comes with the responsibility of agreeing to have a public record of who is packing.
The newspaper did edit the state's publicly available list. We removed street addresses and birth dates from the information to lessen any chance that somebody might use information on the list for identify theft. As a result, our posted list of permit holders for concealed weapons has less information about individuals than the phone book, your voter registration form or the credit card you use to buy dinner at a restaurant.
No matter. The posting of this list somehow conjured up deep fears about personal safety, criminals and the media being soft on crime and hard on the Second Amendment.
This newspaper isn't soft on crime. We know that crime is the No. 1 issue that needs to be addressed in Memphis. We urge public officials to get tough on crime. We back Republican-led efforts to take a hard line on gun crimes and repeat offenders. Only last week we gave prominent coverage to Shelby County Mayor A C Wharton's call for a tougher gun-offender registry in Tennessee. We hope that proposal comes to pass so we can post the names of all who commit gun offenses and the names of all those arrested for carrying a gun without a permit.
And we're not enabling criminals by posting the list of Tennesseans who have carry permits.
Think about it for a minute. Many, if not most, households in Memphis possess a firearm. So you don't really need a list to find a house with a gun.
And, if criminals were checking the permit-to-carry list before picking a target, would they likely choose a house where they know the owner could be carrying a gun, or would they more likely steer away from that house to avoid a possible confrontation?
Neither logic nor common sense is carrying the day on this issue. It's emotion. After listening to dozens of phone calls, it seems that the issue, for them, boils down to a simple core equation: I have a constitutional right to possess a firearm; any effort to infringe on that right will be opposed.
For all those who are a notch or two away from a strict black-and-white view of gun rights, there's a powerful case to be made both for a permitting process to carry concealed weapons and for keeping that permitting process public.
To begin with, the permit-to-carry law helps identify responsible gun owners. If you are a felon, have committed a crime with a gun, have a history of mental problems, etc., you can't get a permit. That's good for society.
Next, violation of the permit-to-carry law can lead to an arrest. In other words, somebody stopped for a traffic violation or frisked at a bar, who has a gun but no permit, can be busted right there. Another plus.
Finally, when somebody who has a permit for a concealed weapon messes up with a gun, they lose their right to have that concealed weapon. For example, Harry Raymond "Ray" Coleman, the Cordova man charged recently with shooting a man to death after an argument about whether the dead man's SUV was parked too close to Coleman's vehicle, will lose his permit to carry a concealed weapon. Isn't that the way it should be?
That's a good segue into why the permit-to-carry list needs to stay public.
News events like the Feb. 6 shooting at Trinity Commons shopping center led many people to wonder, logically and instantly, who else might be packing a gun. At the point of that shooting, the online list of who is licensed to carry a concealed weapon became a matter of deep public interest. That's why, during the past week, thousands of people looked at the list that had been sitting mostly unnoticed on the Web site for two months.
A mom might now check the list to see if the parents at her kid's sleep-over next door had a concealed weapon permit. If so, maybe it would be worth talking to them to make sure the gun is locked up.
A school official, concerned about whether teachers were bringing guns onto school grounds, might check the list to see whether anyone on the staff has a permit to carry, and then have a discussion about it.
Business people who sell goods and services that might be of interest to those who carry concealed weapons might use the list to generate new leads.
But there is one overriding, enduring reason the permit-to-carry list needs to be public. Once a concealed weapon is pulled out at a shopping center, a hospital or a business, what happens next with that gun becomes a matter of public concern to everyone.
That's why commercialappeal.com posted the list. It's a tiny bit of local information, and we're in that business of gathering and distributing local information.
Granted, news organizations do have some things to learn about this changing media world where print is about stories and online is about data and search. We need to learn how to massage databases more efficiently to tease out particular information, such as how many convicted felons in Shelby County have a concealed weapons permit. (Nine, as it turned out when we did this story back in August 2008.)
We'll learn. The feedback, flaming and otherwise, from gun owners concerned about this issue has been helpful. But there isn't much room to go back on this mixing of news in print with data online. If it's not The Commercial Appeal doing this, then it will be Google or a hundred Web sites. As more news and information gathering shifts online, local newspapers like this one simply must make sure that those who are searching for information about local communities are directed to newspaper-based information sources. That's why we continue to add databases to our Web site for people to use. We've already got restaurant cleanliness scores, missing IRS refund checks and school test score results. We're working on addresses of sex offenders, real estate transactions and more.
So can we exhale on this?
The newspaper isn't anti-gun. We are pro-news and information. That's our job, and we want to do it right.
Chris Peck is editor of The Commercial Appeal. Contact him at 529-2390 or at [email protected].
this is from today's (Sunday) editorial page
sounds like they are starting to feel the heat:
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2009/feb/15/inside-the-newsroom-case-for-gun-permit-listings/
Inside the Newsroom: Case for gun-permit listings trumps emotional opposition
By Chris Peck (Contact), Memphis Commercial Appeal
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Misunderstandings with people who carry guns can turn ugly.
This past week it has been ugly at the newspaper, after passionate gun owners latched onto three very wrong ideas about why The Commercial Appeal's Web site now lists all those in Tennessee who have a permit to carry a concealed weapon.
--Wrong idea No. 1: The newspaper is against the Second Amendment that gives Americans the right to keep and bear arms.
-- Wrong idea No. 2: The newspaper is invading people's privacy by posting the permit-to-carry-guns list on its Web site.
-- Wrong idea No. 3: Posting the list is empowering criminals.
The Tennessee Firearms Association and others have fanned the frenzy against our Web site posting of the permit-to-carry list. Pro-gun groups orchestrated a protest campaign that has spread nationwide. By late last week, Commercial Appeal executives were receiving as many as 600 e-mails a day, along with dozens of phone calls at home, at work and on their cell phones. Maps to their houses, with ominous warnings, had been posted online.
Our crime? Putting up a Web-only database that allows people to search by name or ZIP code for those who have a permit to carry a concealed weapon in Tennessee. The list came from the Tennessee Department of Safety and is available to anyone who wants it, simply by contacting the agency's office. The state of Tennessee, to this point, has decided that the right to carry a concealed weapon comes with the responsibility of agreeing to have a public record of who is packing.
The newspaper did edit the state's publicly available list. We removed street addresses and birth dates from the information to lessen any chance that somebody might use information on the list for identify theft. As a result, our posted list of permit holders for concealed weapons has less information about individuals than the phone book, your voter registration form or the credit card you use to buy dinner at a restaurant.
No matter. The posting of this list somehow conjured up deep fears about personal safety, criminals and the media being soft on crime and hard on the Second Amendment.
This newspaper isn't soft on crime. We know that crime is the No. 1 issue that needs to be addressed in Memphis. We urge public officials to get tough on crime. We back Republican-led efforts to take a hard line on gun crimes and repeat offenders. Only last week we gave prominent coverage to Shelby County Mayor A C Wharton's call for a tougher gun-offender registry in Tennessee. We hope that proposal comes to pass so we can post the names of all who commit gun offenses and the names of all those arrested for carrying a gun without a permit.
And we're not enabling criminals by posting the list of Tennesseans who have carry permits.
Think about it for a minute. Many, if not most, households in Memphis possess a firearm. So you don't really need a list to find a house with a gun.
And, if criminals were checking the permit-to-carry list before picking a target, would they likely choose a house where they know the owner could be carrying a gun, or would they more likely steer away from that house to avoid a possible confrontation?
Neither logic nor common sense is carrying the day on this issue. It's emotion. After listening to dozens of phone calls, it seems that the issue, for them, boils down to a simple core equation: I have a constitutional right to possess a firearm; any effort to infringe on that right will be opposed.
For all those who are a notch or two away from a strict black-and-white view of gun rights, there's a powerful case to be made both for a permitting process to carry concealed weapons and for keeping that permitting process public.
To begin with, the permit-to-carry law helps identify responsible gun owners. If you are a felon, have committed a crime with a gun, have a history of mental problems, etc., you can't get a permit. That's good for society.
Next, violation of the permit-to-carry law can lead to an arrest. In other words, somebody stopped for a traffic violation or frisked at a bar, who has a gun but no permit, can be busted right there. Another plus.
Finally, when somebody who has a permit for a concealed weapon messes up with a gun, they lose their right to have that concealed weapon. For example, Harry Raymond "Ray" Coleman, the Cordova man charged recently with shooting a man to death after an argument about whether the dead man's SUV was parked too close to Coleman's vehicle, will lose his permit to carry a concealed weapon. Isn't that the way it should be?
That's a good segue into why the permit-to-carry list needs to stay public.
News events like the Feb. 6 shooting at Trinity Commons shopping center led many people to wonder, logically and instantly, who else might be packing a gun. At the point of that shooting, the online list of who is licensed to carry a concealed weapon became a matter of deep public interest. That's why, during the past week, thousands of people looked at the list that had been sitting mostly unnoticed on the Web site for two months.
A mom might now check the list to see if the parents at her kid's sleep-over next door had a concealed weapon permit. If so, maybe it would be worth talking to them to make sure the gun is locked up.
A school official, concerned about whether teachers were bringing guns onto school grounds, might check the list to see whether anyone on the staff has a permit to carry, and then have a discussion about it.
Business people who sell goods and services that might be of interest to those who carry concealed weapons might use the list to generate new leads.
But there is one overriding, enduring reason the permit-to-carry list needs to be public. Once a concealed weapon is pulled out at a shopping center, a hospital or a business, what happens next with that gun becomes a matter of public concern to everyone.
That's why commercialappeal.com posted the list. It's a tiny bit of local information, and we're in that business of gathering and distributing local information.
Granted, news organizations do have some things to learn about this changing media world where print is about stories and online is about data and search. We need to learn how to massage databases more efficiently to tease out particular information, such as how many convicted felons in Shelby County have a concealed weapons permit. (Nine, as it turned out when we did this story back in August 2008.)
We'll learn. The feedback, flaming and otherwise, from gun owners concerned about this issue has been helpful. But there isn't much room to go back on this mixing of news in print with data online. If it's not The Commercial Appeal doing this, then it will be Google or a hundred Web sites. As more news and information gathering shifts online, local newspapers like this one simply must make sure that those who are searching for information about local communities are directed to newspaper-based information sources. That's why we continue to add databases to our Web site for people to use. We've already got restaurant cleanliness scores, missing IRS refund checks and school test score results. We're working on addresses of sex offenders, real estate transactions and more.
So can we exhale on this?
The newspaper isn't anti-gun. We are pro-news and information. That's our job, and we want to do it right.
Chris Peck is editor of The Commercial Appeal. Contact him at 529-2390 or at [email protected].
Yes indeed... absolutely right.
That's why it's necessary for detailed information be posted on the Internet concerning the most personal details concerning the newspaper's staff. Readers have a right to this information so that they can evaluate the reliability, honesty and truthfulness of what is printed as news.
Who knows were felons might be hiding???
rainbowbob
Member
First, Peck write this...
Then, he writes this...
Didn't he just answer his own question?
Then he comes up with this gem...
Exactly! "...what happens next with that gun..." - NOT what happens before.
I feel like I've stepped through the looking glass or fallen down the rabbit hole with Alice after reading this nonsense.
Peck finishes with...
He's feeling it! Keep the pressure on this moron so he can't "exhale" until he removes the database.
Then, he writes this...
Didn't he just answer his own question?
Then he comes up with this gem...
Exactly! "...what happens next with that gun..." - NOT what happens before.
I feel like I've stepped through the looking glass or fallen down the rabbit hole with Alice after reading this nonsense.
Peck finishes with...
He's feeling it! Keep the pressure on this moron so he can't "exhale" until he removes the database.
Neverwinter
Member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2008
- Messages
- 1,049
For those of you who are working to spread the word about the unethical practices of this media organization, you might want to mention how these three statements are in conflict with each other.
If having knowledge of the people that you feel present a risk to your safety is a public concern, then the investigative notes of the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation(and any other law enforcement organization) should be as available. Isn't knowing the people who are under investigation for crimes more important than the information about people who as of yet are not even under suspicion? Wouldn't a mother want to keep her children away from suspected murderers and rapists?
Gungnir
Member
In the spirit of transparency, it might be a good idea to ask the following information be included in a Web based DB
1) How the employee's of the Newspaper have historically voted, and stand on important issues, healthcare, government oversight, the constitution, Roe v. Wade, Heller v. DC etc. So that everyone can weigh their reports and stories for bias
2) How frequently each reporter and editor had to print a retraction. Since we all see the primary report on the first page, but 3 weeks later the retraction is just before the small ads. This will help instill accountability in their reporting
3) Health, mental criminal records, plus any civil suits of the Papers employees for the same reasons as point 1
4) Anyone arrested, and the reason for the arrest too. Regardless of the ultimate result in court, since they were arrested for a reason. Ensure update later after charges are filed dropped and conviction if any
5) Police Officer records, for cases investigated vs. resolved, conviction rate, any internal disciplinary records, mental or other health records that may be pertinent to public safety.
6) All public servants i.e. Governor, Legislature, Fire Dept. Licensing, etc, full disclosure of criminal records, mental health records, health records where appropriate.
I could go on... ad nauseum but I won't in the interests of public safety
1) How the employee's of the Newspaper have historically voted, and stand on important issues, healthcare, government oversight, the constitution, Roe v. Wade, Heller v. DC etc. So that everyone can weigh their reports and stories for bias
2) How frequently each reporter and editor had to print a retraction. Since we all see the primary report on the first page, but 3 weeks later the retraction is just before the small ads. This will help instill accountability in their reporting
3) Health, mental criminal records, plus any civil suits of the Papers employees for the same reasons as point 1
4) Anyone arrested, and the reason for the arrest too. Regardless of the ultimate result in court, since they were arrested for a reason. Ensure update later after charges are filed dropped and conviction if any
5) Police Officer records, for cases investigated vs. resolved, conviction rate, any internal disciplinary records, mental or other health records that may be pertinent to public safety.
6) All public servants i.e. Governor, Legislature, Fire Dept. Licensing, etc, full disclosure of criminal records, mental health records, health records where appropriate.
I could go on... ad nauseum but I won't in the interests of public safety
Seminole
Member
What a silly editorial. He characterizes the opponents of the CA's action as emotional and irrational, while the alleged logic in this editorial has holes big enough to drive a MACK truck through.
Seminole
Member
I forgot--Sunday's editorial also illustrates the crafty use of half-truth. Peck wrote:
The truth of the matter is that, though Peck implies that the birth dates and street addresses were removed before the database was posted, the database as originally posted DID contain these pieces of information. They were only removed after we complained that the information could lead to identity theft. Everyone knows that once information has been posted on the internet there is no way to call it back. It is there forever, cached in innumerable archives.
Lying, elitist, knee-jerk, irrational, lying, better-than-thou, lying, freedom-fearing liar!
The truth of the matter is that, though Peck implies that the birth dates and street addresses were removed before the database was posted, the database as originally posted DID contain these pieces of information. They were only removed after we complained that the information could lead to identity theft. Everyone knows that once information has been posted on the internet there is no way to call it back. It is there forever, cached in innumerable archives.
Lying, elitist, knee-jerk, irrational, lying, better-than-thou, lying, freedom-fearing liar!
AKAMac
Member
"We're working on addresses of sex offenders, real estate transactions and more."
I'm surprised that they consider CCW a greater threat than sex offenders and also categorize them with potential home buyers in the same breath.
I'm going to Florida in April to look at properties; I'm now on a list because I want a place for winter retirement. Geesh; I need to have a CHANGE in my logic.
Good luck Tennessee, you are going to need it
I'm surprised that they consider CCW a greater threat than sex offenders and also categorize them with potential home buyers in the same breath.
I'm going to Florida in April to look at properties; I'm now on a list because I want a place for winter retirement. Geesh; I need to have a CHANGE in my logic.
Good luck Tennessee, you are going to need it
Lightninstrike
Member
Its not a privilege you idiot, its a right.
The "public" is not the arbiter of who can and cannot own and carry a firearm so giving them a list to "determine" who should and should not be allowed is asinine.
P.S. Good luck in the fight.
luzyfuerza
Member
Did you notice how the CA has already convicted Ray Coleman of a crime?
Is that the way that it really should be?
Seminole
Member
Alright, it is time to contact the businesses that advertise with the Commercial Appeal and tell them we are unhappy with the decision of the CA and will not buy from businesses that furnish them advertising dollars with which this database is maintained. From a perusal of the Sunday paper, the biggest advertisers seem to be car dealerships, furniture stores, and department stores.
Let's start with these:
Bartlett Home Furnishings
2755 Bartlett Blvd.
Bartlett , TN
38134
Bus: 901-388-6030
Fax: 901-388-6552
Royal Furniture
800-294-8450
[email protected]
Haverty's Furniture
6870 Winchester Road
Memphis, TN 38115
901-795-5577
Haverty's Furniture
2825 Wolfcreek Parkway
Memphis, TN 38133
901-380-4150
Samuels Furniture & Interiors--There are two stores:
Poplar Store
5508 Poplar Ave
Memphis,TN 38119
(901) 761-4998
Cordova/Thomasville Store
1615 N. Germantown Pkwy
Memphis,TN 38016
(901) 624-7738
Hobby Lobby: there are three HL stores in Memphis, as follows:
Hobby Lobby
7986 Highway 64
Bartlett, TN 38133
(901) 266-4346
Hobby Lobby
950 W. Poplar St.
Collierville, TN 38017
(901) 861-7575
Hobby Lobby
1991 Exeter Road
Germantown, TN 38138
901) 757-4419
Department stores are also big advertisers, but I'm not sure how advertising decisions are made in this case.
Dillard's Wolfchase
2700 N Germantown Pkwy
Memphis, TN 38133
(901) 383-1029
Dillard's Oak Court
4433 Poplar Ave
Memphis, TN 38117
(901) 685-0382
(901) 374-7479 - Fax
Macy's Oak Court
4545 Poplar Ave.
Memphis, TN 38117
901-766-4199
It's hard to find the car dealership information, primarily because just a few companies own numerous and varied dealerships. Presumably a single entity places advertising for all of each company's dealerships. Can you help find the appropriate contact for the following?
Gossett Motors
Sunrise motors
Let's start with these:
Bartlett Home Furnishings
2755 Bartlett Blvd.
Bartlett , TN
38134
Bus: 901-388-6030
Fax: 901-388-6552
Royal Furniture
800-294-8450
[email protected]
Haverty's Furniture
6870 Winchester Road
Memphis, TN 38115
901-795-5577
Haverty's Furniture
2825 Wolfcreek Parkway
Memphis, TN 38133
901-380-4150
Samuels Furniture & Interiors--There are two stores:
Poplar Store
5508 Poplar Ave
Memphis,TN 38119
(901) 761-4998
Cordova/Thomasville Store
1615 N. Germantown Pkwy
Memphis,TN 38016
(901) 624-7738
Hobby Lobby: there are three HL stores in Memphis, as follows:
Hobby Lobby
7986 Highway 64
Bartlett, TN 38133
(901) 266-4346
Hobby Lobby
950 W. Poplar St.
Collierville, TN 38017
(901) 861-7575
Hobby Lobby
1991 Exeter Road
Germantown, TN 38138
901) 757-4419
Department stores are also big advertisers, but I'm not sure how advertising decisions are made in this case.
Dillard's Wolfchase
2700 N Germantown Pkwy
Memphis, TN 38133
(901) 383-1029
Dillard's Oak Court
4433 Poplar Ave
Memphis, TN 38117
(901) 685-0382
(901) 374-7479 - Fax
Macy's Oak Court
4545 Poplar Ave.
Memphis, TN 38117
901-766-4199
It's hard to find the car dealership information, primarily because just a few companies own numerous and varied dealerships. Presumably a single entity places advertising for all of each company's dealerships. Can you help find the appropriate contact for the following?
Gossett Motors
Sunrise motors
Now you're on the ball!
All of these businesses (car dealerships, furniture stores, and department stores) are likely having a hard time in today's rough economy. They are not going to like getting pulled into something like this when they don't have their own dog in the fight. If any of them start calling the newspaper - or better yet, canceling advertising you can expect a panic in the paper's boardroom.
The last thing they can afford is to get a reputation for starting controversies that they’re advertisers get dragged into.
I am sure they never expected anything like this.
All of these businesses (car dealerships, furniture stores, and department stores) are likely having a hard time in today's rough economy. They are not going to like getting pulled into something like this when they don't have their own dog in the fight. If any of them start calling the newspaper - or better yet, canceling advertising you can expect a panic in the paper's boardroom.
The last thing they can afford is to get a reputation for starting controversies that they’re advertisers get dragged into.
I am sure they never expected anything like this.
So long as you are polite, don’t use foul language, and don’t make any threats beyond saying you intend to take future business elsewhere; no one can say they are being harassed. They may have gotten thousands of e-mails and phone calls, but you have no way of knowing that. It is advisable to call during normal business hours, not 2:00 am, in the morning…
They are a business. You are a potential customer. They’d better darn well listen to what you have to say.
Carl N. Brown
Member
Apparently the Commercial Appeal is not accepting further letter-to-the-editor responses to their pistol permit database. And I had a response composed and ready to post. Oh, well.
And in the interest of balance, one of the responses published by Commercial Appeal:
Oh, well.And in the interest of balance, one of the responses published by Commercial Appeal:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked