There is a new Bonfire related letter to the editor in this morning's Eagle. I would recommend that rather than writting a rebuttal letter (this could go on for ever), that you start by contacting the Eagle (wouldn't hurt to contact KBTX & ABC 40) and asking them to do a story on ASB's cleanup efforts - what you are planning, and why you are waiting.... This will reach a larger audience and not look like you are just snapping back. You might go with a press release and then follow up with phone calls, but I'd start with contacting the Eagle.

[This message has been edited by College Station Aggie (edited 1/13/2006 9:02a).]

Super. I'll look into it and bounce it off some others first.

-------------------------------------------------------
If you can read this, thank a teacher.
If you can read this in English, thank a Soldier.

FYI:

quote:

---

D.J. Rust (Eagle, 4 Jan) has a good point about bonfire priorities. Why are Aggies expending energy and time planning another bonfire when the present one has not been finished?

Reports in The Eagle suggest that organizers intend to walk away from the dismembered stack and prepare to cut more wood for this November's bonfire. The burn ban was a hard break for last November's bonfire organizers.

I encourage the organizers to clear the site they have already used and show that Aggies stay with it when things don't go as planned.

JERRY JENSEN

College Station

---

http://www.theeagle.com/stories/011306/opinions_20060113018.php

By replying to one fly in the soup, I have invited the entire swarm for lunch. Nice.

-------------------------------------------------------
If you can read this, thank a teacher.
If you can read this in English, thank a Soldier.

exactly, instead of responding "tit for tat", nip their argument in the bud by responding to the SOURCE of their MISINFORMATION - The Eagle (although I don't remember seeing an article, but I might have missed it, not what I'm usually scanning for). Don't get angry, just present the correct information at the source.

I smell Wayne with this article.

CSA- What got the whole mess kicking was what the ***holes wrote about the "criminal violation" of burn ban......

____________________________________________________________
Proudest member of the Fightin Texas Aggie class of 08 Beat the h*** outa tu A-A-A-A-A!!!!. May bonfire forever burn in our hearts.....and may the Twelfth Man ever burn it in memory and in hope for the future.

Ag_of_08 - understood, but if you are trying to win the battle of public opinion, you can't fight fire with fire (no pun intended) - you've got to stop the source of the fire. Get folks on your side and the battle is half won.

There were always nay-sayers about Bonfire when it was University sanctioned, but they were kind of considered crackpots by the rest of the community. Local folks don't know how to respond to an o/c Bonfire, but if you show them you aren't a bunch of spoiled kids, but rather a responsible group of adults trying hard to maintain something before it is lost, you'll get community support again.

I'm not saying you have to PC down Bonfire, but remember, when it was on campus, you had university professionals keeping an eye on the overall Bonfire image.

[This message has been edited by College Station Aggie (edited 1/13/2006 1:04p).]

No no no, i was refering to the eagle. They wrote an article out fo the blue shortly before bonfire was burned the first time, right as the injunction was coming out attacking it. Im not shure there the reason for the attempted injunction, but they didnt help. It wasnt just letters to the editor, the eagle staff stuck there nose into something they shouldnt have.

____________________________________________________________
Proudest member of the Fightin Texas Aggie class of 08 Beat the h*** outa tu A-A-A-A-A!!!!. May bonfire forever burn in our hearts.....and may the Twelfth Man ever burn it in memory and in hope for the future.

True - they like to make the news rather than report it, but if you consistantly spoon feed them stuff and play on the general laziness of reporters, you can get them on your side.

Edit: See post below.

[This message has been edited by DualAG (edited 1/14/2006 9:48a).]

I just exchanged email with Jerry Jensen, the author of the letter that appeared in Friday morning's Eagle. Dr. Jensen teaches petrolium engineering at A&M and is an all-around good guy He's a member of my church.

He's relieved that ASB remains dedicated to cleaning up the mess before going full speed ahead with plans for 2006 Bonfire.

He suggests that your group write another letter to the editor, this time using more civil verbiage, to explain your cleanup plans and reassure the community.

I agree. Just because the last letter backfired doesn't mean you shouldn't try again. You need to do damage control. Then, you can take College Station Aggie's suggestion about generating positive publicity when the cleanup actually begins.

Opie, both you and Mr. Jensen have used up your one letter per month allotment in the Eagle, so I'd suggest another officer of the organization sign it.

Here is one suggested version:

Editor,

In reply to Jerry Jenson's concerns (Eagle, Jan. 13), be assured that the officers of Aggie Student Bonfire remain dedicated to cleaning up the remains of November's Bonfire at Hot Rod Hill.

We would prefer to burn what remains, but would do so only after sufficient rainfall triggers revocation of the country burn ban, and then only after consultation with the property owner and country officials.

If burning remains impractical, we will do what is necessary to remove the debris by other means.

/s/ (whoever is designated to sign the letter)
Title, Aggie Student Bonfire


[This message has been edited by DualAG (edited 1/14/2006 9:50a).]

A week later, but yeah, DualAg nailed it on the head.

^
^
^

The window of opportunity to rebut Dr. Jensen's well-intentioned but factually incorrect letter is rapidly closing.

Will anyone in the oranization write in?