Forgot to mention this in my last post, but I also found 100+ news articles about her death from newspapers all across the US. I don't have much interest in them myself, but I can dump them if anyone else does. Just wanna know if there's any demand first because it'll probably take a few hours to compile them all in a .zip file and I'm #lazy. (I'll be happy to do it if anyone does want them though!)
Forgot to mention this in my last post, but I also found 100+ news articles about her death from newspapers all across the US. I don't have much interest in them myself, but I can dump them if anyone else does. Just wanna know if there's any demand first because it'll probably take a few hours to compile them all in a .zip file and I'm #lazy. (I'll be happy to do it if anyone does want them though!)
Dump them. Where did you find them? Did you collect them yourself?
Forgot to mention this in my last post, but I also found 100+ news articles about her death from newspapers all across the US. I don't have much interest in them myself, but I can dump them if anyone else does. Just wanna know if there's any demand first because it'll probably take a few hours to compile them all in a .zip file and I'm #lazy. (I'll be happy to do it if anyone does want them though!)
I'd be very interested in reading them. The only info I know about her death comes from the article so it'd be interesting to see an actual news story about it
So, I have just been put on a warning at FindADeath... As a result, I won't be using the site anymore. Before you pass judgement, hear me out:
On the 19th of February, FAD user itwbtc16 posted a selection of pages from the Christine Chubbuck police report, confirming that, of the two cameras there, one was locked into 2 guests waiting to be interviewed (Linda "Shay" Taylor's camera) and the other was framed up on Christine's head and shoulders (Jean Reid's camera).
Testimonies of Gordon and Lin aside (because refuting them is apparently a favourite pastime of a lot of people), this proves that the angle in the fake is inconsistent with that of the real video and is, hence, a fake.
Enter FAD user Upset, who refuses to acknowledge ANYTHING I try to point out to him, the police report included (which I tried on several occasions to draw his attention to, only for him to outright ignore it for the sake of his unwavering blind faith of the video being real). You might also recognise him from the NationSquid forums, where he and I have had more than a few heated arguments over this (and where he has NOT ONCE acknowledged my notes on the police report and, realistically, probably never will).
Anyway, today itwbtc16 posts a new message, backing up the fact that the police report conflicts the fake and that the video, therefore, cannot possibly be real. I decide to reply and thank him for using some common sense, since, like I mentioned earlier, most everybody was just completely ignoring my posts in an utterly baffling display of ignorance.
My comment is then responded to, by a FAD moderator, cindyt, who says (and, I'm paraphrasing here, but this was the long and short of it): "anybody is entitled to believe whatever they want to, and they have the right to ignore any evidence you present them with, too", which, in my opinion, demonstrates an appalling lack of integrity on her part and that of the site in general. Evidently, pageviews are of a higher priority to them than getting their facts straight.
Heck, by cindyt's ruling, I can say that the sky is red, and it doesn't matter HOW many people present me with evidence to the contrary, there is apparently nothing wrong with me completely discounting that evidence. A certain Family Guy skit comes to mind...
So, I decided to respond to her message, explaining that while I agree wholeheartedly about people being entitled to their opinions, that, given the fact that time and time again, people blatantly ignored what I was saying, only replying with things like "you're wrong, it's real", or "you can't argue with photographic evidence", that I was well within my rights to be frustrated about it. All I wanted was for people to acknowledge the points I was putting forward, as I was acknowledging theirs. Anyway... we all know how much moderators love being contradicted, and so I was inevitably given a warning (despite being perfectly civil in my messages, mind you).
So yeah, that's that. You won't be seeing me around FAD anymore and it's a pity, because I feel as though I was part of the minority of people there being logical about the whole situation. But hey, if they want to believe that the earth is flat, then that's their prerogative. It's just a damn shame, because up until now, I really thought they were a reputable source of information.
Some of you may be wondering why I am so high strung when it comes to this fake video in particular, allow me to explain: the notion of someone recreating a known suicide video for the sake of publicising their YouTube channel is, frankly, revolting. I was the one who had to do the unpleasant thing and ask Gordon about this (which I took no pleasure in, I assure you), bringing up an event which I'm sure still scars him to this day, all because of an insensitive, attention seeking YouTuber faking it and then refusing to own up to it. It's despicable. As such, I feel as though I now have a responsibility to get the truth out there.
Some time ago, I stated that I had no intentions of bringing any condemnation towards NationSquid, but now, more than a month on without having owned up to the fake, I believe he is truly deserving of it. What he did was wrong and it must be protested. And if I'm the only one who's going to do that, then so be it, but I'm not going to stop putting the word out and letting people know that it's fake, until such a time as NS admits that it is.
I'll leave you with this note from cindyt herself, a quote by way of the founder of FAD, Scott Michaels; it speaks volumes really:
"Why let the truth get in the way of a good story?"
I'm still an active member of FAD and will remain impartial regarding the debating side of things - however, one finds a strong sense of irony in a forum which for 10 years now has been discussing and respecting the life of Christine Chubbuck, a woman against 'if it bleeds, it leads' and sensationalist 'entertainment' journalism, but then who promote "Why let the truth get in the way of a good story?" on that very discussion page. Is that not part of the exact thing Christine had a problem with?
I'm still an active member of FAD and will remain impartial regarding the debating side of things - however, one finds a strong sense of irony in a forum which for 10 years now has been discussing and respecting the life of Christine Chubbuck, a woman against 'if it bleeds, it leads' and sensationalist 'entertainment' journalism, but then who promote "Why let the truth get in the way of a good story?" on that very discussion page. Is that not part of the exact thing Christine had a problem with?
That's why I bailed. For a moderator to so clearly endorse what are essentially conspiracy theories over hard fact is totally irresponsible and it completely trashes their credibility; cindyt really ought to have known better. I have nothing against anybody who uses FAD, but personally, I want nothing to do with the site anymore and will not be returning. If the staff there won't take responsibility for ensuring that the facts are first and foremost (and, in fact, seem to be of the exact OPPOSITE view), then why bother engaging in discussion at all? Especially if they go to such lengths as to purposely ignore hard evidence every time it's presented to them (which, according to cindyt, is totally fine and not problematic in any way) - notice how they STILL have not ONCE acknowledged the notes on the police report you and I have been putting forward? Where does this kind of nonsensical level of blind faith even come from? I just can't fathom it, it's one of the most bizarre displays of ignorance I've ever seen, online or off.
I think they're still nice pictures to have regardless. They certainly add a level of humanity to them, regardless of how it was achieved.
In other news, what do people think the likelihood of that one existing episode of Suncoast Digest actually being made public at any point is? I think it's such a shame that of the two pieces of footage of Christine that we are aware were actually taped and are still in existence, the one which many would agree should be made public (i.e. the normal episode), isn't. There's only, like, 2 or 3 places in the US now that can actually digitalise the format on which her final broadcast is currently on, whereas that standard episode has already been digitalised.
