Cartoon Network CEO Resigns Over Aqua Teen Scare 710
DesertBlade writes "Jim Samples, CEO of Cartoon Network, has resigned over the bomb scare prompted by the Aqua Teen marketing campaign. Turner (CN's parent company) ended up paying over 2 million in restitution to the city of Boston, and a man with a thirteen year record at the company has lost his job. Though many people have been citing this as 'the ultimate successful advertising campaign', there have obviously been real consequences from the incident." By virtue of the consequences of the campaign, was this now officially a bad idea? Or is your opinion that this is all far too much knee-jerking? Have your say in the comments.
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:5, Interesting)
Anyways, I'm glad he took the fall for it, as he most likely has savings as opposed to the young guys who actually put up signs. Another sacrifice is made to the new State of paranoia.
Very disappointing overreaction (Score:5, Interesting)
Booooo! (Score:2, Interesting)
Public & Network's joined fault! (Score:2, Interesting)
Boston's Response (Score:0, Interesting)
The question asked is whether Turner / etc. got what they deserved -- which they did. The only other thing would be to slap some sense or respect into those two mental children who hung the signs and then made the absurd comments about hair. Hope the one kid is laughing as he is deported.
Yet we are still talking about "Boston's Response"...
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:4, Interesting)
"What we need right now is a clear message to the people of this country. This message must be read in every newspaper, heard on every radio, seen on every television. This message must resound throughout the entire Interlink. I want this country to realize that we stand on the edge of oblivion. I want every man woman and child to understand how close we are to chaos! I want everyone to remember why they need us!"
Everyone should see that movie, and then take a good, hard look around them.
Re:Stop Spreading Terror! (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm reasonably sure NYPD would have freaked out if one was reported as an unknown electronic device on the (distinctly longer) GW or Brooklyn bridges. None in NYC were in subway stations or critical infra--the most concerning was on a highway onramp.
And, most importantly, LEDs are freaking scary! Boo!
He should not have resigned (Score:3, Interesting)
He should not have resigned. He should have taken those responsible for this gross overreaction to task by produced a show about how stupid the response was. Using industry/military experts in bomb making, demolition, target selection and mission execution.
And it goes with out saying that he would not use the talking head pseudo terrorist experts, read political appointees, that spouted as fact that is possible to successfully get the components of on and to mix binary explosives on a moving plane loaded with real people and a flight crew who would notice that one washroom was never available not to mention the thermos cases the components would have to be brought on the plane in.
www.thebostonbomb.com
Re:Stop Spreading Terror! (Score:3, Interesting)
Those signs totally look like some crap that some middle schoolers would throw together at the last minute for a "science" project (no offense intended to you middle schoolers out there who read
Bomb Stops At The Top (Score:1, Interesting)
I would, then I could remote-detonate it. Taking out what really matters. No, not the civilians.
BTW with this mans act, I guess slashdot is going to have to revise it's cynical attitude towards business.
CEO? (Score:1, Interesting)
I'm not sure where CEO came from. GM/VP is a different job.
Re:I agree (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:It happened because it's Boston (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Which one? Bizarro World? :] (Score:3, Interesting)
What the actual bomb squad guys thought / knew and what the managers and politicians decided to do with the information, those are different things.
Re:Stop Spreading Terror! (Score:3, Interesting)
Nah, I'm pretty much just scared of our government. It represents far more of a threat to my safety and well-being than any Al-Qaeda terrorist.
Re:Which one? Bizarro World? :] (Score:2, Interesting)
Yet, even then, after many explosions targeting us, when we saw a pile of rocks on the side of the road, we'd still have the sense to know it was just a pile of rocks. Hell, we'd go kick it and see. EOD took time to respond. And they're needed at real bomb sites, not the fake or imagined ones.
Our platoon had a nearly 100% rate of not calling out EOD for non-bombs. And the only bomb training we got before hand was the old plastic utensil land mine detector course.
This shit in Boston is just crazy. My security image below is 'stoned', exactly what the Boston officials must be. Or maybe they
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't quite remember where they were all placed but even if they were placed around an airport, I still personally think it's an overreaction simply on technical grounds. Given the size of the devices, they would have to be attached to a plane or be within several dozen feet to cause any noteworthy damage, even if they were pure C4. Since none of them were placed on airport grounds, they posed absolutely no threat to aircraft.
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:5, Interesting)
A. Yes
Q. Is it forseeable that pouring boiling water on a person will cause an earthquake in Uganda.
A. No.
Q. Is it forseeable that a lite-brite advertisement placed w/o permission will get taken down and a fine sent to the party who put it up w/o permission?
A. Yes
Q. Is it forseeable that a lite-brite advertisement placed w/o permission will cause an entire city to "duck and cover".
A. No
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:1, Interesting)
And only the legal system's lack of perception allowed the confusion to stand.
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I agree (Score:4, Interesting)
I'd much rather the Boston police take it seriously, and be wrong, than take it casually and be wrong.
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:4, Interesting)
I'd say it would be pretty familiar to anyone who'd ever played "space invaders" too. (ie pretty much anyone under 40.)
Otherwise it just looks like a panel of randomly placed LEDs.
If by "random" you mean "a clear image of something giving you the finger" I suppose so.
I believe the people who mistakenly thought it could be a bomb did so with the most earnest of intentions.
True but we don't really have much use for people who report things that aren't bombs. How many innocent cardboard boxes, guitar cases, gymbags, abandoned Dells, old speakers, and other nondescript "potentially suspicious looking" debris is lying around Boston? They could shut the city down for an entire decade with earnest intentions.
People should know better. When I see a plane flying low I still assume its landing, not attacking the city...
I can understand how this got out of hand but it'll happen again. Around here Telus is putting up pink flamingos all around the city as part of its latest campaign... they're hollow and in public places and they weren't there yesterday... could be a bomb in there.
Seriously if the 'terrorists' were planting bombs everyone they'd make them look like run of the mill every day items like transformer boxes... hmm... wait... i saw a transformer box on one of the support columns in my parkade... i don't remember that being there before... excuse me...
Re:Comments from a bostonian... (Score:3, Interesting)
So the CN is responsible because there _could_ have been a bomb. This reminds me of the guy on the British subway who was gunned down because he _could_ have had a bomb, since his jacket was a little bulky, and he was running for the train. I'm believe both cases came about through fundamentally flawed reason and response, not to mention unreasonable levels of fear.
The reason this is all a HUGE problem, is that it sets a terrifying precedent for the way people think and act; Look over your shoulder all the time, and point the finger at anyone/thing that freaks you out. It can be summed up as, "Cry 'Wolf!' as often as possible.". This idea fundamentally opposes rational thought, and the very principles of "Innocent until proven guilty." are only a little further down this slippery slope.
This level of paranoia cannot be condoned as "reasonable" or "acceptable". It intrudes on the most basic principles of freedom and liberty. Or, to close with my favorite Ben Franklin quote:
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Perfect, except for one thing. (Score:3, Interesting)
The scenario you describe is perfect, EXCEPT for one thing. The marketing geniuses who put it up did not bother to include on the devices ANY kind of identifyng information. If they had, I would agree with you completely.
But, as it actually happened, what were the cops on the ground supposed to to with four 911 calls within an hour and finding 3 of these devices on the most strategically located bridges (and fiber-optic conduits) in Boston and the other near a hospital? Maybe the thing itself doesn't look like a bomb, but why couldn't it just be one component of a wireless trigger system?
Perhaps report back that "it might be suspicious, or it might look a bit like some character in some show my teenaager watched once, so you better send out the marketing analysis experts before we call the bomb squad.".
Remember this was a very low-res pixel graphic with no identifying info meant to be obscure for a targeted audience. It wasn't like it flashed letters for national brands like "Coke" or even a local one like "Joe's Pizza".
While I usually find myself very much on the anti-authority side of the argument, in this case, they were doing their jobs exactly right. Call the bemb experts, clear the area, let them figure out what it is, and call the "All Clear" when it is ok.
Re:Perfect, except for one thing. (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm sure someone in the force probably had seen it, but the entire force didn't go out and inspect them - probably only four did. The entire force isn't in on that call, and they certinly don't have all the info at that minute.
Consider how it actually plays out. Several hours after a half-dozen people were arrested in London on a terrorist plot, they get a series of four 911 calls within an hour about devices on bridges and near a hospital. They send a few officers out to the site to see what is up. Now, the officers all call in that they see some device with LEDs, batteries, wires, and circuit boards. They don't take them down and inspect them in detail, both out of common sense (don't mess with stuff when you don't know what it is), and probably SOP to not screw up potential evidence, and to leave it for the specialists.
Now, given that situaion, as the officer on site, or the supervisor hearing all four reports confirmed, of unrecognized electronic devices placed in key strategic locations around the city, -- ARE YOU REALLY going to make the call that "nah, nevermind, it's just junk". You potentially only have minutes to react; you may already be too late. Think for a second how you'd be rightly pilloried if someting did blow up and you had called "nevermind". You do not have the luxury of time to figure out who might have put it up there and why, what product might be being marketed, verify their story, etc. -- you need to figure out NOW whether or not it is a threat.
The only thing to do is to send in an expert to find out WTF those things ACTUALLY are, even if they look like they could be innocuous. Even if one of the officers had recognized it as looking like some kind of marketing, what's to say that it isn't just a cover for a wireless relay/trigger for something further under the bridges?
Now, I'd say exactly exactly the opposite if they marketers had put ANY identifying marks on there. Just a tiny sticker with "Interference marketing / 123 main street/ anytown MA / 617-345-6789" would do.
With that, and 10 (hectic) minutes, the cops could verify that they were actually put there by a marketing firm, that it was a bona fide firm with a lease for X years, their clients were Turner, ABC, Etc., and that their clients could verify that they were who they said they were, etc. But, there was no such info to even start such an investigation, and no time to guess.
I also consider that these so-called marketers are supposed to be professionals at anticipating people's reactions to their actions. The entire purpose of the device is to generate a reaction. It seems that they could also have anticipated that security people would react to a set of *unknown* devices in key strategic locations as a threat, and done something simple to mitigate that, such as putting on a tag, or calling in a notice. But they didn't. If they had, and the cops ignored it, then, I'd be in the front of the line berating them for not doing their job, but in this case, they did the right thing.