| . |
. |
| Below: "Eli Lilly also makes a schizophrenia drug . . . ." |
| x |
 |
| So, Indiana taxpayers should perhaps be wondering whether NBC and Channel 13, in the name of their own profitability, may have helped make an expensive public building unusable.
Another consideration that is there are those in Susan’s milieu who might react violently to being toyed with. As I’ve tried to indicate, those who work in commercial television don’t always proceed by strictly ethical methods. Actors, sports figures, and others in popular culture are very much a mixed bag with respect to ethics. I suppose the majority of the TV celebrity population consists of reasonably responsible individuals. But there’s a significant minority who aren’t responsible at all. Some are convicted of serious crimes from time to time, as the tabloid press and tabloid TV continuously remind us. And I think it's fair to say that each of the three major television networks has [employed], at any given time, a certain number of individuals who could be described as criminals. And network competition, both intramural and extramural, is often quite brutal. NBC seems currently seems to be the nastiest of the three major networks. But I imagine there are a number of intelligent, cold-blooded individuals at all three networks who might not be above arranging an “accident” for someone thought to have pulled a “fast one”--as we Americans say--on one of them. So I’m afraid there might be some question about whether the plane crash referred to above was truly accidental. With limited energy and resources, one often hates to start from scratch. That holds true for a writing project, which is why I've inserted these red updates in my republished 2005 letter to Mr. Wright. Eventaully such a patchwork may become too awkward, and one does have to start over. In early 2008 I was hoping that that wasn't yet the case for this material and probably relying somewhat also on the patience of the reader. But in January 2008 I called McGraw-Hill which owns the station that Barbara Lewis worked for before going to WFYI. In my experience, the Indianapolis ABC/McGraw-Hill station was second only to the NBC affiliate in illegal, harassing electronic invasions. McGraw-Hill headquarters is located in New York City, where I imagine that sort of thing may be leading to a "culture of schizophrenia" and contributing to the general decline of the city. Alas, no New York TV station may be presumed entirely innocent. What is to be done, then, to mute the feindish babble that echos from one chamber to the next in imperiled Gotham City? My suggestion is for a theatrical production Paranoid Schizophrenia, the Musical. Information on that may be viewed by clicking "Gaus Theatrical Productions" at left. To conclude [my letter to Mr Wright]: Your station is on a higher cultural level than Channel 13. I’d like to think WFYI is also on a higher ethical level. However, of course, I have no authority here. I can’t force you to require responsible behavior from the two individuals who I’ve been discussing. However I suppose I can be assured of at least minimal satisfaction. Although I’m not [now] a member of Channel 20, I have donated to the station in the past. Unfortunately, I probably won’t want to donate or become a member in the future if things remain as they are. I’m sorry to have to be that way; but, as already indicated, I don’t think this is just about me. It’s also about what kind of a city we want to have and what kind of a country. And there may be others in Indianapolis who will have reason to think as I do when someone on Channel 20 is appealing for donations. If nothing else, I’d like to suggest that you might not want to use Mr. Rader [or Mrs. Lewis-West] as an on-air personality for a pledge drive. The financial results might be quite disheartening. Best Regards, David Gaus When Sound Medicine first went on the air, it was sponsored by Pfizer. I complained to them about Barbara's conduct and sponsorship was withdrawn. The company may have feared accusations of medical fraud, since it makes a schizophrenia drug. Eli Lilly also makes a schizophrenia drug, Zyprexa; Barbara's husband is a former Lilly executive; and I've traced some of my abusive experiences back to Lilly. (For more, see "Lilly" in the index of the home page.) One might therefore foresee possible problems for Zyprexa. I say that, although my casual opinion is that the drug is a reasonably good product on a purely biological basis. At any rate, problems for Lilly are something most in Indianapolis, including me, would like to avoid. Postscript: In early 2007 I took the initiative of contacting Lilly and two local psychiatrists over the above issue. I imagine that the number of people who are the victim of fraud involving schizophrenia is a small percentage of those who are diagnosed as having the disease. Nevertheless the number of individuals who are indeed the victims of fraud and harassment may be fairly large nationwide. I think many victims are likely to be found in cities such as New York City and Chicago, where there are a lot of apartments. Organized crime is probably involved, and the government, probably, doesn't have a clue. I suggest a screening test for detecting those who are the victims of this fraud. One question might be, "Do you usually hear voices only when you are inside your apartment?" At Lilly I spoke with Tara Ryker, who is in charge of media relations for Zyprexa. Earlier I'd spoken to Dr. Andrew Morrison, a psychiatrist who has prescribed Zyprexa to patients. Dr. Morrison agreed that to create artificial voices in a victim's environment would be unethical, if the intent were to make either the victim or a psychiatrist believe that the victim was mentally ill. I wasn't able to reach Dr. Morrison in March 2007 to ask his opinion of a screening test. However I did talk to Dr. Kenneth Weisert about the test and he agreed that it could conceivably make sense in some circumstances. So it looks as if I may want to add to this material at a later time. It was last modified in February 2008. HOME PAGE |