>Surely the question is not "Should they be made public?" but "When should
>they be made public?"
<snip>
>Here in GB cabinet papers are available after 30 years. Should there be a 30
>year rule for publisher's records too?
>
>George
Interesting point. I write Reader's Reports as if they are going to be read
by not only the publisher but the author, so therefore don't write in a
hurtful or aggressive manner. However, the idea of them being embargoed for
thirty or so years has great merit: they would no doubt be very interesting
reading for students, researchers, and critics.
BTW, following on from Anothny's post, FACP just gave me copies of reports
in the past. TWShapcott wrote one report, and then became the consultant
editor. We started with the report to do the editing. This 'open' way seems
preferable to closed cupboards, although I would agree a reader's anonymity
has to be preserved to give them free reign to express their opinion.
In this age of snooping and prying into private lives, it is wise to write
all reports, correspondence and such with an eye to how it would be read if
published in the 'open' media. That's Burke's law ...
Andrew
----------------------------------------
Andrew Burke Copywriting
[log in to unmask] Creative Writing
http://www.bam.com.au/andrew/ Editing
----------------------------------------
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|