[Bambo]

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: Limelight - Link watcher You're about to enter the following site: https://forms.gle/afgJuTqwFPVkrcDA6 Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy. https://forms.gle/afgJuTqwFPVkrcDA6 Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

Click here for an application form for a crew position or a guest appearance.

---

---

Ronald Johnson Show - Ep 1 - Jack Kruger

[Welker]

I like the sound of this Hans Moleman fella

[Tom*]

I like the sound

[Markus]

I like

[kellekerell]

I love the idea!

[Burnett]

Hyped!

[Welker]

Soon the wait will come to an end.

[Judge Rage]

Soon the wait will come to an end.

HERE WE HERE WE HERE WE FUCKING GO

[Lord Octagon]

Soon the wait will come to an end.

YES

[Welker]

The wait is finally over!

Ronald Johnson episode one starring Jack Kruger of the Weyland Yutani Corporation participates in a tell all interview with surprising results! 

[Jeff Ford]

Fallon better get ready for a fucking fight.

[Judge Rage]

WY-SEC 
Office of the Executive Director
Floor 4,
WY-SEC Plaza,
1 Robsin Square,
Weyland Park, 
EvoCity, ID 
83731

Dear Producers of 'The Late Night Show with Ronald Johnson',

I am extremely displeased at the most recent episode which featured myself and was doctored to bring disrepute on myself and the company I represent.

Neither I, nor the Weyland-Yutani Corporation are neo-nazis and, as I said in real life during the interview, that is against everything our company stands for. We do not condone the actions of the Nazis in World War 2, as I said in the interview which was doctored. The editing of your show was actually quite subpar and you can tell at several points, such as at 3:23 where the video cuts forward to miss out parts of what I said.

In addition to this, there was also a sexual element to the interview that we were not not told about, and as someone who has been happily married for a number of years I am shocked at the editing to suggest that I was a homosexual (something which is incredibly offensive in this day and age) and also that I had apparently engaged in sexual intercourse with "a Thai man". 

None of the above questioning topics were previously discussed or had anything to do with what the topic we were supposed to be discussing, which was coronavirus and the corporation's response to it, instead you created this highly bizarre video which was highly offensive and could have a negative impact on both myself and the corporation. As a result, we have taken the decision to, unless the Ronald Johnson Show apologises, admits that the video was doctored and issues compensation, take legal action against the show due to the potential for the doctoring of the show to cause damage to both my personal character and reputation, but also the reputation of our Corporation, which could lead to a material loss of profits. 


Jack Kruger MSc (Hons)
Executive Director for Combined Global Security Operations 
[font=Roboto, sans-serif]Weyland-Yutani Corporation[/font]

[brave soldier]

owwww i like it

[Lord Octagon]

 

916 W Belknap Street

Suite 240, Fort Worth, TX 76102

(817) 440-3953

Office of the Executive Director
1 Robsin Square, Weyland Park, EvoCity, ID 83731

RE: Your March 30 letter addressed to 'The Late Night Show with Ronald Johnson'

Dear Mr Jack Kruger,

This firm is litigation counsel to Ronald Johnson, et al. We are in receipt of your March 30 cease and desist demand.

In the letter, you demand that Ronald Johnson and his team "apologise" and "issue compensation" for "damage to both my personal character and reputation, but also the reputation of our Corporation". However, your attempt to censor The Late Show with Ronald Johnson with these meritless threats will have the opposite of its intended effect. Johnson will not surrender to your bullying. 

Your Frivolous Defamation Claim:

As you should be aware, satire, caricature and parody are forms of art that rely on blurring the line between truth and outrageousness. Per the Texas Supreme Court decision in New Times v. Isaacks and 1988 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Hustler Magazine v. Falwell, there exists no defamation in cases where it is unlikely that a reasonable person would believe the story to be actually true. 

Through a culmination of the opinions of these two Courts, we can offer a defence through the following:

Use of an irreverent tone will signal that the story is not straight news.
- As a comedy show, Ronald Johnson and his partner Hans Moleman convey no element of seriousness when they ask their questions in a mock-interview style. 

Consider the context of the publication the story will run in, including whether the publication has a history of satire or parody. The Wall Street Journal should be more careful than Mad Magazine.
- Ronald Johnson is a known comedian and his show is evidently that of satire and parody. If you were on 60 Minutes, would a load of oranges have fallen on you in a supposed 'tangerine pipe problem'?

Use of an unorthodox headline will alert readers from the beginning that the story is not straight news.
- 'a tell all interview with surprising results!' is a fairly clear signpost.

Unbelievable or outrageous items in the story
- I believe the phallus-descriptive element of the show covers this base

Use of a disclaimer that is in an appropriate location
- A disclaimer is posted right below the video, in a standard size.

I hope this has cleared things up for you.

Regards,