|
 |
CNN TALKBACK LIVE
Should Missing Girl Parents' Lifestyle Become an Issue?; Was a Judge Pressured Into Throwing a Decision?; Rejection on Valentine's Day
Aired February 14, 2002 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ALISON STEWART, HOST: The search for Danielle van Dam, why are so many people talking about her parents' lifestyle.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I am a little loath to start criticizing their lifestyle, but I can see how bringing different people into your home that maybe your kids don't know could ultimately be a threat.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
STEWART: Also, just what kind of pressure was the French Olympic skating judge under?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If there is an ugly story behind it, then the truth has to be spoken.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
STEWART: A teddy bear scare spooks Olympic security.
And on the day of Valentines, roses and chocolate, there's sometimes rejection.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The person who gave you this (UNINTELLIGIBLE) does not want to talk to you or speak to you again. We would like to take this opportunity to officially reject you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
STEWART: Listen in on the heartbreak hotline.
Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE: AMERICA SPEAKS OUT. I'm Alison Stewart. Happy Valentine's Day.
Well, you know what, it's really turning to something of an Olympic scandal. France's Olympic chief now says his country's figure skating judge was somewhat manipulated into voting for the Russians. Was the fix in? We'll get more on that in just a minute, but first let's talk about a suspicious purchase at a Wal-Mart that has the FBI concerned about Olympic security. CNN correspondent Rusty Dornin joins us in Salt Lake City, Utah. And Rusty, we are supposed to beware of bear, is what I understand.
RUSTY DORNIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Beware of bears on Valentine's Day, that's right.
Apparently, there was a clerk in a Wal-Mart that was alerted to a purchase by a clean-shaven what he or she thought was a Middle Eastern descent, who bought apparently nine bears, Valentine bears, along with 14 canisters of propane. Now, the bears are 20 inches tall, the cans of propane are about nine inches. He also bought some beebees, so the concern was that he was trying to possibly put the propane canisters inside the bears and create some kind of an explosive device. Obviously, that could have been carried onto an airplane.
But the thing that sort of links the two to the Olympics is that during the figure skating competitions, people often throw teddy bears and flowers onto the ice after the performances, so of course there was concern that this might be something that was destined for the Olympics -- Alison.
STEWART: All right, Rusty. You have been through a lot of this security, and say I wasn't a too bright terrorist and I decided to bring that through the general security. Could you get something that big in, a 20-inch bear? I understand you are only allowed to bring small packages in, right?
DORNIN: They don't even -- very small packages, and they will often make you take everything out of the packages. They are feeling the size and shape of things. I think it might be very difficult for something like that to get through.
STEWART: All right. Is security still a bit news issue there, still a big topic?
DORNIN: Not really. I think it's been so high all along that people are sort of taking it in stride. They know they have to arrive a little early for the venues to get through security. I think probably people are deciding to not bring certain things so they don't get hassled for it. You know, not bring any large bags or anything like that.
One thing that is interesting is people were not supposed to bring food to the venues, but apparently they ordered a half-a-million hot dogs to last through the entire 17 days of the Olympics, and they have completely been consumed. So now they're telling people they might be allowed to bring in food, as long as they put them in clear plastic wrapping, because the hot dogs are all gone.
STEWART: Half-a-million hot dogs already? Goodness gracious, this is America. Rusty Dornin, thanks so much for joining us from Salt Lake City, Utah.
And of course we want to talk about that Olympic -- the controversy going on. Everybody's heard about this, right? The Russian team got the gold, many people thought the silver, which went to the Canadians, should have gone to the Russian team. We're going to go to Phil Jones -- oh, OK, we don't have Phil Jones. We are going to go to break first and then maybe we will talk to Phil Jones, from "Sports Illustrated" CNN and have some more information on that. TALKBACK LIVE will come back in a minute.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
STEWART: OK. You know what, Steve, we are on day I think it is four of skategate. All right. You told me that your fiancee won't even watch anymore.
STEVE: That's right. She has refused to watch anymore of the judged events, because why would you root for somebody and give them all that support if the judges aren't going to be fair about it.
STEWART: Helen, you have an opinion about this, I know.
HELEN: Well, as I said before, I think it's an absolutely disgrace. The man that's heading up the whole committee doesn't know anything about ice skating. That was all over the newspaper.
STEWART: All right. Well, we are going to a sports reporter from "Sports Illustrated" CNN. Phil Jones, are you there?
PHIL JONES, CNNSI CORRESPONDENT: I am indeed.
STEWART: All right, Phil, want to know -- the big news is about the French judge. What is the latest?
JONES: Well, the latest is that International Olympic Committee President Jacques Rogge had asked for a quick resolution of this matter, and the man in question that one of your audience is talking about is the president of the International Skating Union, Ottavio Cinquanta. He said there is going to be no quick resolution, that the ISU council meeting, which takes place on Monday, won't be brought forward, because they are going to wait for Canada's appeal, study Canada's appeal, and he said they can't do that in 10 minutes.
Now this is in spite of the fresh evidence that came forward last night form the chief of the French Olympic team. Now, his name is Didier Gailhaguet, and he made this comment, that the French judge in question may be the pivotal vote in that 5/4 decision for the Russians over the Canadians, had been pressured to act in a certain way, and the judge has been somewhat manipulated. But he said the French Federation in no way had been in any kind of deal with the Eastern bloc countries in order to gain a victory for the Russian team over the Canadian team -- Alison.
STEWART: Now, does anyone really know what "somewhat manipulated" mean? It sounds like being a little bit pregnant. What does that mean exactly?
JONES: It's very difficult to gauge exactly what that means, Alison, I know. You know, a certain amount of pressure put on this French judge. And he also said that she was of a fragile disposition. I don't quite know what that means either.
But all we can gauge is that the French judge in question, a female, has been approached alleged by somebody within the international figure skating family, if you like, and was pressured, allegedly again, into voting a certain way for the Russians over the Canadians. And obviously, we are going to throw that word "allegedly" in here, because we know nothing for fact.
STEWART: Well, this allegedly fragile and manipulated judge, she's still going to work, correct?
JONES: Well, rumor had it that she had already flown back to France because of all the pressure. And as far as we know, she has not yet been seen by any of the media here since this scandal broke. So we can only assume that she has either taken a flight back to France or she's lying low here. We've certainly not seen her here.
STEWART: So the judges are not speaking to the press. Any of the judges at all?
JONES: No. Actually, they're not allowed to. The ISU banned that. The only person that is allowed to address the media would the referee, and he did speak yesterday, Ronald Fanning (ph). And that's where the ball really started rolling, where these French allegations were made.
STEWART: All right. Phil Jones, we thank you so much for joining us and giving us all that great information. Thanks a bunch.
JONES: Thanks, Alison.
STEWART: We are going to take a quick break, and be right back with more of TALKBACK LIVE. Stay with us.
Coming up: The mysterious disappearance of Danielle van Dam. A missing girl, a possible suspects and questions about the parents' lifestyle next on TALKBACK LIVE.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
STEWART: ... February 2. Police say the San Diego girl was kidnapped from her bedroom in the wee hours of the morning. The investigation has focused on a neighbor who is being described as a potential suspect. Danielle's parents are not suspects, and have been pleading daily for help in finding their daughter.
However, there are suggestions the couple's lifestyle might be part of the story. "Newsweek" wrote about it this week. Reporters have asked them about it, and their spokeswoman has responded in a written statement, quote: "They do not lead a perfect lifestyle, but they did not kill their daughter," end quote.
Meet Ana Figueroa, the staff reporter who wrote about this for "Newsweek" magazine, and John Timoney, a former Philadelphia police commissioner. He is CEO of the Beau Dietl & Associates, an investigative and security firm, and criminal defense attorney Arthur Barens. Welcome, our guests, everybody.
Ana, let me start with you. You get this piece of information. There has been information floating out there. Please explain to the audience exactly what "Newsweek" reported about this situation?
ANA FIGUEROA, "NEWSWEEK" MAGAZINE: Well, "Newsweek" reported that questions about the couple's lifestyle were interjecting themselves into the story. Basically, since the time the little girl was abducted, the local media down in San Diego had been somewhat, you know, badgering the San Diego police department to get them to confirm these rumors.
Now, they have never confirmed anything officially, but unofficially police sources started leaking, and by last Friday it had become somewhat of a local media circus pertaining to the lifestyle of the parents. So "Newsweek" reported that the lifestyle of the parents was now a big part of the story.
STEWART: Now, as a reporter, this idea of the family engaging in all sorts of different sexual practices, that becomes a news story because?
FIGUEROA: Well, it doesn't necessarily become a news story. It may have nothing to do -- in fact, we have no evidence that the parents' lifestyle -- if the stories are true -- does have anything to do with the disappearance of the child.
What we simply did was show that this story had taken on sort of a life of its own. In other words, the lifestyle was interjecting itself into the search for the little girl. And that was clear as of a week ago, that the parents were going to have to, you know, deal with questions about this from the local media and now the national media.
Rightfully or wrongfully, I don't think we make a judgment as to whether this should be part of the story. We simply are telling our readers that it has become part of the story, and you know, admittedly an intriguing aspect of the story.
STEWART: And you say this information was leaked through the police department?
FIGUEROA: It was leaked to local media by sources in law enforcement. And I want to clarify, it does not necessarily mean that it came from the San Diego police department. They were very adamant that they not be tainted as the leakers, because they are obviously very upset. So keep in mind that there are multiple law enforcement agencies involved in this investigation. There are sheriff's departments, there are other police departments, and the FBI as well. So these leaks could have come from any number of police sources.
STEWART: John, let me get you in on this. Is this a legitimate line of questioning for the press and for the police, or only for one and not the other? JOHN TIMONEY, FORMER PHILADELPHIA POLICE COMM.: Only for one. Only for the police, and not for the press. It's hard, you know, after a few days have elapsed, to keep the press out, but certainly for the first couple of days the police have to treat everybody as a suspect, number one.
Number two, lifestyle does matter. Does the lifestyle impact in regards to negligence or neglect or leaving the child alone that may have helped contribute to the kidnapping? Those are legitimate law enforcement questions. The lifestyle being out in the public domain, vis-a-vis reporters -- it will eventually get out there, but it shouldn't get out there in the first two or three days.
People have to use good judgment, because in the vast majority of these cases, they resolve themselves. The kid is found at a neighbor's house, had left during the middle of the night, went to a friend's house, and they get resolved. So there is no sense sullying the reputation of the parents unnecessarily. Eventually, this will come up. I thought early, this came out way too early.
STEWART: Now, do police officers ever leak information in the sense of, hey, you reporters can go down this road, I can't as an official.
TIMONEY: First of all, police officers can go down any road. You have to do it tactfully, and you have got to explain to the parents. I mean, the Ramsey case is a classic example. Everyone is a suspect, and you have to let them know, listen, I'm just doing my job, I don't mean to be offensive, but I need to ask certain questions. I need to go in a certain direction. It may offend you, but I'm only doing my job. If you handle it tactfully, you can ask almost any question.
STEWART: Arthur Barens, is this a legitimate line of questioning for the press? Don't we have a right to know about these things, especially when the family has come to the media, and, in many cases, people believe have used the media.
ARTHUR BARENS, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I think there is a legitimate expectancy of privacy in people's lives. The fact is, the media, on the other hand, is the best resource available to these or any other parents in an analogous situation to locate their child. I think it's very regrettable that the focus of this story is now going to change from a kidnapped child to the curiosity and interest we may have in the unusual or unconventional sex life that the parents may have.
I think, again, it's a legitimate inquiry for the police, to look at the environment surrounding the child at the time of the possible abduction, but in terms of the parents and the press right now, I think the press -- the interest of the parents in using the press is to find their child. I think the interest of the press right now should be in finding the child.
STEWART: All right. We have got somebody in our audience who seems to agree with you. A lot of folks seem to. Tell me about it, Maddux (ph).
MADDUX: Yeah, I agree with that. This case reminds me of the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) case, where the little girl was snatched out her bedroom and subsequently murdered by this lunatic pedophile. The problem now is that people are focusing, because this swinging situation has come out, the people are now going to be focusing on the parents and the lifestyle, and that's going to take away from some of the time needed to investigate who snatched this child.
BARENS: I would agree with that. That absolutely backs my point on this. Unfortunately, there may be more of an interest in sex than in loss of the child. I'm not saying that's appropriate. It's just an unfortunate thing that that may sell more copy and more columns in a paper than does a missing child.
FIGUEROA: Alison, can I say something here?
STEWART: Absolutely. And we all of course have to remember, Danielle, we don't know what has happened to Danielle yet.
FIGUEROA: I just want to point out that "Newsweek" was not the first news media outlet to, you know, break this story or focus on the lifestyle of the parents. The lifestyle of the parents had really been in the spotlight from the beginning, namely because the mother had been out at a bar or at a restaurant/bar with some girlfriends until 2:30 in the morning.
She came home, and, you know, both parents admit -- you know, the father was home with the children, but they do say that they didn't check on their children, you know, when the mother came home, and when the father woke up and continued to hang out with the mother and two female friends and two male friends. And they again didn't check on the children, even though there were some indications that something might have been amiss, namely an alarm system was indicating that some doors were open.
So my point is that the lifestyle of the parents really was raising some eyebrows. And again, not to make a judgment call on this at all, but people were sort of asking, where were the parents, why didn't they check on this little girl or any of their other children.
(CROSSTALK)
STEWART: John, it just seems a natural thing that the parents' behavior would have a difference. If these folks had been -- or any parents who were in a situation like this -- had been, say, gambling addicts, and they held Gamblers Anonymous meeting in their homes or something like that, invited people in, they had debts or something, wouldn't we be looking at that? Wouldn't we be considering that, and wouldn't the news media be printing that?
TIMONEY: No, again, I think -- I leave it up to the news media. They have to use their own judgment. The newspapers have got editors to make these calls, and I just think looking at these cases over the years, it seems like earlier and earlier we're getting into cases -- into areas that really are not an essential part of the investigation. They may be for law enforcement for the first day or two, just to kind of clear the air, to make sure there isn't anything amiss.
And as I say, eventually things are going to get out, in regards to the lifestyle. But I think early on, only because the vast majority of these cases get resolved, you know, happily, with no issue, that you are unnecessarily tainting or going into the private lives of people whose lives should remain private, as the lawyer correctly pointed out.
STEWART: All right. We have a caller from Oregon who wants to weigh on this subject.
CALLER: Yeah, I think that the information about their lifestyle choices has certainly got to be pertinent to the police investigation, because that's going to widen the circle of potential suspects, that type of thing. But you know, the press has to tread lightly, and it does not mean that these are horrible people who have responsibility for the disappearance of their child. And the press has to be cautious and careful and give these people some space on this.
STEWART: Let me ask the audience, if the news media -- if this information was out there and the news media didn't report it, would this big hole that would be the elephant in the room that no one is talking about is been -- people in the media, news folks being delinquent? Anybody? What do you think? Actually, we got a bunch of people back here from San Diego, so let's get some opinions. Who said yes? Dave said yes.
DAVE: I think that the press has a duty to report it. I don't think they need to blow it out of proportion, but they have a duty to report it so we know what's going on. And then it's up to the police officers and their departments to take it further and do the investigations.
STEWART: How is this playing out in San Diego?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, it became a little suspicious when I was watching at the second day of coverage on television, when the mother came on and was looking more like she was interested in promoting herself than her lost child. That lady had more eye makeup than Mimi on the "Drew Carey Show." I mean, very suspicious.
STEWART: How did it play out in the San Diego media, when you watch it at home?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think they are very concerned about the lost child, and that's, you know, the number one thing. On television, it doesn't seem like they have really talked about their lifestyle. It's more in the newspaper that you read it that way, but it always felt a little fishy. The whole thing was just -- you know, you just got kind of a feeling that something else was up and you didn't know what it was. And I think maybe it might be that.
STEWART: Ana, as a reporter, what do you think of the idea this family has used a very powerful tool, the media, as any family probably would in trying to find their child. Can you pick and choose when you want to invite the media in and when you don't? FIGUEROA: Well, I don't think you can. I mean, let's keep in mind that this couple was very shrewd, and they realized early on that they needed to sort of grab the media's attention to, you know, make sure the pictures of this little girl were, you know, were shown frequently. And they were successful. I mean, this story now is in the national news cycle. And that was a conscious decision that they made.
By the same token, I think that they can't now say, look, we don't want, you know, our personal life has nothing to do with it. Well, I mean, this is their personal life. This is, you know, their family life. Their child is missing. So...
TIMONEY: If I can just jump in here for a second. I mean, I must respectfully disagree, because the vast majority of kidnappings or some other kind of heinous crime, folks do go to the media with pictures, whether it's a missing kid, a kidnapped kid. And so, using that rationale, the next time a parent comes forward with a legitimate missing kid, they have got to think, they got to give it a second thought, are we going to go public because now people are going to investigate my private life. I think that's a little -- that's a huge stretch for the press.
BARENS: I think we're also -- I wonder if -- I wonder if instead of talking about these people being potential swings, supposing they were communists or Muslims. What do we say about their personal life then? If they have a different lifestyle than middle America, do we say, well, let's report on that, because that makes them more likely to endanger their child, or is it really still about trying to find that child?
FIGUEROA: No, no. Clearly, it's still about trying to find their child. I mean, nobody is saying that people should be judged because of what they do with other consenting adults.
And the point is that this story had become quite a big story in San Diego. And the parents' attention was being deflected by having to answer questions about this. And it continues to be part of the story. And, quite frankly, the reason it is part of the story is because it's unclear, you know, if it had any connection to the disappearance of their child. We don't know that it did.
But there is still police sources that have leaked a lot more information than we put in the magazine to indicate that it did have some connection. And, you know, we don't go public with everything that we hear from the police. But I think it's taking the argument somewhat to the absurd to say we would publish any aspect of their lifestyle.
(CROSSTALK)
STEWART: Folks, guests, we are going to stop there because we need take a quick break. We want to also remind people of course this is opinion and speculation. But we will get back to the subject absolutely in just a few minutes. We have got to take a quick news break. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
STEWART: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. We just saw what Frank from New York thinks.
And I want to let -- I believe it was John. You wanted to respond earlier before the break, correct?
TIMONEY: No, I just wanted to challenge Analyst. I think I disagree with her or else I misunderstood her. I thought she said that, once you go public with the pleading, then your private life becomes public.
FIGUEROA: No, I didn't not say that.
TIMONEY: OK, all right, then I'm wrong.
FIGUEROA: I said that issues about your private life, these people have to answer them, it seems to me, if they are going to ask the media for help. And there are these pervasive issues about their private life that perhaps could have some link to the fact that someone has gone into their house, apparently, and taken their child.
Then I think it is not unfair to expect them to be prepared to answer questions of the media. Now, as I said earlier, I am not making a judgment whether this stuff should have come out or not. We did not bring it out. But it is out there.
Now, I also want to say that I admire them for the fact that they have got the gumption to keep coming out. I mean, if this came out and if it is true -- again, we don't know if it is true or not -- but assuming it is true, they are still coming out every day, talking to the press, dealing with humiliating questions. A lot of other parents would have just said: Look, forget it. It's too embarrassing. We are not going to go out there.
So I got to give them credit for getting their act together and coming out every day, now knowing that there is this side issue that is going to be asked of them. And to me, that shows that they are very much determined to find their daughter at the cost of perhaps some embarrassment to them.
(CROSSTALK)
BARENS: I think there would be a better way of doing, through getting a spokesman, or getting a lawyer to donate his time or her time to go out and handle those questions.
FIGUEROA: Well, they have spokespeople. They have spokespeople. They have had a series of spokespeople.
And they have been confronted with these questions, these leaks from the law enforcement. And they have answered them by saying -- not by denying, but by saying: We want the focus to be on our daughter. And I think the focus is on their daughter.
STEWART: Arthur Barens, we are going to give you the last word on this.
BARENS: Well, again, I am concerned about having a chilling effect on the legitimate use of the press for people to find a missing child. It is regrettable that, I believe -- and excuse my cynicism -- that the focus of this story is going to shift, for better or worse, to the sexual history of these parents rather than the tragedy of the missing child.
In any of these cases, I dare say there is hardly anyone you could not dig up dirt on if you look hard enough. I think the issue is, this child is missing. The press can play a very, very helpful role in finding this child. And that is what it should be concerned with.
(CROSSTALK)
TIMONEY: I second that.
STEWART: All right, Arthur Barens, John Timoney, and Ana Figueroa, we thank you all very much for joining you us today and sharing your opinions and your expertise.
FIGUEROA: Thank you.
STEWART: We are going to take a break and do a little Valentine's dance.
Still ahead: a rejection line for those who hand you a line.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He was like, "You look like that 'Sex in the City' girl," just like all in my face as I was trying to walk down the street. So I was like, "Do you want my number?"
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There is always, always alcohol.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
STEWART: Is this heartbreaker for softies, cowards or cads?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
STEWART: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE.
Well, it's Valentine's Day, not a day to dwell on rejections. But we just had to tell you about a New York service that might qualify as the anti-Valentine. It's a phone number you can pass out when you are out on the town and you want to get rid of a certain persistent pest. The number they get is for a rejection line.
And here is what they just might hear.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Maybe this is their way of saying: Hey, you, I'm scared. I'm scared of committing to or even casually dating you because you are that intimidating and impressive. Wow, Cupid strikes again. Love is so crazy. Good luck, hot stuff.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(LAUGHTER)
STEWART: Wowie zowie.
We have the creators of the Rejection Line, Jonah and Chelsea Peretti, coming to us from New York.
Good morning -- good afternoon, you guys.
CHELSEA PERETTI, CO-FOUNDER, REJECTION LINE: Good morning, Alison.
JONAH PERETTI, CO-FOUNDER, REJECTION LINE: Hi, Alison.
STEWART: All right, let's talk about this rejection line. How did you get the idea for this?
J. PERETTI: Well, there's a lot of women kept complaining to us that they would get harassed by sort of aggressive men. And this was sort of a way they could send a message to them that they did not want to see them.
C. PERETTI: And, of course, I had experienced a little bit of that myself. So that definitely fed the project.
STEWART: All right, explain to folks exactly how it works.
C. PERETTI: So, basically, if you're in a club or a bar, art gallery, wherever someone is hitting on you.
STEWART: Grocery store.
C. PERETTI: That's right. Aisle seven.
Wherever you are, if someone is hitting on you and you are not comfortable, you don't feel like dealing with it, it sort of behaves as a get-out-of-jail-free pass. You can just give them this code and be done with it. Then they can call and hear the outgoing message.
STEWART: All right, Chelsea, you can't see this, but underneath you, we've got an instant message that says: "Giving out a fake number is just plain mean."
What is your response to that?
(LAUGHTER)
C. PERETTI: Well, my response to that is, aggressively harassing someone for their number is also mean. So I guess that would be my response. STEWART: Jonah, have you ever been on the receiving end of someone being really harassing and wanting your number? And have you done this? Have you given out the number?
J. PERETTI: I have not actually given out the number, but I know people who have.
STEWART: And has it worked? Has anyone ever run into the person they have given the number to? That could potentially very embarrassing.
C. PERETTI: Yes, that could be tough. We do not have any statistics on that at this time, but we are busily gathering statistics every day.
(LAUGHTER)
STEWART: You get out there and gather that data for us.
It's not just a male -- it is a male and a female thing, right? you have various choices you can pick when you call this number. Tell us about that, Jonah.
J. PERETTI: Well, we made sure that it was gender neutral. Anyone can use it. Straight people can use it. Gay people can use it, anyone who just wants to send a message to someone that they are not interested.
And part of it is, this was sort of an experiment. We created this thing and we told our friends about it. And then it just started spreading. And now we have had over 200,000 calls. So it was interesting see how it became this phenomenon that sort of spread on its own.
STEWART: And you've spread across the country as well, correct?
C. PERETTI: Yes. Actually, we have gotten e-mails from Australia. We've gotten contacted from Japan, Latin America. People like the idea, definitely.
STEWART: You must have some great stories?
J. PERETTI: We did just launch the Los Angeles Rejection Line, too.
STEWART: Ah, excellent. "Dude, I don't want to talk to you," something like that.
(LAUGHTER)
STEWART: Well, I have to admit, we actually have two people who have been false-number giver-outers back here. And now they are going to be very embarrassed.
All right, Brianna, you will get another date after this, I promise, Tell us you story. BRIANNA: Briefly, we were just out at a bar one night. And this man was harassing me. And just to get him away, like: "OK, here is my number. Call me. I will be home." And he went away, because nothing else would work. Lies wouldn't here. "My boyfriend is here" wouldn't work. "I'm gay" wouldn't work. Nothing was working. So I gave him my number. And I'm really sorry to whoever he called.
(LAUGHTER)
STEWART: Chelsea, does that sound like what really goes on?
(CROSSTALK)
STEWART: ... telling the truth?
C. PERETTI: Yes. I definitely think that it is a problem of people not being able to read body language or understand if someone is not interested and really not listening. So, I mean, it is sort of a joke and quick way of handling that scenario.
STEWART: Tell me, Jonah, about the different kind of choices you can have. Once you get on the phone and you have been rejected, there's three different kinds of ways you can be rejected? I didn't know there were that many ways.
J. PERETTI: So first you just get a message that you have been officially rejected. And then, after that, you can listen to a sad poem written by a kindred spirit. Or you can talk to our comfort specialist who will make you feel better and give you suggestions about how to pull your life back together. And you could also click the option to cling to the unrealistic hope that a relationship is still possible, if you just can't let go.
STEWART: Nonrealism works for people sometimes.
J. PERETTI: Yes, we have all been there.
STEWART: Right.
We have a gentleman here who has apparently received a false number. True?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A while ago.
STEWART: A while ago?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A long while ago.
(LAUGHTER)
STEWART: So how did you feel about that when you called that number and it was the Home Depot? What did you think?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I thought maybe she wrote it down wrong.
(LAUGHTER) STEWART: There you go. He is in the clinging to false hopes.
C. PERETTI: Exactly.
J. PERETTI: See, with our service, there would be no ambiguity. So he has been living for the last 15 years not sure whether she just wrote it down wrong, you know.
STEWART: We have got a comment over here.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is a great idea because we now live in a cell phone society. This is a great idea. I wish I had thought of it.
(LAUGHTER)
C. PERETTI: Thank you.
STEWART: I want to point out. You guys, you are not making any money off this, are you? Is this a financial venture?
C. PERETTI: That is when the smiles fade. No, we make no money. We are losing money. So...
J. PERETTI: One of the ideas of the project is that anyone can create something. If they have a good idea, they can create something, and hundreds of thousands, millions of people can see it. So, in a way, it is just sort of an experiment in democratic media. It's a way of doing comedy for the masses. And it's a way of providing a service. So it was not really our goal to make a bunch of money with the project.
C. PERETTI: We just wanted to have fun and see how many people would actually start using it, because it did seem like something that people would be excited to use.
STEWART: Well, I have to tell you, the Web site is actually really fairly entertaining. Tell me what they can find on your Web site.
C. PERETTI: Our Web site is stockpiled with MP3s so you can hear the voice mails that people leave on our answering machine. There's also some information about how the service works and my brother and myself.
And what else, Jonah?
J. PERETTI: Those are the main things. And, also, somewhere on the Web site now is the Los Angeles line.
STEWART: All right, well, hopefully people will go to that. It's RejectionLine.com.
Jonah and Chelsea Peretti, you gave us some good laughs for this Valentine's Day. You probably helped out a couple of women and men out there. Thanks a bunch. C. PERETTI: Thank you, Alison.
J. PERETTI: Thank you.
STEWART: Up next: Can you follow your nose to romance? Perhaps.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
STEWART: It's Valentine's Day and love is in the air, literally. Your one and only might be just a sniff away.
CNN medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta is here to tell us about Love.
And the nose knows, huh?
DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, that's right. I tell you, you have got Godiva, FTD, Hallmark trying to create love. But there are scientists that have been looking into possibly unlocking its mystery. And what we're talking about here is pheromones. I brought a couple of examples down here.
These are the things that you could find on the Internet, on television, products that supposedly contain pheromones.
STEWART: Now, tell people what pheromones are, who don't know.
GUPTA: Now, pheromones are basically these faint chemical signals that people have known about for a long time. They are released into the air from your skin. And, basically, they regulate mating rituals, for example, in animals.
But, also, more interestingly, in humans, these are the things that supposedly synchronize menstrual periods amongst women living in college dormitories together, the same thing, pheromones.
And, basically, how they work, a little faint chemical signal -- we're talking about a very small amount -- is released into the air. It is not something you could consciously sense, but it actually will travel through the air, go to someone else who will sense that pheromone. And then it will have effects on their brain, on their mood, and possibly on their feelings of love.
STEWART: Now, is it the kind of thing like it's a jigsaw puzzle, or one piece matches the other? Or do all pheromones sort of work on all the guys over there or all the ladies over here?
GUPTA: Well, it is sort of interesting. There have been a lot of studies done to show that only certain pheromones will work on certain people. But even more interestingly, people often associate pheromones with aphrodisiacs, things that will make people fall in love.
And I talked to a bunch of different scientists about that. I said, are pheromones aphrodisiacs? And, unfortunately for a lot of people out there, the answer was sort of an unequivocal no. There are a lot of Internet and other types of advertisements that will make all sorts of claims about them. But what they do say is that pheromones will oftentimes elevate people's moods, sometimes have a placebo effect. If you feel more attractive, you act more attractive. And thus you are more attractive.
STEWART: Now, these are commercial products you're showing me. This isn't something that has been cooked up in some laboratory somewhere. Explain this to me.
GUPTA: That's right. These are things that you can -- we just actually just called this company off of the Internet, Natural Attractions. There literally are hundreds of them. And they all claim to have pheromones in them. Interestingly, the FDA prohibits them from actually marketing themselves as aphrodisiacs, because, based on the scientific knowledge, they say as well there is no such thing as an aphrodisiac, so don't market it as that.
But they do say these types of products, which you can find anywhere, are marketed as pheromone-containing products.
STEWART: Now, do pheromones ever repel people, the opposite to the magnet?
GUPTA: You know, these are things that people have really done quite a bit of research on.
Now, what they really found was that your pheromones will actually attract a certain group of people. And they have been able to actually identify who your pheromones will be able to attract based on your genetic structure. This is getting kind of sciency here.
STEWART: Go for it.
GUPTA: But if you look at -- they actually studied a population of people, of just a few hundred people, and they found out who actually ended up mating with whom. And they found that people did not actually mate with their brothers and sisters, and they did not mate with people who were genetically very different from them. They mated with people who were sort of genetically similar, but not exactly alike.
And they attributed that completely to pheromones. These were people who did not know if they were related. They didn't know if they were not related. Yet the genetic pool was maintained and there was no inbreeding that actually went on.
STEWART: Now, is this an exact science?
GUPTA: Absolutely not. And the scientists I talked to -- and one of the guys was pretty funny. He said: "Listen, I have been looking for an aphrodisiac for 11 years and I am convinced that there is not one." This is somebody who is all over the Internet talking about these sort of things. Even he will say it is not an exact science. There probably is no such thing really as an aphrodisiac.
STEWART: All right, well, we appreciate all the information about the chemistry of love. Perhaps someone will find true love.
GUPTA: That's right. I got some extra product if anybody wants any.
STEWART: All right.
The whole audience seems to be rushing the stage at this moment. Down, down people.
(LAUGHTER)
STEWART: Thanks so much.
GUPTA: Thank you.
STEWART: You know he what? We are out of time. Our thanks to Dr. Sanjay Gupta, our studio audience, and you at home. I'm Alison Stewart. And I will see you here tomorrow at 3:00 Eastern for TALKBACK LIVE's "Free-For-All Friday." You don't want to miss that.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
|
|
|
|
|
