I've just put my finger on it:
...[H]ere's the full statement of retraction from PTC/MRC head honcho L. Brent Bozell,
"Media Research Center (MRC), Parents Television Council (PTC), Dr. Delores Tucker, Mark Honig and I have in the past made statements regarding so-called wrestling deaths -- children killed by other children alleged to be mimicking "professional wrestling" moves they saw on television.
We made such statements to members of MRC and PTC, the media, advertisers on World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) SmackDown! program, retailers that sell WWE-related toys and merchandise, public officials and the public.
MRC and PTC also produced a videotape as part of a fundraising campaign in connection with its "National Campaign to Clean Up TV Now!", which advanced the notion that the murder of Tiffany Eunick was caused by the influence of professional wrestling on Lionel Tate.
The videotape included interviews with Lionel Tate's lawyer advancing the notion that the murder of Tiffany Eunick, the victim, was directly caused by the impact that professional wrestling had on Lionel Tate.
We based our statements on media reports and source information. We now believe, based on extensive investigation and facts which have come to light since making those statements that it was wrong for MRC, PTC, their spokespersons and myself to have said anything that could be construed as blaming WWE or any of its programs for the deaths of the children.
Simply put, it was premature to reach that conclusion when we did, and there is now ample evidence to show that conclusion was incorrect. I now believe that professional wrestling played no role in the murder of Tiffany Eunick, which was a part of our "Clean Up TV Now!" campaign and am equally convinced that it was incorrect and wrong to have blamed WWE or any of its programs for the deaths of the other children.
Because of our statements, PTC, MRC and the WWE have been in litigation since November 2000. WWE vigorously advanced its position that neither it, nor "professional wrestling" led to these deaths.
WWE also contended that MRC, PTC, their spokespersons and I had misrepresented the number of advertisers who withdrew support from WWE's SmackDown! television program after receiving communications from the PTC, some of which regrettably connected the WWE and SmackDown! to the deaths of children.
As such, WWE exercised its right to initiate this litigation, during which facts came to light that prompted me to make this statement.
By this retraction, I want to be clear that WWE was correct in pointing out that various statements made by MRC, PTC and me were inaccurate concerning the identity and number of WWE SmackDown! advertisers who withdrew support from the program. Many of the companies we stated had "withdrawn" or pulled their support had never, in fact, advertised on SmackDown! nor had any plan to advertise on SmackDown!
Again, we regret this error and retract any such misleading statements.
Finally, concerning the statements about child wrestling deaths, it was wrong to have stated or implied that WWE or any of its programs caused these tragic deaths. Specifically concerning the Lionel Tate case, recent developments lead us to believe that others and we were given, and relied upon, false information provided by parties close to the case.
The information that we were given and relied upon may have been designed to make a national example of the Florida murder trial, pinning the blame on WWE.
For example, we were told by a source that Lionel Tate was watching a WWE program when he assaulted Tiffany Eunick. In fact, Lionel Tate was watching the "Flintstones" and a cartoon entitled "Cow and Chicken." We were also told, by a source, that Lionel Tate killed Tiffany Eunick while executing a wrestling move unique to a WWE character called the "Stone Cold Stunner".
We have since learned that this was not true, nor was there any evidence that it was true. It is now well documented that after the Tate trial concluded, the presiding Judge said it was "inconceivable" that Tiffany Eunick's injuries were caused by Lionel Tate mimicking wrestling moves.
Indeed, since the trial ended, Lionel Tate's new lawyers have filed court papers in which they admit that the "wrestling defense" was, in their words, "bogus."
Given these facts, WWE was within its rights to be angry at the MRC, PTC, their spokespersons and I for contacting WWE's advertisers to go beyond complaining about WWE content but passing along accusations which we now know were false. Because I feel a simple retraction is not sufficient, I have personally extended my apology to Vince McMahon and the WWE on behalf of MRC, PTC, Dr. Tucker, Mr. Honig and me.
Through this letter, I now make this apology public and specifically directed to the advertising community that has in the past, is currently or may in the future consider advertising or sponsoring WWE programming.
The PTC can have its concern with the content of WWE's television programming - though these concerns have been reduced significantly over the past years as a reflection of WWE's changed standards. But nowhere in that debate, including in the correspondence and statements to the advertising community, should there have been any discussion of "wrestling" deaths.
I regret this happening. It wasn't fair to WWE.
And I say this emphatically: Please disregard what others and we have said in the past about the Florida "wrestling" death. Neither "wrestling" in general, nor WWE specifically, had anything to do with it. Of that I am certain."
I love that story.