Talk:Jim Hood

NPOV tag

There has been a great deal of mainstream press criticism of Jim Hood that is absent from this article, but because I have written some of it,[1] [2] [3] I leave it to others to do the edits to balance the article. THF 02:57, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

An anonymous single-purpose-account from Mississippi State continues to attempt to sanitize the article even more than it is already sanitized. The article does need work, but the problem is the absence of information about Hood's questionable role in insurance litigation, and the solution is not to delete what little is there. THF 15:33, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Hood basically operates outside of law to exercise his impact as only liberal in Mississipi government. In the pardon matter, though he got judge to sign order blocking release, the pardons are valid whether or not inmates are released are not. Haley Barbour does not care one way or the other anymore. He issued pardon and moved on. If the prisoners are not released, Barbor does not care. Most of the pardons are not of prisoners, but rather people who want rights restroed to vote, hunt, and regain professional licenses. Pardon was signed. It was up to Governor to decide if conditions were met, not judge or attorney general. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.116.212.23 (talk) 15:16, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

There is a pattern of these attorney generals from southern states being homosexual. Is hood in this camp? That mess with the partnership was also messy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.139.67.17 (talk) 11:21, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Treatment of newsy controversies/scandals.

FTR, this, this, and this were reverted to this in keeping with WP encyclopedic standards. Notable events of controversial and scandalous nature are reported in a BLP if they are newsworthy, and the test of newsworthiness is that they are described by reliable sources.

Because the RS describe the controversies/scandals, we consider those data to be relevant to the encyclopedic mission of the article and include them regardless of our estimations of the merit/justness of such attention or criticism. Whether or not we believe the subjects' conduct to be controversial is immaterial. All that matters to us is that it was/is controversial to enough people that it was so described in the sources.

We describe these concisely and neutrally and therefore present them in sections titled "controversy/controversies" (if they are few) or in specific sections for individual controversies (if they are many). —Digiphi (Talk) 23:40, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I believe the latest controversy with the MPAA and Google qualifies. Here are some links: [4] [5] — DeweyQ (talk) 20:32, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I agree - Google filed a lawsuit this should be mentionedChristopheT (talk) 08:13, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

There are two sides to the Google / MPAA / Jim Hood discussion and The Register covers it here: [6]

there are a lot of decent sources that did cover the story - I think there is no need to add 'The Registers' editorial piece.

ChristopheT (talk) 13:12, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

The register article specifically addresses the Verge and the NY Times articles as pedling a hypothesis that is not supported by the evidence I think this should be added as a counterpoint to those articles:

"So The Verge and the New York Times were peddling a conspiracy theory that the evidence doesn't support. They were also whipping up anger among a constituency that has rallied for them before, very effectively: the "don't break the internet" crowd"

I think there are a few issues here :

* Part of the documents that leaked during the Sony hack showed that the MPAA and a few big movies studios were working on a a secret legal campaign to discredit Google. They hired a law firm to have draft a letter that Hood was later presenting as coming from his own office when addressing it to Google. (see NYT article). The leak raised a number of questions as to Holden being biased given his close relationship with the MPAA & the movie industry. This also sheds a negative light on former lawsuits brought against Google by Hood's office as it remains unclear whether or not they were also driven and financed by Entertainment & Pharmaceutical lobby groups.

The NY Times article is behind a paywall and cannot be accessed by non paying users. Can this be used as evidence without a copy being availaible?

* The letter (the one drafted by the MPAA layer) Hold sends to Google contains a number of statements that might suggest Hold is not familiar with the 'free speech' concept and might not be legally competent.

ChristopheT (talk) 13:59, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Project Goliath

Trying to gather together sources that might be useful for expanding on details of the scandal. --BeebLee (talk) 03:07, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

• June 2013: [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]
• December 2013: [13] [14]
• April 2014: [15] [16] [17]
• December 2014: [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24], [25]
• January 2015: [26]
• February 2015: [27]
• March 2015: [28] [29], [30]
• April 2015: [31] [32]
• June 2015: [33], [34] [35] [36]
• July 2015: [37] [38] [39]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jim Hood. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120112073951/http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2012/01/11/mississippi_gov_haley_barbour_pardons_murders_brett_favre_s_brother_earnest_scott.html to http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2012/01/11/mississippi_gov_haley_barbour_pardons_murders_brett_favre_s_brother_earnest_scott.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:08, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Related?

Is he related to Confederate General John Bell Hood?--Solomonfromfinland (talk) 16:23, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

A terrorist in our grasp Americas freedom took a consution disgraced by terrorist on US soil.

Terrorist of the Vatican launches war on US citizen in our homes with no warning and takes our freedom that our family's have fought and won... Our rights as citizens violated with numerous death threats and no reason or understanding of what these terrorist demands our but to give up life and all we cherish... Kids made to suffer by a terrorist in there own minds prayed a pound to stop them and lead them to suicides.... 50.86.50.214 (talk) 00:45, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Contact with urgency Donnie Lee Berry.. 19155 hwy 27 crystal springs Ms 39059 6017172678

My contacts and my address hwy 27 crystal springs Mississippi 50.86.50.214 (talk) 00:51, 8 June 2023 (UTC)