Give virtual activism a chance

This post shows Philip Dawdy' e-mail for two reporters from the"Wall Street Journal". Here Stephany wrote:
"MY LETTER TO FDA
THOMAS LAUGHREN:
Dear Dr. Thomas Laughren,"

Do you expect them to answer? They will not. Of course there will be no reply especially if the argumentation shows evidences that they are wrong, concealing information, distorting facts or display conflicts of interest.
They use the Göbells strategy "a lie repeated a million times becomes a truth". Replying e-mails that question them open a discussion and they don't want it. They use the strategies: "pretend not to care"; "ignoring will prevent them to question us more and more". So people give up sending them e-mails because it seems to be useless.
No! After receiving, and not replying, many e-mails they will have to think... and perhaps answer or not.
But their answer is not what is at stake here. They only need to be advised that we are not buying the forth power anylonger.

I'm keen to virtual activism.

I've already sent e-mails to WHO, FDA, MHRA, APA.... name it. I also have participated on BBC's "Have your say" - these are my contributions - and have send demands on more mental health problems sending request to explanations about psychiatric drugs on this opportunity:

HAVE YOU GOT AN IDEA?

Your say

I do some social networking activities from time to time and not only express what is concealed but receive lots of good information from people who know the truth. I use to signed all petitions online related to psychiatric drug problems as well as some other issues. I do what I can.
It's about time to question these people and don't wait for reply.
The answer will not go to our Inbox. But I truly believe that doing nothing is much worse.