OrangeWhoopass.com Forums
General Discussion => Talk Zone => Topic started by: JimR on March 06, 2008, 05:42:02 pm
-
Fuck BP. I am reading the annual on the train to ST, and those jerks like nothing and no one in Houston. Damn.
-
Fuck BP. I am reading the annual on the train to ST, and those jerks like nothing and no one in Houston. Damn.
At least they admitted that conceding the Central probably wasn't the best plan.
But their hatred for Ausmus has reached the point of the irrational.
-
If you want more questionable previews of the Astros, Deadspin's (http://deadspin.com/364626/baseball-season-preview-houston-astros) is up now.
Actually, it is a marked improvement from her offering last year. And, it seems to me that it probably accurately reflects the opinions of your run-of-the-mill Astros fan.
-
If you want more questionable previews of the Astros, Deadspin's (http://deadspin.com/364626/baseball-season-preview-houston-astros) is up now.
That's the least informative season preview of all-time. Entertaining though.
Would've been better if she'd have flashed her tits and then yelled to him that his mom scuffed balls.
-
The whole Deadspin preview is obviously embellished.
No one is asking to see her tits.
(http://bookishlove.net/uploads/legion_pindelboyz.jpg)
She's in the Brown.
-
I think we can allow that some drunk in San Francisco might be a little fuzzy on the concept of tits. But Whitney did get one thing right
I log on to my hometown newspaper's sports page, and the only pertinent information about the 2008 Houston Astros' baseball-playing roster is relegated to a side column entitled "Astros Notes." Astros NOTES??
Anyone who relys on the Chronicle for their Astros news can be forgiven for not understanding the signing of Darin Erstad. The brian trust in the sports section seem to think that the "slice of life", human interest stories, and the latest on Clemens are the safest way to attract eyeballs this ST. Their sports reporters have to be led to their leads by a trail of very obvious bread crumbs.
-
The brian trust in the sports section seem to think that the "slice of life", human interest stories, *** are the safest way to attract eyeballs this ST..
Fair enough, but my question is what do you really want to read from sports reporters when writing spring training? Personally, I couldn't give a crap (as a random example) on whether JJO thought Woody looked good or bad, but am interested on what Woody was working on and how far along he thought he was, etc... As for 'slice of life' or 'human interest story,' the only one who's (generally) been writing about this stuff has been Steve Campell (in his blog no less), and personally I'm enough of a homer to have enjoyed his screeds...
To take it a step further, if we were able to convice The Grocer that someone from OWA should be granted a press pass for spring training, (1) what kind of questions would you want that person to ask players, and (2) what kind of stories would you like to read about?
-
It distresses me that anyone who passes for a professional writer, is also supposedly a lifelong Astros fan and is writing a season preview of the Astros doesn't know enough not to depend on the Houston Chronicle sports section for anything other than comic relief (or something to wrap shrimp shells in).
-
As soon as I saw who wrote the Deadspin article, I moved on. I have no interest in anything she has to say about the Astros.
-
What is that from? A benefit concert for comfortable shoes?
The whole Deadspin preview is obviously embellished.
No one is asking to see her tits.
(http://bookishlove.net/uploads/legion_pindelboyz.jpg)
She's in the Brown.
-
As soon as I saw who wrote the Deadspin article, I moved on. I have no interest in anything she has to say about the Astros.
Saying that it was better than her effort last year is the best example of damning with faint praise I can think of.
-
Fair enough, but my question is what do you really want to read from sports reporters when writing spring training? Personally, I couldn't give a crap (as a random example) on whether JJO thought Woody looked good or bad, but am interested on what Woody was working on and how far along he thought he was, etc... As for 'slice of life' or 'human interest story,' the only one who's (generally) been writing about this stuff has been Steve Campell (in his blog no less), and personally I'm enough of a homer to have enjoyed his screeds...
To take it a step further, if we were able to convice The Grocer that someone from OWA should be granted a press pass for spring training, (1) what kind of questions would you want that person to ask players, and (2) what kind of stories would you like to read about?
Here are some of the stories about Spring Training that I have read about, first or better in sources other than the Chronicle,
Nolan Ryan going to the Rangers
Darin Erstad hired to mentor Hunter Pence
The first reliable reports on Pence's accident
Dewey Robinson's focus on the changeup for all the Astros pitchers
The details of the trade for Tejada
The Astros catching rotation.
Mclane's statements about Clemens in camp.
I don't want to ask the players anything. I want reliable reports on what they are doing. The game on the field is what I'm interested in and I don't think it unreasonable to expect the Houston paper to be a reliable witness to that. It's especially important to me when I can't watch the games. For instance, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a baseball reporter to know whether a pitcher is "struggling" as opposed to working on a new pitch.
-
Fuck BP. I am reading the annual on the train to ST, and those jerks like nothing and no one in Houston. Damn.
Fuck 'em. Those stat geeks TOTALLY miss the intangibles that Brad Ausmus brings to this club.
-
Here are some of the stories about Spring Training that I have read about, first or better in sources other than the Chronicle,
Nolan Ryan going to the Rangers
Darin Erstad hired to mentor Hunter Pence
The first reliable reports on Pence's accident
Dewey Robinson's focus on the changeup for all the Astros pitchers
The details of the trade for Tejada
The Astros catching rotation.
Mclane's statements about Clemens in camp.
I don't want to ask the players anything. I want reliable reports on what they are doing. The game on the field is what I'm interested in and I don't think it unreasonable to expect the Houston paper to be a reliable witness to that. It's especially important to me when I can't watch the games. For instance, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a baseball reporter to know whether a pitcher is "struggling" as opposed to working on a new pitch.
Another thing that has happened to newspapers (online or print) is the advent of much more media exposure nowadays. Reliance of one source is not necessary any more for the end-user/fan/customer. Of course, newspapers by their very name are supposed to be "news" outlets, as in "fact, information, et. al." The explosion of cable single source niche broadcasters, such as music, entertainment, sports, etc. has dual implications: customers have choice (in some ways better, in many ways worse), and media outlets such as newspapers have tried to change to adapt when perhaps it wasn't in their best interest to do so.
For example, why would the sports department at the Chronicle want to compete with ESPN? Well, they wouldn't, because ESPN serves a national interest, or better still an Northeastern bias and all the rest of us can suck it. So I need someone to tell me about the local nine, or the local football, basketball, overall sports. But you know what, I hear more complaining about the lack of coverage for (insert local team name here) in ESPN than I do for anything else. That tells me that the ESPN coverage is much more coveted by the fans and thus they rarely care about holding the local rags and media outlets accountable. You get what you pay for, IOW. The other thing, some media outlets that were not available before have cropped up: Local Sports Team (and/or League Sponsored) websites and of course, the dreaded fansite, blogs, opinion sites and one-offs for local teams. These two relatively new media outlets (ugh, I hate calling what we do as media, but for now, let's go with it) have yet another impact on how the local news outlets (both print, radio and television) have reacted to what is their niche. The Astros.com of the world have much better access and coverage for the local team, work just as hard, and focus on the keener aspects of nuance for the team. An example would be an analysis of the Astros farm system would probably come out much more in-depth from Astros. com than what you'll get from the Chron. Is it the chronicle's fault?
Not entirely, IMHO.
But to carry this thought through, is that the newness of the media outlet explosion both in the cable/national realm and now seeped to the local realm have caused what we once considered the "single source of news" for us as less than what it used to be. Is it supposed to be where we go to get our news simply because they were first? I fear that the advancement of entertainment into the news reporting (ESPN, I'm looking right at you) has had it's ripple effect keenly down to the local "news reporting". If we bitch about lack of coverage by the Entertainment/Sports outlet that is ESPN, then we can easily accept the locals reporting on the Houston nine in much the same trite fashion... no? Furthermore, a concerted effort is now being made to merge into the media outlets and sort of string them together as some sort of whack tapestry of information. Example, ESPN will employ Richard Justice for his views because quite frankly, it's cheaper to do this for local flavor on local and even national events that come out of this area, than to employ national reporters to go investigate. Same with local radio making radio stars out of newspaper guys, television shows making tv stars out of radio guys, and on and on and on.
What's next? Radio reaching out to fansites is happening now, see ClutchFans.net as the best example of a simple yet effective method to gather news from sources that may or may not be credible, but certainly it is cost effective and there is no reinvention of the wheel.
So all in all, this is the bottomline for me: Get the news wherever you want to get it from but you'll be hard pressed to make a case for a single source that is right all the time, perfect all the time and entertaining all the time. Except here of course. Now, who out there in the media world wants to sign me up to do a full hour show about barrio queso? Anyone... Bueller... Bueller... anyone?
-
Fuck BP. I am reading the annual on the train to ST, and those jerks like nothing and no one in Houston. Damn.
How do you post from your phone? Is it a blackberry? I don't even have that option on mine (it's read only).
-
The Astros.com of the world have much better access and coverage for the local team, work just as hard, and focus on the keener aspects of nuance for the team. An example would be an analysis of the Astros farm system would probably come out much more in-depth from Astros. com than what you'll get from the Chron. Is it the chronicle's fault?
Absolutely it is.
Astros.com is not a "news" outlet, it is a promotion outlet. No other team's web site provides better access and more intelligent analysis than the local newspaper. There's a reason when people like Olney don't link to the mlb.com stories when they run down the news of the day. The team is supposed to promote itself through its web site. The local media is supposed to be the fourth estate, unbiased and objectively reporting on the events within its bailiwick. I don't know anybody who is a fan of another team that gets the bulk of their news from that team's web site rather than the local press.
I have the greatest respect and appreciation for the work Footer does. It is sad that she has to do the Chron's work for them. But the fact that she does is the greatest imaginable indictment of the Chron's sports coverage.
-
Absolutely it is.
I won't quibble with "absolute". I don't think they are "entirely" to blame, but they share the responsibility. You know who is to blame ultimately? Shareholders. They want ROI on the investment and if they don't get it, they shut down the operation or change out the leadership and get what they want. Is it wrong for a shareholder of a media outlet to want ROI? Not entirely. But I don't fool myself into thinking for one minute we're dealing with the fourth estate as in the old days. They have to balance between entertainment competition with other venues and actual news reporting. You want true news reporting: you may want to try NPR-ish type of sports reporting. Good luck finding it.
Astros.com is not a "news" outlet, it is a promotion outlet. No other team's web site provides better access and more intelligent analysis than the local newspaper. There's a reason when people like Olney don't link to the mlb.com stories when they run down the news of the day. The team is supposed to promote itself through its web site. The local media is supposed to be the fourth estate, unbiased and objectively reporting on the events within its bailiwick. I don't know anybody who is a fan of another team that gets the bulk of their news from that team's web site rather than the local press.
I have the greatest respect and appreciation for the work Footer does. It is sad that she has to do the Chron's work for them. But the fact that she does is the greatest imaginable indictment of the Chron's sports coverage.
She does a better job of balancing the entertainment a team site provides with insightful information. The chron doesn't do as good a job of balancing. But if it generates revenue for shareholders, it allows the news outlet to stay in business. So my point was you take the good with the bad and move along. If you expect differently, my opinion is you're fooling yourself into thinking that the news business is what it used to be or should be. It. Is. Not.
-
fooling yourself into thinking that the news business is what it used to be or should be. It. Is. Not.
or ever particularly was. Yellow Journalism aint an invention of modern times.
"You furnish the pictures and I'll furnish the war."
-William Randolph Hearst
-
Fuck BP. I am reading the annual on the train to ST, and those jerks like nothing and no one in Houston. Damn.
is it arizona or florida this year for you?
-
is it arizona or florida this year for you?
Is the train going east yet?
-
What's next? Radio reaching out to fansites is happening now, see ClutchFans.net as the best example of a simple yet effective method to gather news from sources that may or may not be credible, but certainly it is cost effective and there is no reinvention of the wheel.
What does ClutchFans do that you're referring to here?
-
Is the train going east yet?
A train leaves Kissimmee traveling westbound at a rate of acceleration of 0.01 m/s^2. The train carries a full supply of Shiner 98. At what point will Tony LaRussa's BAC exceed the speed of the train?
-
What does ClutchFans do that you're referring to here?
"Clutch" has a weekly guest spot with John and Lance on 1560.
-
A train leaves Kissimmee traveling westbound at a rate of acceleration of 0.01 m/s^2. The train carries a full supply of Shiner 98. At what point will Tony LaRussa's BAC exceed the speed of the train?
Is that a no?
-
A train leaves Kissimmee traveling westbound at a rate of acceleration of 0.01 m/s^2. The train carries a full supply of Shiner 98. At what point will Tony LaRussa's BAC exceed the speed of the train?
Trick question. His BAC exceeds the speed of the train for the entire journey.
-
She does a better job of balancing the entertainment a team site provides with insightful information. The chron doesn't do as good a job of balancing. But if it generates revenue for shareholders, it allows the news outlet to stay in business. So my point was you take the good with the bad and move along. If you expect differently, my opinion is you're fooling yourself into thinking that the news business is what it used to be or should be. It. Is. Not.
What exactly are you referring to as the "good" we get from the Comical that supposedly attempts to balance the "bad"? Every once in a great while I read a good article in that rag; as I recall there were a couple during Biggio's final games last year. But they are hardly enough to even make a blip.
-
Trick question. His BAC exceeds the speed of the train for the entire journey.
Correct answer.
-
Is that a no?
It's more of an extended "I don't know".
-
No, the train still is not going east. We are in AZ, which is far better in all respects. The Astros made a mistake turning down a partnership with Texas in Surprise. Maybe they'll move out here soon. More and more teams are.
Fyi-Lakey says Lidge will be ready for OD and that any of us can have Wes Helms if we'll pay $750,000 of his salary. Anyone need a gardener or a pool boy?.
-
I won't quibble with "absolute". I don't think they are "entirely" to blame, but they share the responsibility. You know who is to blame ultimately? Shareholders. They want ROI on the investment and if they don't get it, they shut down the operation or change out the leadership and get what they want. Is it wrong for a shareholder of a media outlet to want ROI? Not entirely. But I don't fool myself into thinking for one minute we're dealing with the fourth estate as in the old days. They have to balance between entertainment competition with other venues and actual news reporting. You want true news reporting: you may want to try NPR-ish type of sports reporting. Good luck finding it.
She does a better job of balancing the entertainment a team site provides with insightful information. The chron doesn't do as good a job of balancing. But if it generates revenue for shareholders, it allows the news outlet to stay in business. So my point was you take the good with the bad and move along. If you expect differently, my opinion is you're fooling yourself into thinking that the news business is what it used to be or should be. It. Is. Not.
You seem to be taking the specific example of the what we get from the Chronicle and applying to modern journalism as a whole. My point is that the Chron's coverage is much worse than that in other cities. I'm not asking them to be great, I'm just asking them to be as decent as their peers. The fact that we have to rely on Astros.com instead of an actual news outlet is indicative of how far below other newspapers the Chron is. No other fans have to rely on their team's own official web site for balanced analysis of that team. That's what their newspapers provide.
-
Fyi-Lakey says Lidge will be ready for OD and that any of us can have Wes Helms if we'll pay $750,000 of his salary. Anyone need a gardener or a pool boy?.
I'm looking for a nanny, but Helms doesn't make the play to the left well enough for my tastes.
-
Fuck BP. I am reading the annual on the train to ST, and those jerks like nothing and no one in Houston. Damn.
I don't think BP has ever written a positive Astros preview. No reason for that to change now.
-
You seem to be taking the specific example of the what we get from the Chronicle and applying to modern journalism as a whole. My point is that the Chron's coverage is much worse than that in other cities. I'm not asking them to be great, I'm just asking them to be as decent as their peers. The fact that we have to rely on Astros.com instead of an actual news outlet is indicative of how far below other newspapers the Chron is. No other fans have to rely on their team's own official web site for balanced analysis of that team. That's what their newspapers provide.
In fact, recently, papers in other cities, NY Post, (Clemens at ST) St Petesburg Times, (Pence and glass door) a generic AP article, (Rodriguez's ST appearance) have had more information on stories that the Chronicle was covering about the Astros.
-
In fact, recently, papers in other cities, NY Post, (Clemens at ST) St Petesburg Times, (Pence and glass door) a generic AP article, (Rodriguez's ST appearance) have had more information on stories that the Chronicle was covering about the Astros.
Exactly. The Chron's poor coverage of the Astros isn't some sort of symptom of shifting market forces in modern journalism. It's just a really shitty paper. It has nobody but itself to blame for being so shitty.
-
Not just talking about the preview. The player profiles are negative too
-
Not just talking about the preview. The player profiles are negative too
I've skimmed the book. There might be 20 positive player profiles in there, total.
The BP guys have figured out that their negaitve stuff is more entertaining for the masses than the positive.
-
A lot of teams are moving out of Florida. Is the Grapefruit League on borrowed time?
No, the train still is not going east. We are in AZ, which is far better in all respects. The Astros made a mistake turning down a partnership with Texas in Surprise. Maybe they'll move out here soon. More and more teams are.
Fyi-Lakey says Lidge will be ready for OD and that any of us can have Wes Helms if we'll pay $750,000 of his salary. Anyone need a gardener or a pool boy?.
-
That's the least informative season preview of all-time. Entertaining though.
Somehow, the Red's preview (http://deadspin.com/365180/baseball-season-preview-cincinnati-reds) is spot on for certain things:
"12. Eat Skyline Chili. Or just stick your finger in your asshole and rub it on ramen noodles. Bingo, you've experienced Cincinnati's finest cuisine."
-
BP has always been funny. That is the only reason I buy it.
-
The BP guys have figured out that their negaitve stuff is more entertaining for the masses than the positive.
They've always struck me as being more assholes than funny.
-
Lakey says Lidge will be ready for OD and that any of us can have Wes Helms if we'll pay $750,000 of his salary. Anyone need a gardener or a pool boy?.
There is an open audition for sons of former Astros this spring. Helms is just a nephew, though, right?
-
You seem to be taking the specific example of the what we get from the Chronicle and applying to modern journalism as a whole. My point is that the Chron's coverage is much worse than that in other cities. I'm not asking them to be great, I'm just asking them to be as decent as their peers. The fact that we have to rely on Astros.com instead of an actual news outlet is indicative of how far below other newspapers the Chron is. No other fans have to rely on their team's own official web site for balanced analysis of that team. That's what their newspapers provide.
I. Don't. Disagree.
But what I'm saying that if news is all that was required of the local rag, they'd be out of business. They're not. Why? Obviously because they provide what the masses require, whether it be stockholders, consumers and fans. You and I require information, news coverage, et. al. What we get is entertainment, sensationalism, IOW - what sells to Joe Public. Have you read the bloggers who support the Chron? It's kind of scary actually. So they buy, the chon sells, everyone is happy... except you and I.
But perhaps, perhaps, perhaps... you and I are not the customers they concern themselves with. We live in the era of reality television. We live in the era of fans crying about lack of coverage on ESPN (a national *entertainment* venue). We live in the era of trains in ballparks. Any of that for me? No, I'm not what those things are geared for. Those things are for the consumers of today and thus what I expect from the Chron might be exclusive news and information, but it's not going to happen. Do they do a worse job than other cities of course, I don't doubt that. But what you replied to me was that I was not correct to say "Not entirely" to my own question of "Is the Chronicle to blame?". You said "Absolutely" as in "Yes, they are to blame *entirely*". Or did I misunderstand your point? See I don't blame the Chronicle for being a business run to make money so they provide what sells to their own consumers. If they didn't, they'd be out of business. It's the same with Drayton McLane, hell... I hate the train at MMPUS, but who cares what I think... McLane is running a business to make money and there are consumers who buy his stuff, trains and all... and if that means he puts a new 100 Million dollar LF out there, so be it.
So my point again is that I think (my opinion) is that one has to temper expectations of some things out there because that is usually what gets one disappointed more so than anything else.
-
But what I'm saying that if news is all that was required of the local rag, they'd be out of business. They're not. Why? Obviously because they provide what the masses require, whether it be stockholders, consumers and fans. You and I require information, news coverage, et. al. What we get is entertainment, sensationalism, IOW - what sells to Joe Public. Have you read the bloggers who support the Chron? It's kind of scary actually. So they buy, the chon sells, everyone is happy... except you and I.
I wrote the Chronicle recently to complain about something specific in their sports coverage. I have no idea why I did this, but I did. Here is the gist of their response:
"Chron.com gets an average of 3 million hits a day and almost 90 million a month."
-
"Chron.com gets an average of 3 million hits a day and almost 90 million a month."
Does that actually make them much money? I go to their website occasionally to look at pictures or read what stupidity their sportswriters are spouting. But I would never actually pay for that, and if there are ads on the site I haven't noticed (I have pretty decent ad-blocking software) and would certainly never click on them. I wonder how many print subscribers the Chron has that are like my dad. He subscribes to the Beaumont paper mainly to read the obituaries and because he isn't comfortable enough with the computer to read it online, and because all they can get is a crappy dial-up connection where they live, up at Rayburn. I wonder how many people under 70 are really actual physical newspaper readers? If I were one, I think I'd be more inclined to subscribe to the NY Times or the Washington Post.
-
Does that actually make them much money? I go to their website occasionally to look at pictures or read what stupidity their sportswriters are spouting. But I would never actually pay for that, and if there are ads on the site I haven't noticed (I have pretty decent ad-blocking software) and would certainly never click on them. I wonder how many print subscribers the Chron has that are like my dad. He subscribes to the Beaumont paper mainly to read the obituaries and because he isn't comfortable enough with the computer to read it online, and because all they can get is a crappy dial-up connection where they live, up at Rayburn. I wonder how many people under 70 are really actual physical newspaper readers? If I were one, I think I'd be more inclined to subscribe to the NY Times or the Washington Post.
Don't forget the coupons.
-
If I were one, I think I'd be more inclined to subscribe to the NY Times or the Washington Post.
Take a pass on both of those papers. They are now drivel and one-sided political screed.
I quit the NYT when I'd have to always keep the previous day's paper so that I could get the corrections in the next day's paper. The NYT ombudsman does provide some comic relief by ripping a story in the A section as being poorly reported or politically one-sided. The minority shareholders of the NYT's parent company are revolting against little "Pinch" Sulzberger as we write.
-
I still subscribe to the Chronicle. I don't want to take my computer to the bathroom with me.
-
They've always struck me as being more assholes than funny.
There's a difference?
-
Take a pass on both of those papers. They are now drivel and one-sided political screed.
Which side?
-
Which side?
The left side.
-
The left side.
The left side of who/what?
-
The left side of who/what?
It is well known and has been well documented that the New York Times is a left-swinging, Democrat rag. I have no problem reading well written partisan editorials; in fact, I like reading them, and it doesn't matter what side it is. I respect the best of both sides of opinion, whether it is Robert Reich, Thomas Friedman, Camille Paglia or Susan Estrich and others (I love the rawness of James Carville) from the left or George Will, Charles Krauthammer, Pat Buchanan, Ann Coulter or the late William F. Buckley and others from the right. However, when the editorial bias pervasively creeps into the reportage side of things as has happened at the Old Gray Lady for a long time, I have a problem; a big problem. NYT reporters have been caught *creating* biased news--by no less an authority than their own ombudsman.
-
William Buckley would roll in his grave to hear his name lumped in with Ann Coulter.
-
William Buckley would roll in his grave to hear his name lumped in with Ann Coulter.
I agree. He was my personal favorite, an extremely thoughtful, thought provoking and eloquent man.
-
It is well known and has been well documented that the New York Times is a left-swinging, Democrat rag. I have no problem reading well written partisan editorials; in fact, I like reading them, and it doesn't matter what side it is. I respect the best of both sides of opinion, whether it is Robert Reich, Thomas Friedman, Camille Paglia or Susan Estrich and others (I love the rawness of James Carville) from the left or George Will, Charles Krauthammer, Pat Buchanan, Ann Coulter or the late William F. Buckley and others from the right. However, when the editorial bias pervasively creeps into the reportage side of things as has happened at the Old Gray Lady for a long time, I have a problem; a big problem. NYT reporters have been caught *creating* biased news--by no less an authority than their own ombudsman.
"To the left of me" would've saved space.
-
It is well known and has been well documented that the New York Times is a left-swinging, Democrat rag. I have no problem reading well written partisan editorials; in fact, I like reading them, and it doesn't matter what side it is. I respect the best of both sides of opinion, whether it is Robert Reich, Thomas Friedman, Camille Paglia or Susan Estrich and others (I love the rawness of James Carville) from the left or George Will, Charles Krauthammer, Pat Buchanan, Ann Coulter or the late William F. Buckley and others from the right. However, when the editorial bias pervasively creeps into the reportage side of things as has happened at the Old Gray Lady for a long time, I have a problem; a big problem. NYT reporters have been caught *creating* biased news--by no less an authority than their own ombudsman.
the times has a consistent standard of quality writing that goes far beyond the op-ed page. for instance, there was a great article in last sunday's sports page about how new Harvard basketball coach Tommy Amaker is lowering academic standards to recruit players. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/02/sports/ncaabasketball/02harvard.html
or take an article from today's paper about Bush vetoing the congressional interrogation bill:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/09/washington/09policy.html?hp
this article reports this story on the angle of the issue of executive power and executive privelege, not the angle of "bush and democrats at WARRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!" that is likely to characterize nearly every other news outlet that reports this story.
don't you think that using such strong, dismissive phrases like "democrat rag" or saying that an editorial bias "pervasively creeps" is in some ways a means of propaganda to undercut any prospective negative articles about republicans?
-
don't you think that using such strong, dismissive phrases like "democrat rag" or saying that an editorial bias "pervasively creeps" is in some ways a means of propaganda to undercut any prospective negative articles about republicans?
No, I don't. There have been oodles of documented examples of pervasive bias by the NYT. Now, that's not to say that the Times doesn't still have value, because it does. The Sunday Times remains my favorite paper, and I purchase it from time to time. My complaints about the Times really apply to the A section, and really page 1. It's as if the motto today is "All the news that fits we print."
-
No, I don't. There have been oodles of documented examples of pervasive bias by the NYT. Now, that's not to say that the Times doesn't still have value, because it does. The Sunday Times remains my favorite paper, and I purchase it from time to time. My complaints about the Times really apply to the A section, and really page 1. It's as if the motto today is "All the news that fits we print."
The NYT certainly had value when the Bush Administration needed cheerleaders for its insane Iraq War. Judith Miller's bogus stories about WMD were routinely cited by Cheney and others. Plus she covered up for Scooter Libby after he outed a CIA agent. They've also sat on stories that were embarrassing for Republicans, printing them only when someone else was about to scoop them. The latest one was the story about John McCain's lobbyist mistress.
-
The NYT certainly had value when the Bush Administration needed cheerleaders for its insane Iraq War. Judith Miller's bogus stories about WMD were routinely cited by Cheney and others. Plus she covered up for Scooter Libby after he outed a CIA agent. They've also sat on stories that were embarrassing for Republicans, printing them only when someone else was about to scoop them. The latest one was the story about John McCain's lobbyist mistress.
The marketplace is setting the NYT value by its continuing loss of subscriptions and advertising revenue. I must correct one factual error in your obviously partisan piece: Richard Armitage, not Scooter Libby, outed the CIA agent Valerie Plame. Armitage admitted it, and Libby wasn't charged with that.
Back to baseball anyone?
-
Take a pass on both of those papers. They are now drivel and one-sided political screed.
I quit the NYT when I'd have to always keep the previous day's paper so that I could get the corrections in the next day's paper. The NYT ombudsman does provide some comic relief by ripping a story in the A section as being poorly reported or politically one-sided. The minority shareholders of the NYT's parent company are revolting against little "Pinch" Sulzberger as we write.
Well, what papers would you recommend? In any event, the NYT and the Wash. Post have to be a huge step up from the Houston Chronicle. And if the Times leans left, it could only help provide a balance for living in Texas. One good thing about moving back home is that I will no longer have to suffer the inevitable "Oh, so you must love G.W. Bush" whenever someone found out I was from Texas. Now I can go back to being something of an exotic species just for being a liberal, and an unmarried, straight woman over 20 who isn't looking for a husband. Ah, it's good to be home.
-
STOP!
-
I subscribe to the Austin paper only so i can get a feel for what's happening locally. I don't expect much from it, and it barely delivers that. I'll probably always subscribe to the local paper.
I think the New York Times has a lot of problems but it's still the bellwether paper for the rest of English speaking North America. I read The New York Times online often, not 'cause it's the New York Times, but because there is an article or story of interest that my search directed me to or linked me to. And the stories are always well written and edited.
As for James Carville or Ann Colter, I can stand liars of any ilk and wish they'd both STF up and vanish.
-
There have been oodles of documented examples of pervasive bias by the NYT.
Documented by whom? All I know is that the Times employed a columnist who was a mouthpiece for Scooter Libby and that they sat on the warrantless wiretapping story until after the election.
Joey's right. It's a generally well written paper and you can learn a great deal by reading it thoroughly. To dismiss it as a "Democratic rag" is absurd.
Now, the editorial pages of, say, the Wall Street Journal and Investor's Business Daily certainly embrace many conservative tenets, some of which I also happen to embrace, but I would not dismiss either paper as a Republican rag.
-
Somehow, the Red's preview (http://deadspin.com/365180/baseball-season-preview-cincinnati-reds) is spot on for certain things:
"12. Eat Skyline Chili. Or just stick your finger in your asshole and rub it on ramen noodles. Bingo, you've experienced Cincinnati's finest cuisine."
Yuck. I'm glad I've never had that shit.
-
Documented by whom? All I know is that the Times employed a columnist who was a mouthpiece for Scooter Libby and that they sat on the warrantless wiretapping story until after the election.
Joey's right. It's a generally well written paper and you can learn a great deal by reading it thoroughly. To dismiss it as a "Democratic rag" is absurd.
Now, the editorial pages of, say, the Wall Street Journal and Investor's Business Daily certainly embrace many conservative tenets, some of which I also happen to embrace, but I would not dismiss either paper as a Republican rag.
If you do not read the WSJ and the NYT, you are simply not informed. What's the purpose of reading only opinions that you agree with?
-
What's the purpose of reading only opinions that you agree with?
Smug complacency is enjoyable to some I suppose.
-
STOP!
Hammer Time.