PDA

View Full Version : changing the media coverage


xil357
05-15-2003, 12:43 PM
We've argued until we're blue in the face (or the fingers) that the media is far more negative toward the Sox than the Cubs. (I would argue that the media is balanced toward the Sox, but the love affair with the Cubs on the part of their corporate brethren -- the Trib, and the demographics-chasing Sun Times makes it seem like the Sox only get negative press.)

However, as a media watcher (albeit in the Dallas-Fort Worth market) who works on a daily basis with professional print journalists in an academic setting (most of them sports journalists who have covered the Dallas Cowboys, NASCAR, Rangers baseball, etc.), consider this story:

Last year, one of our journalism students wrote Dallas Morning News Sports Day editor Dave Smith an e-mail to complain about the lack of coverage the baseball team here at our junior college was receiving, despite the fact that they were about to win the NJCAA national championship, especially considering that the Morning News regularly covers high school sports to the extent that junior varsity high school bowling teams get full-length feature stories.

Well, within a day Mr. Smith wrote back to our student with a somewhat snotty reply saying, in effect, "nobody cares about junior college sports." However, the day after that, he wrote back ANOTHER e-mail reply and reconsidered his earlier opinion and agreed that our baseball team would get coverage in the sports section of the paper. Sure enough, there were game report stories for each of the games leading up to and including the Richland College Thunderduck's NJCAA Worlds' Series triumph. Since then, when our basketball and soccer teams have advanced to the national championship tournaments, sure enough they get some press in the Morning News.

Another example. Dallas' Channel 8 lead sportscaster, Dale Hansen, last year reported on a story that contained a factual error. My colleague, who was watching the broadcast, sent him an e-mail with the correct facts (I can't even recall the issue specifically). Well, on the next night's 10 p.m. newscast, Hansen specifically mentioned the e-mail that my colleague sent and corrected the error.

My point is, with the amount of passion that Sox fans exhibit on WSI, it's a shame that we don't send gobs of e-mails to Tribune and Sun Times reporters and editors to express our dismay at the double-standard with which those two papers cover the two baseball teams.

Moreover, to what extent would a threat to either cancel subscriptions to either paper (we already know that the Southtown is a good alternative for Sox coverage) or to boycott specific advertisers have an impact? I think it could be huge.

If just one e-mail can influence coverage at a paper that has no competition in its city (The Dallas Morning News is the only major paper in Dallas, we don't even have alternatives like the Daily Herald or the Southtown here, and the Morning News owns and publishes all the suburban papers, too!!), imagine what lots of angry e-mails can do to newspapers in a competitive market? Think of what bunches of e-mails sent to Channels 2, 5, 7, 9 and 32 could do.

Phil Rogers is a member of WSI, and from speaking to one of his former colleagues from both the Dallas Morning News and the now-defunct Dallas Times Herald (the Morning News bought and closed down the Herald in 1991), he's a great guy and a superb journalist, confirming my independent and long-standing opinion of his great baseball coverage for the Trib. But I doubt his editors and Tribune management even know WSI exists. And we know that WSI members are but a small percentage of the legions of Sox fans who will not turn out for a mediocre team even though we live and die with their exploits on the field.

The Sox get less positive press and less coverage overall because the media believes that Sox fans are a small and shrinking demographic. Why should they devote resources to covering a product that they believe is of interest to an insignificant and apathetic population?

Let's prove them wrong and use the power of the Internet to enact some real change instead of just b*tching about it.

Iwritecode
05-15-2003, 01:11 PM
Originally posted by xil357
But I doubt his editors and Tribune management even know WSI exists.

Trust me, the guys at the Cubune know we exist. I wouldn't be surprised to find out they have people that lurk on this site daily. There's been many a time that letters and/or emails have been sent out about the coverage that they give the Cubs compared to the Sox. It never helps. They have it set in their minds that they are giving fair coverage to both teams and that's that. It's been this way for years and I don't see it ending anytime soon.

Hangar18
05-15-2003, 01:14 PM
Originally posted by xil357
We've argued until we're blue in the face (or the fingers) that the media is far more negative toward the Sox than the Cubs. (I would argue that the media is balanced toward the Sox, but the love affair with the Cubs on the part of their corporate brethren -- the Trib, and the demographics-chasing Sun Times makes it seem like the Sox only get negative press.)

However, as a media watcher (albeit in the Dallas-Fort Worth market) who works on a daily basis with professional print journalists in an academic setting (most of them sports journalists who have covered the Dallas Cowboys, NASCAR, Rangers baseball, etc.), consider this story:

Last year, one of our journalism students wrote Dallas Morning News Sports Day editor Dave Smith an e-mail to complain about the lack of coverage the baseball team here at our junior college was receiving, despite the fact that they were about to win the NJCAA national championship, especially considering that the Morning News regularly covers high school sports to the extent that junior varsity high school bowling teams get full-length feature stories.

Well, within a day Mr. Smith wrote back to our student with a somewhat snotty reply saying, in effect, "nobody cares about junior college sports." However, the day after that, he wrote back ANOTHER e-mail reply and reconsidered his earlier opinion and agreed that our baseball team would get coverage in the sports section of the paper. Sure enough, there were game report stories for each of the games leading up to and including the Richland College Thunderduck's NJCAA Worlds' Series triumph. Since then, when our basketball and soccer teams have advanced to the national championship tournaments, sure enough they get some press in the Morning News.

Another example. Dallas' Channel 8 lead sportscaster, Dale Hansen, last year reported on a story that contained a factual error. My colleague, who was watching the broadcast, sent him an e-mail with the correct facts (I can't even recall the issue specifically). Well, on the next night's 10 p.m. newscast, Hansen specifically mentioned the e-mail that my colleague sent and corrected the error.

My point is, with the amount of passion that Sox fans exhibit on WSI, it's a shame that we don't send gobs of e-mails to Tribune and Sun Times reporters and editors to express our dismay at the double-standard with which those two papers cover the two baseball teams.

Moreover, to what extent would a threat to either cancel subscriptions to either paper (we already know that the Southtown is a good alternative for Sox coverage) or to boycott specific advertisers have an impact? I think it could be huge.

If just one e-mail can influence coverage at a paper that has no competition in its city (The Dallas Morning News is the only major paper in Dallas, we don't even have alternatives like the Daily Herald or the Southtown here, and the Morning News owns and publishes all the suburban papers, too!!), imagine what lots of angry e-mails can do to newspapers in a competitive market? Think of what bunches of e-mails sent to Channels 2, 5, 7, 9 and 32 could do.

Phil Rogers is a member of WSI, and from speaking to one of his former colleagues from both the Dallas Morning News and the now-defunct Dallas Times Herald (the Morning News bought and closed down the Herald in 1991), he's a great guy and a superb journalist, confirming my independent and long-standing opinion of his great baseball coverage for the Trib. But I doubt his editors and Tribune management even know WSI exists. And we know that WSI members are but a small percentage of the legions of Sox fans who will not turn out for a mediocre team even though we live and die with their exploits on the field.

The Sox get less positive press and less coverage overall because the media believes that Sox fans are a small and shrinking demographic. Why should they devote resources to covering a product that they believe is of interest to an insignificant and apathetic population?

Let's prove them wrong and use the power of the Internet to enact some real change instead of just b*tching about it.
this is a great story and warms the heart, but Ive sent emails Bitching about this double standard to at least the Trib and a certain radio station here as well as SPEAKING LIVE to a Sports Editor at WLS-7 tv They pretty much said the same thing. They say the report with a BIAS because there are more cub fans then sox fans. I explained that the reason for that is because they choose to focus more coverage on the cubs than the sox, and that s the reason. Basically what came first the chicken or the egg. The media doesnt care what Sox fans think is what I get from them. the main announcer at Wscr in chicago BLATANTLY covers the cubs first, 90% of his show seems to be cub related. whether hes talking about the cubs, posing cub related topics (so that callers call in only about cub material) to having guests who he Poses Cub Related questions to, its terrible. He has got to be, in radio media, one of the worst out there, and hes so blatant about it, he could care less. Ive called him out on it EVERY TIME HE DOES IT with an email. they never respond back. A boycott sounds in order.....where does it start?

Hangar18
05-15-2003, 01:37 PM
This certainly doesnt mean we should Give Up. Maybe we need to, as Emeril says, "kick it up a notch" and really call out the media on this. Its embarrassing, frustrating, and de-moralizing that the media, the CHICAGO media has this Fuzzy Blue Slant and could care less what we think. The more I think about it, this "media" makes me feel like a non-citizen, like I dont count. Maybe we should take this more Personally and decide that we dont need to read certain newspapers, watch certain stations. We need one Sports Announcer to come forward, and say ENOUGH, and give us the coverage we deserve. no more no less.
hell, if I can talk business with a guy on the east coast somewhere, and when he discovers im a Sox Fan, and he chimes in that our park is "worse" than wrigley, and "its more fun there", never mind that he hasnt ever set foot in the dump, who do we blame? The Irresponsible, yellow media is responsible for this, thats who. No way someones going to say well hey, maybe the guys got a cousin and thats what he heard. BS. They are, and Will always be a Product of the Media. "dont believe the hype"

xil357
05-15-2003, 02:09 PM
Listen,

In the last 20 years, the media has become just another business, focused on the bottom line and targeting specific demographics to sell advertising and make money for the executives and shareholders. So hit them where it hurts them most -- in the wallet.

As far as collective action, here is what I would recommend (and I'm sorry that I don't live in Chicago to take a more active role in what I am about to suggest).

First, flood Tribune, Sun Times, WSCR, WBBM, WMVP, WGN, WLS, WMAQ, etc. editors, ad salespeople and executives e-mail stating definitively your gripes and what actions you are going to take:

Send e-mails or letters (or make phone calls) to advertisers in these specific media outlets and tell them that you are going to patronize their competitors or not purchase their products at all because they purchase advertising in slanted media outlets that piss off Sox fans with unbalanced coverage. Carbon copy these e-mails to the folks you previously e-mailed at the Trib, the Sun Times, WSCR, etc.

Then FOLLOW THROUGH with your threats to not patronize.

In your e-mails, mention that you are a member of a large online community and refer them to WSI.

Do not harass or use abusive language.

Then, begin patronizing advertisers who advertise at The Cell and e-mail or call them to say you specifically are patronizing them because they support the Chicago White Sox and/or advertise in the Southtown.

They may be the same businesses that you target with your boycott, but they don't have to know that. Send your negative boycott/complaint e-mails from a different e-mail account than the one you use to send your positive e-mail thank-yous.

Continue writing to the Trib, Sun Times, WSCR, etc. and follow through on your threat to cancel your subscription. Tell them flat out that you will get your news from them for free on their web site, that you will do the same thing with their on-line advertisers, and that when you register to access their site, you will put in a phony address, zip code and e-mail address specifically to foil their efforts to collect marketing data that they use to sell more advertising. Subscribe to the Southtown.

Keep calling sports talk radio when you have time. No matter what the topic, change it to make your point loud and clear. If they are talking about the Bears quarterback situation, tell the producer that you want to talk about Rex Grossman's success in an NFL offense. If and when you get on the air, change the topic to unbalanced media coverage of the Sox. So what if they cut you off mid-sentence? Eventually it will piss them off to the point that at least there is a story there worth looking into.

Talk with fellow Sox fans who aren't on WSI. Get them involved in manipulating the market with boycotts and direct action.

This is not a quick fix. But it wouldn't take very many people to start making a big impact.

The costs of taking a little bit of effort to do this are small. The costs of doing nothing at all eventually could mean the Portland White Sox. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

thecell
05-15-2003, 02:25 PM
Originally posted by xil357
Listen,

In the last 20 years, the media has become just another business, focused on the bottom line and targeting specific demographics to sell advertising and make money for the executives and shareholders. So hit them where it hurts them most -- in the wallet.

As far as collective action, here is what I would recommend (and I'm sorry that I don't live in Chicago to take a more active role in what I am about to suggest).

First, flood Tribune, Sun Times, WSCR, WBBM, WMVP, WGN, WLS, WMAQ, etc. editors, ad salespeople and executives e-mail stating definitively your gripes and what actions you are going to take:

Send e-mails or letters (or make phone calls) to advertisers in these specific media outlets and tell them that you are going to patronize their competitors or not purchase their products at all because they purchase advertising in slanted media outlets that piss off Sox fans with unbalanced coverage. Carbon copy these e-mails to the folks you previously e-mailed at the Trib, the Sun Times, WSCR, etc.

Then FOLLOW THROUGH with your threats to not patronize.

In your e-mails, mention that you are a member of a large online community and refer them to WSI.

Do not harass or use abusive language.

Then, begin patronizing advertisers who advertise at The Cell and e-mail or call them to say you specifically are patronizing them because they support the Chicago White Sox and/or advertise in the Southtown.

They may be the same businesses that you target with your boycott, but they don't have to know that. Send your negative boycott/complaint e-mails from a different e-mail account than the one you use to send your positive e-mail thank-yous.

Continue writing to the Trib, Sun Times, WSCR, etc. and follow through on your threat to cancel your subscription. Tell them flat out that you will get your news from them for free on their web site, that you will do the same thing with their on-line advertisers, and that when you register to access their site, you will put in a phony address, zip code and e-mail address specifically to foil their efforts to collect marketing data that they use to sell more advertising. Subscribe to the Southtown.

Keep calling sports talk radio when you have time. No matter what the topic, change it to make your point loud and clear. If they are talking about the Bears quarterback situation, tell the producer that you want to talk about Rex Grossman's success in an NFL offense. If and when you get on the air, change the topic to unbalanced media coverage of the Sox. So what if they cut you off mid-sentence? Eventually it will piss them off to the point that at least there is a story there worth looking into.

Talk with fellow Sox fans who aren't on WSI. Get them involved in manipulating the market with boycotts and direct action.

This is not a quick fix. But it wouldn't take very many people to start making a big impact.

The costs of taking a little bit of effort to do this are small. The costs of doing nothing at all eventually could mean the Portland White Sox. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

I like this guy!

Hangar18
05-15-2003, 02:27 PM
Originally posted by xil357
Listen,

Subscribe to the Southtown.

Keep calling sports talk radio when you have time. No matter what the topic, change it to make your point loud and clear. If they are talking about the Bears quarterback situation, tell the producer that you want to talk about Rex Grossman's success in an NFL offense. If and when you get on the air, change the topic to unbalanced media coverage of the Sox. So what if they cut you off mid-sentence? Eventually it will piss them off to the point that at least there is a story there worth looking into.

Talk with fellow Sox fans who aren't on WSI. Get them involved in manipulating the market with boycotts and direct action.

This is not a quick fix. But it wouldn't take very many people to start making a big impact.

The costs of taking a little bit of effort to do this are small. The costs of doing nothing at all eventually could mean the Portland White Sox. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

We need to start on this Immediately. This is a Call to Action.
We Cant AFFORD NOT TO Begin this.
is there a way to keep this Thread at the top of the Posts?

Daver
05-15-2003, 02:31 PM
Originally posted by Hangar18

is there a way to keep this Thread at the top of the Posts?


Yes there is. :redneck

Hangar18
05-15-2003, 02:38 PM
This is an Official Call To Arms (or pens/emails as it were). Yeah, im sick and tired of the media, and im sick and tired of talking about how bad they are here. Its Proven. Time and Time Again.
Nows the time to do something. XIL357 has motivated me, and hopefully you too. Good Times are ours if we want them. So...
I pose this question to you my fellow Sox Fans....

Are You With Us? Or are You Against Us ??

xil357
05-15-2003, 03:18 PM
Thanks, Hangar18. I'll help in any way I can from Texas. It is so empowering to be at the forefront of a grass-roots movement.

Here is a sample e-mail to send. Borrow/copy/edit to suit your purposes (it's not copyrighted):

Dear sir/madam,

As a die-hard fan of the Chicago White Sox, I am appalled at the unbalanced and unfair coverage your media outlet gives Chicago's major league baseball teams. While the Cubs receive positive press and their shortcomings are glossed over and excused, any blemishes on the White Sox are magnified while their successes are downplayed, contributing to a local and national perception that the White Sox are a cursed and second-rate franchise with a dwindling and apathetic fan base. This perception must be corrected and if you subscribe to the canons of journalism, you should be ashamed of yourselves for allowing your media product to be so blatantly one-sided. However, understanding that as a corporate entity, you respond only to actions that effect your bottom line, note that this e-mail has been sent to your colleagues in the newsroom, in the corner office and at the businesses that advertise with you, and that I am taking the following actions effective immediately:

1. I am canceling my subscription to your newspaper / I will no longer watch your television station and I will ask all my friends, co-workers and family to do the same.

2. I will boycott any and all companies that advertise in your paper / on your station and I will ask all my friends, co-workers and family to do the same.

3. I will inform these advertisers that I am undertaking these actions because of your blatant media bias in favor of the Cubs and against the White Sox.

4. While I may not cease consuming your media product, rest assured my consumption specifically will be in ways that will deny your corporation revenues that you otherwise would expect from that consumption. For example, I may utilize your web site for information, but I specifically will inform your web advertisers that I am boycotting their businesses and if asked to register to use your site, I will provide you with phony information so as to deny your marketing department the opportunity to include me in your demographic lists. Or, I will read your newspaper only AFTER someone else has purchased and discarded it, denying you another newsstand purchase.

I am a member of White Sox Interactive (www.whitesoxinteractive.com) and as a large and growing community of die-hard White Sox fans, we will utilize the organizing power of the Internet to see that our boycott affects your corporate profitability. There are more White Sox fans in the market than you think, and we will make our voices heard. Ignore us at your own peril.

It is because the media is a powerful tool of manufacturing consent in post-industrial democracies that we are taking this action. However, know that even the almighty corporate media must bow to the customer as king.

Sincerely yours,

--- sign your name

doublem23
05-15-2003, 03:23 PM
I think my opinion on the Chicago sports media is... Who gives a ****ing ****? Chicago, for all its good, easily has the worst sports media I've ever had the misfortune to have to deal with. Nothing but morons head to toe. Hell, the sports talk shows they have in Peoria offer more intelligent commentary than anything you can get up here.

The only newspapers I read are the Daily Southtown and New York Times, and I haven't listened to Chicago sports radio outside of Sox games on AM-1000 in a looooooooooooong time.

**** the Chicago sports media. Nothing but idiots and buffoons.

Bisco Stu
05-15-2003, 11:33 PM
Win the World Series (or even a freaking pennant!) and we can shove it all down their throats. That's all I care about, even though I respect your efforts to change the Flub bias.

TheBigHurt
05-16-2003, 12:01 AM
Originally posted by doublem23

The only newspapers I read are the Daily Southtown and New York Times
THE only newspaper I read is New York Newsday (LI edition) and occ. the NY Post or NY Daily News :)

MarqSox
05-16-2003, 04:26 AM
I'm with the movement, but for this to take off, it needs to be fully coordinated. It needs to be on the level of WSI's legendary assault on Knueman's Chicago Survivor poll. I propose we select a different advertiser each week for the rest of the season, and on a specific day (say, Wednesdays) we bombard them with e-mails and phone calls. This would be MUCH more effective than each of us doing it on our own. For instance, if Carson Pirie Scott or whatever receives 100 phone calls and 200 e-mails from pissed off Sox fans next week, that will get their attention.

C'mon Sox Army, stand tall!

hsnterprize
05-16-2003, 08:58 AM
Hey y'all,

I'm a member of the press. It's only on a part-time basis, but I've been to quite a few places, and have met a few people to know who I can talk to about the Sox coverage and such. I'm not going to make any promises, but, if there's anyone in particular you'd like for me to kinda nudge on the shoulder to have them pay attention to our team, then please let me know. I've just finished moving, and with my crazy work schedule, I don't know how often I'll be able to go to games and such. But, once things settle down with the family, then I can get back in the press boxes.

You WSIers are great. I'm proud to be part of this team. As a reporter, I'm obligated to cover both teams with the same enthusiasm and objectivity. However, as a fan, I bleed silver and black, and I'm not ashamed to say that. People who regularly see me in press boxes know where my allegiances lie. Believe me...I want the Sox to get as much positive press as possible. I'll do my part...let's do what we can to get other reporters to do the same thing!!!!!

xil357
05-16-2003, 09:44 AM
That is one hell of an idea, MarqSox, to coordinate the efforts and concentrate the e-mails and phone calls on specific days.

The e-mails need to be carbon copied to Tribune editors, management and advertising executives to be fully effective. Here is a contact in the Trib's advertising department, taken from their web site:
Joe Farrell_ 312.222.2583_ jofarrell@tribune.com

Now, we need to come up with a list of advertisers. Unfortunately, a quick glance of chicagosports.com reveals that a lot of their advertising is in-house (ads for other sections of the site, for the print issue, for metromix.com, etc.).

However, Harris Bank runs banner ads at the bottom of the page, and they sponsor the online business section. We can say we are going to pull our savings and checking accounts out of Harris Bank and put them elsewhere, or that when we re-finance our mortgages, we will look elsewhere for a bank that doesn't advertise with the Tribune (and the Sun Times, too).

A pop-up ad came up from Fisher Investments. Their address, according to their web site, is 13100 Skyline Blvd. Woodside, CA 94062. Their TOLL FREE NUMBER is 800-568-5082. If you call, ask for a manager because you have a complaint. Their FAX number is 650-529-1341. Their e-mail address is info@fi.com. We can say that we have some money to invest, but since they advertise with the Chicago Tribune web site, we will take our investment dollars elsewhere.

There is another online ad for CDM fantasy sports, for their fantasy golf / The Golf Channel "majors challenge." Since we are White Sox fans I take it not many of us care too much about golf, but CDM and The Golf Channel don't have to know that. Their TOLL FREE phone numbers are 1-800-568-6288, 1-888-676-2248 and 1-800-787-5674. Their address is CDM Fantasy Sports, 11756 Borman Drive Suite 220, St. Louis, MO 63146. Their e-mail address isn't listed, but they do have a form you can fill out to e-mail them at http://www.cdmsports.com/about/email_cdm.html Choose the "sales/marketing" department as the recipient of your complaint.

Another especially annoying and frequent pop-up ad was bought by cheaptickets.com. Their phone number is 888-922-8849. Here is the link for their e-mail page http://www.cheaptickets.com/trs/cheaptickets/content/customer_service/cs_email.xsl?email-type=survey
Or, try sending e-mail to: telluswhatyouthink@cheaptickets.com

Another pop-up ad was bought by lowermybills.com. Their address is LowerMyBills.com, Inc. 2120 Colorado, 3rd Floor, Santa Monica, CA 90404. Here is the web address for submitting comments/complaints: http://www.lowermybills.com/misc/customer/

Tell these companies that you really otherwise think they are fine companies and you would like to patronize them, but as a White Sox fan who is fed up with the biased media coverage provided by the Tribune, who owns the Cubs, you cannot and will not patronize them as long as they continue to advertise with the Trib, and that you will tell all your Sox fans to do the same.

Now, because I live in Texas and don't get the print Trib, I can't come up with a beginning list of Trib print advertisers. The idea to target Carson Pirie Scott or Marshall Fields, as Chicago-based retailers, is a good one, because their bread and butter market is the Chicago area, and as retailers they have to be responsive to would-be customers. I shopped there when I lived in Chicago, and I'm sure many of us also shop there or have wives or girlfriends who spends lots of money there. (If you are single or maybe still in junior high or high school, they don't have to know that. Say you have a wife and three teenage daughters and if they don't pull their ads from the Trib and Sun Times, as the family breadwinner you will forbid them to shop there. If you are a lovely lady Sox fan, then you don't even have to fake it. Say you will buy your silver and black pantsuits, blue jeans, blouses and Sox jerseys, hats and pennants directly from the White Sox) Mention specific store locations, especially in the West, South and Southwest suburbs, like Orland Square, Fox Valley, Louis-Joliet or Oak Brook.

I propose starting this coming Wednesday (5/21) with:
Harris Bank and Carson Pirie Scott.

For Wednesday (5/28), we target:
Marshall Fields and Fisher Investments.

If others want to come up with more businesses (especially Chicago-based companies) who advertise in the print Tribune and Sun Times and on Chicago TV stations (2,5,7,9,32), let's list them here and develop targets for June and July.

"SOX FANS OF THE WORLD UNITE, YOU HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE BUT YOUR CHAINS! BUT IF YOU DON'T UNITE, YOU MAY LOSE YOUR TEAM!"

soxruleEP
05-16-2003, 12:02 PM
XIL357 SAYS:

>>>I propose starting this coming Wednesday (5/21) with:
Harris Bank and Carson Pirie Scott.<<<

SEE HIS COMPLETE POST ABOVE AND HIS EARLIER POST FOR THE SAMPLE EMAIL.

I am in--are we ready to stand up for our team. Everyday my blood pressure goes up when I listen to morning Cubbie-love spin session (This morning Murphy was trumpeting that "there were more Cub fans in Milwaukee than Sox fans at [The Cell]."

Daver and other moderaters--are broadcast messages to members to enlist their particpation possible (or desireable)?

valposoxfan
05-16-2003, 12:22 PM
OK we need to get a solid coordinated plan in place to put this into effect. This is a great idea. Who is going to take control of organizing this? What days are we looking at to go after advertisers? I want to hear more. I'm extremely interested...

valposoxfan
05-16-2003, 12:26 PM
Chicago Sun-Times advertisers:
http://a3.suntimes.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.suntimes.com/index/index.html/19266/x01/talkamerica.sky.HP/TAskyhp/30636637666261623365633237646330
AMERITECH

http://a3.suntimes.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.suntimes.com/index/index.html/30193/x03/applevacations/aplsky/30636637666261623365633237646330
APPLE VACATIONS INC.

Viva Magglio
05-16-2003, 12:42 PM
Who in the Chicago media (other than regular beat reporters like Doug Padilla, Joe Cowley, Teddy Greenstein, Kent McDill, and Julie Swieca) can we consider White Sox allies?

Hangar18
05-16-2003, 12:43 PM
Originally posted by soxruleEP
XIL357 SAYS:

>>>I propose starting this coming Wednesday (5/21) with:
Harris Bank and Carson Pirie Scott.<<<

I am in--are we ready to stand up for our team. Everyday my blood pressure goes up when I listen to morning Cubbie-love spin session (This morning Murphy was trumpeting that "there were more Cub fans in Milwaukee than Sox fans at [The Cell]."



Im Calling Apple Vacations and Ameritech Today.....

...on the the Score Cub morning show, Murph "Baited" the callers by saying "hey cub fans, call in and finish the sentence "You Know its the Cub Season when ___________" This led to a barrage of cub callers calling in, drooling over the season. Murph after 15mins, then ubiquitously adds "Sox Fans call in too"
he goes to commercial break, then comes back to a caller asking about cub CF average, which spawns talk about past cub CF stats. Commercial break, then, they played a Sound Bite from the cub game. Which led to an inning by inning breakdown and analysis by Murph. callers called in, debating which was the more important inning. Murph then "Planted" information by saying Patterson should be one of the reserves on the NL allstar team (knowing cub fans will begin pushing for this now)
Murphys Journalistic Style of "Baiting", "Planting" and "Steering" all topics towards the Cubs is embarrassing. so in this 45 min or so span of Cub Talk, Murph threw in a 10second blast of Mark Buehrle (and deservedly so) on how he better win tonites game.

Hangar18
05-16-2003, 12:46 PM
Originally posted by Hangar18
Im Calling Apple Vacations and Ameritech Today.....

...on the the Score Cub morning show, Murph "Baited" the callers by saying "hey cub fans, call in and finish the sentence "You Know its the Cub Season when ___________" This led to a barrage of cub callers calling in, drooling over the season. Murph after 15mins, then ubiquitously adds "Sox Fans call in too"
he goes to commercial break, then comes back to a caller asking about cub CF average, which spawns talk about past cub CF stats. Commercial break, then, they played a Sound Bite from the cub game. Which led to an inning by inning breakdown and analysis by Murph. callers called in, debating which was the more important inning. Murph then "Planted" information by saying Patterson should be one of the reserves on the NL allstar team (knowing cub fans will begin pushing for this now)
Murphys Journalistic Style of "Baiting", "Planting" and "Steering" all topics towards the Cubs is Embarrassing and Very Unprofessional. So in this 45 min or so span of Cub Talk, Murph threw in a 10second blast of Mark Buehrle (and deservedly so) on how he better win tonites game. Is this equal treatement? I think not

MarqSox
05-16-2003, 12:50 PM
Originally posted by ˇViva Mágglio!
Who in the Chicago media (other than regular beat reporters like Doug Padilla, Joe Cowley, Teddy Greenstein, Kent McDill, and Julie Swieca) can we consider White Sox allies?

Jon Kass, Phil Rogers, Dan McNeil, Dave Wills

MarqSox
05-16-2003, 01:00 PM
I think we ought to consider also that maybe the Cubune is not the right target for our movement here. Certainly it is among the gravest offenders, but when it comes down to it, the Cubune's financial interests will always be to promote the Cubs over the Sox. Sure, they want to appease advertisers, but not at the expense of the company's baseball division.

Therefore, I propose we target the other media, since it will have more of a direct impact. Let's hit the Big 4 TV stations, the Score and the Sun-Times. Hell, let's even go after the Daily Herald. WSI is remarkably strong -- if we choose our targets wisely and coordinate, we may seriously be able to change some things.

xil357
05-16-2003, 01:14 PM
It is good to identify allies in the media. However, we don't want to get them too involved in our movement because we don't want them to lose their jobs. After all, we are going to be cutting into the profits of the media conglomerates and their advertisers -- if this works there are going to be some really pissed off executives. However, if they want to help, let's not turn them away, either.

We need to make this as transparent as possible and CC our e-mails to the ad executives and editors and management people at the Trib and Sun Times so they are absolutely clear with what is going on. They are the people who make the decisions on what to emphasize in their respective media outlets. The reporters are just doing their jobs. And we want to make sure that our allies in the media are able to continue to do their jobs.

Since Mike Murphy seems to be a lightning rod (I do remember him as being a big Cub fan from my WSCR-listening days back in the mid 90s -- and before that on weekend nights at WLS), we ought to target one or two of his big advertisers, too. I have no idea who advertises on his show since I can't pick up 670AM from 950 miles away.

Can anyone post who Murphy's biggest sponsors are?

He might be a good target for phone sabotage in addition to e-mails. Call up to say you want to talk about the Cubs, or whatever else is the topic that he is talking about. DON'T LET THE PRODUCER KNOW WHAT YOU REALLY WANT TO TALK ABOUT. Tell them you are calling from a cell phone or long distance and you just have a quick comment to make about whatever the topic is. If you get on the air, say:

"Murphy, your Cubs bias is transparent, you have no business being on the air and members of White Sox Interactive dot com are boycotting your sponsors."

Practice saying this so that you can say it clearly and steadily in one breath.

If we get even just four or five of these on the air, imagine how many disgruntled Sox fans could visit WSI in the next week.

Hangar18
05-16-2003, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by MarqSox


Therefore, I propose we target the other media, since it will have more of a direct impact. Let's hit the Big 4 TV stations, the Score and the Sun-Times. Hell, let's even go after the Daily Herald. WSI is remarkably strong -- if we choose our targets wisely and coordinate, we may seriously be able to change some things.

Good Idea. Every day, there will be at least 2 or 4 Corporations who will get emails, letters, phone calls from us. We will however, EVERYDAY call ALL MEDIA Outlets. The Score for one.
TV Channels 2,5,7,9, CubLoverTeleVision, FOX
as well as the PAPER OUTLETS

xil357
05-16-2003, 01:40 PM
I have a radical idea. Speaking of an army of Sox fans...

What if legions of WSI members turned out for a protest at a nationally-televised day game at Wrigley Field. Not to buy tickets and attend the game, but stand outside Wrigley with picket signs and chanting catchy phrases about the media bias in favor of the Cubs.

Does anyone know what it would take to get a permit to do this?

If this isn't feasible, what about getting a permit to march in Grant Park or in front of WGN/Tribune or Sun Times headquarters downtown?

I am visiting my family in late July / early August and am willing to attend and/or help organize such an event if enough people are interested. I'm not talking about just a dozen or so people. It would only be worth it if we got at least 100 people to show up with sox flying.

We would all need WSI t-shirts, Sox caps and signs or pennants to carry. But most of all we would need a permit to protest otherwise we'd all end up in jail -- not for acting like a bunch of hooligans, but simply for not having the permit.

It also would be an opporunity, especially if we got media coverage, to demonstrate that Sox fans are not a bunch of drunks who run on the field.

(I'm reminded of the news coverage Lincoln-Way High School got when my friends and I organized a walk-out in Oct. 1992 to protest the fact that the school suspended the guy who won 90 percent of the vote for homecoming queen. Jackie Bange, who worked for Channel 5 at the time, came out with the big remote news truck and we were the lead story on the 5 p.m. and 6 p.m. news. If we as a bunch of high school dorks could get that kind of coverage by making a phone call to Channel 5 the night before this walk-out, imagine what kind of media coverage an orchestrated effort on our part could generate.)

Is anyone willing to carry the ball to get a permit?

This especially would be effective if we have a couple of solid months of boycotting under our belts.

joecrede
05-16-2003, 01:45 PM
This is a great idea, count me in.

I agree with leaving the Tribune and the Tribune co. out of the campaign though. The Sox do business with 'GN afterall and since the Tribune's galling conflict of interest is obvious to everyone, they probably do bend over backwards to try to be fair. Besides, as a Sox fan, it's always nice to have that conflict of interest, real or imagined, to raise hell about. I don't want them "accomodating" me. :D:

The real media enemies of the Sox are as follows:

1. The Score (Murphy, North and Offman. Offman's weekend show often is a four hour advertisement for not going to US Cellular Field.)
2. Marriotti
3. Giangreco

IMO, The Score is the worst offender. Murphy's show would be the best place to start.

xil357
05-16-2003, 02:12 PM
As long as they own the Cubs, the Trib always is going to have a conflict of interest. That's why they need to be targeted along with the Sun Times, the Score, and everyone else.

If our boycott is effective but excludes the Trib, where are the advertisers going to put their dollars instead of the Sun Times, etc.? They are going to buy more ads with the Trib and WGN. That is only going to make them evil empire stronger. We don't want to cut off our nose to spite our face, so to speak, so we need to keep Tribune Corp. squarely in the cross hairs.

It is precisely because of the conflict of interest with Tribune Co. management that this problem exists in the first place. What we have now is the net result of 20+ years of Tribune Co. promotion, cash and media exposure of the Cubs and nothing more. In the late 70s and early 80s the Sox and Cubs roughly drew equal numbers of fans and both their ballparks were, quite honestly, rat holes in rough neighborhoods. How else do you explain the Sox having a better record since then, with more division championships, but being a distant second in media attention? There is no other explanation for it. It is the Tribune Corp. and nothing more. They have created the monster. We have to destroy it and every other media outlet that wants to emulate the Tribune Corporation's dominance in the Chicago market and national prominence.

It is only a matter of including another set of e-mail addresses in your e-mails to advertisers who advertise in both papers (Carsons, Fields, etc.) to include the Trib and WGN in on this.

Remember, the media is one incestuous pot of corporations that own parts of each other, and they all demonstrate a pro-Cubs bias on both a local and national level, so we may as well lump them together for retaliation. (For more information, see The Nation magazine's "Big Ten" of the corporate media. Of course, Tribune is closely tied in with AOL Time Warner, hence the WB on WGN.)

This is not going to be easy or a short-term thing. We need to think long-term and down the road, we need to patronize, encourage and thank those businesses that do support the Sox by buying advertising space in billboards at the Cell, in the game programs and during White Sox radio broadcasts. And we need to let them know that we are supporting them BECAUSE they support the Sox.

arneharris
05-17-2003, 12:26 AM
As a reporter, I'm obligated to cover both teams with the same enthusiasm and objectivity. However, as a fan, I bleed silver and black, and I'm not ashamed to say that. People who regularly see me in press boxes know where my allegiances lie.


Get another job. You can be biased in the Southtown...

I can see being fair if you're objectively covering the "other" team as part of your assignment, but withholding your true colors 100% of the time should not affect your readership, unless, of course, the readers are mostly not for your team!

Obviously, you can't slam the "other" team......that's for trolls and fans. But withholding who you root for completely? That's selling out for the check.

MarqSox
05-17-2003, 01:11 AM
Originally posted by arneharris
Get another job. You can be biased in the Southtown...

I can see being fair if you're objectively covering the "other" team as part of your assignment, but withholding your true colors 100% of the time should not affect your readership, unless, of course, the readers are mostly not for your team!

Obviously, you can't slam the "other" team......that's for trolls and fans. But withholding who you root for completely? That's selling out for the check.

Actually, that's known in the business as "ethics."

Dan H
05-17-2003, 07:42 AM
I have big problems with the Chicago sports media as well. I agree with many of posters here that the Chicago media has done a great deal to promote the Cubbie myth. However, I part ways with some of you, and I will put my slant on this.

First, my biggest issue with the media is their unfair treatment of the fans not the Sox. The fans have been made scapegoats for the up and down performance of the club. Yes, attendance can be a factor. But it is far from the only factor, and it would help if Jerry Reinsdorf didn't alienate an already small fan base. The Tribune ran a series of articles on empty blue seats at Comiskey a few years ago that didn't come close to examining the attendance issue. It was pure garbage.

Secondly, I don't like when public figures make controversial statments, and then back down from them once a fire storm begins. Jerry Manuel said the Sox should look in the mirror. Frank Thomas said he shouldn't have to. Those two men said those things and they haven't denied saying them. Don't blame the media for reporting it. And these men don't have any business blaming the media for it. That's cowardly.

As far as WSCR goes, I've stopped listening because no one on that station truly respects what a fan has to say. Murph is one of the worst. He spends 15 minutes on one subject than switches to another. How can anyone examine anything in detail when they have such a short attention span? His idoitic devotion the Cubs and their worthless tradition is sickening.

Finally, I do think that sportswriters have to be objective. You cannot be a honest reporter if you let your sentiments get in the way of reporting facts. That means you can't be a fan nor can you let any negative bias into a story. A reporter has to report what he/she sees and hears. You can't do that well if you let your bias get in the way. I have done reporting and believe stongly that JFK was killed as part of a conspiracy. I have written two articles on the assassination and went out of my way to give a fair presentation of view points that differed from my own. That is how reporting is supposed to work. You can't examine a controversial topic in any other way.

I do agree that the Sun-Times and the Tribune can be pretty lame. However, the Sox have created some of their own bad publicity. It is time for the team to turn things around in more ways than one.

xil357
05-20-2003, 10:45 AM
Mr. Dan,

Please understand that our collective frustration is not with the beat reporters, who, in my opinion (and likely in the opinion of most of the complainants in this thread) treat the Sox fairly.

However, there are members of the media establishment who, for business-related reasons, make coverage and space decisions based on perceived demographics. These are the columnists, the radio voices, the editors, the publishers and the executives.

Class act a@*holes like Mike Murphy and Jay Mariotti are paid for their opinions. However, as much as their opinions may be their own, understand that they are not going to say something that they think is wildly unpopular. For all their pontificating and use of strong language, they are nothing more than corporate-controlled wind socks. They don't want to make people cancel their subscriptions, and they and their editors know this. Their jobs are to make people come back to read / hear them again and again and to patronize their corporate sponsors.

I fully acknowledge that the Sox are terrible at media relations and this no doubt influences the coverage, too. I also acknowledge that I would not be pushing this effort to boycott the Trib, Sun Times and WSCR advertisers if the Trib owned the Sox, because I have silver and black blood pumping through my veins and I live and die with the Sox. However, I acknowledge my bias, as does WSI as a whole.

My problem lies with the fact that the vast majority of the Chicago media hides behind their so-called canons of journalism and objectivity and is fundamentally unable and unwilling to acknowledge either a conflict of interest (Tribune/WGN owning the Cubs, Murphy being one of the first Wrigley bleacher bums) or cheerleading in their pursuit of target demographics (WLS-TV, Sun Times, as has been explored earlier in this thread). It is this pervasive pro-Cubs bias that is killing off the potential Sox fan base both in Chicago and across the country.

It is in the Tribune company's interest that the Cubs product is promoted. Their bottom line is at stake! The amount of the bonuses awarded to Mark McGuire and the other Trib executives is contingent upon the Cubs continuing to grow their fan base through ticket sales, TV viewership of televised games, advertising sales, etc. The White Sox are a competing product in this market. Hence the fact that we don't see crowd shots of Sox fans when they play on the road. It is a self-fulfilling / perpetuating prophecy.

It is in Mike Murphy's interest as an admitted Cubs fan to talk about the Cubs on the air. White Sox radio broadcasts are a product of WSCR's competitors, as well. As a corporation, WSCR doesn't want listeners to move over to WMVP for Sox games. In addition, because the North side and North/Northwest suburbs are more affluent and populated, Cubs fans must be more affluent and there must be more of them. Therefore, they target that demographic with positive press about the Cubs.

This is why Sun Times lead columnist Jay Mariotti still suckles at the teat of Sammy Sosa at every opportunity. Sure, Greg Couch disses the Tribune for the ticket scalping fiasco, but his criticisms are directed at the Tribune Company -- the Sun-Times corporate rival! The Cubs themselves as a team are not criticized. There has been very little written about Sosa's incredible lack of production this year. Any decline is based on the toenail. His precipitous decline in muscle mass and size this year, which for any other superstar on any other team would be scandalous (especially for someone who first bulked up at an alarming rate in the mid-90s and then last season angrily refused to take a free drug test) has been ignored. If Sosa were on the Sox, fans and the media would demand to know the truth. But as the star and media darling of the Cubs, he is Mr. Teflon and Mariotti -- and everyone else -- won't follow their journalistic OBLIGATION to investigate, or their respective media outlets refuse to assign or publish such inquiries. It is this double standard that Sox fans find so appalling, especially when the reasons are plainly obvious to anyone willing to devote three brain cells to considering instead of just belligerently ignoring.

Again, its not that the Sox are bashed in the media. Rather, it seems that way with all the rose-colored ink that is produced about the Cubs. That is the same reason why very few news stories mention that the jackass who attacked the umpire at the Cell was a Cubs fan and had previously attended a Cubs game that afternoon, gotten drunk, then went to the Sox game simply to get more liquored up! Rather, it is blamed on the Sox management or lack of security or the reputation of Sox fans. The brawl in the stands at Wrigley several years ago is long forgotten, but the incidents at Sox games are explored and repeated.

It's not the beat reporters who are the problem. And Sox management is not without blame. Hell, just look at many of the other threads here! But the corporate-owned media that seeks after the bottom line is going to bend over backward to both deliver the demographics and appease their advertisers. The only way to make them listen is to hit them where it hurts most -- in their profit margins. That's why we need to target their biggest advertisers.

Pro-Cubs bias in the media is not a conspiracy, for goodness sake. It is a fact, it is completely logical and understandable from a business point of view, and it is an outrage to any true Sox fan. That's why the media needs to be shown, in a most direct and effective manner, that there are lots of Sox fans out there who are willing to use their economic clout to make the media understand our power as consumers who are "mad as hell and not going to take it anymore."

More than just complaining, we as die-hard and unrepentant Sox fans advocate doing something about it. If you love the Sox and don't want to see the franchise fail, then do something about it, damnit!

Rocky Soprano
05-20-2003, 12:36 PM
Count me in guys. Im willing to help out in any way.

I work for Harris Bank in Customer Service, so it would be funny to see their reaction to a bunch of Sox fans calling. :D:

steff
05-20-2003, 01:43 PM
Originally posted by xil357
I have a radical idea. Speaking of an army of Sox fans...

What if legions of WSI members turned out for a protest at a nationally-televised day game at Wrigley Field. Not to buy tickets and attend the game, but stand outside Wrigley with picket signs and chanting catchy phrases about the media bias in favor of the Cubs.

Does anyone know what it would take to get a permit to do this?

If this isn't feasible, what about getting a permit to march in Grant Park or in front of WGN/Tribune or Sun Times headquarters downtown?

I am visiting my family in late July / early August and am willing to attend and/or help organize such an event if enough people are interested. I'm not talking about just a dozen or so people. It would only be worth it if we got at least 100 people to show up with sox flying.

We would all need WSI t-shirts, Sox caps and signs or pennants to carry. But most of all we would need a permit to protest otherwise we'd all end up in jail -- not for acting like a bunch of hooligans, but simply for not having the permit.

It also would be an opporunity, especially if we got media coverage, to demonstrate that Sox fans are not a bunch of drunks who run on the field.

(I'm reminded of the news coverage Lincoln-Way High School got when my friends and I organized a walk-out in Oct. 1992 to protest the fact that the school suspended the guy who won 90 percent of the vote for homecoming queen. Jackie Bange, who worked for Channel 5 at the time, came out with the big remote news truck and we were the lead story on the 5 p.m. and 6 p.m. news. If we as a bunch of high school dorks could get that kind of coverage by making a phone call to Channel 5 the night before this walk-out, imagine what kind of media coverage an orchestrated effort on our part could generate.)

Is anyone willing to carry the ball to get a permit?

This especially would be effective if we have a couple of solid months of boycotting under our belts.


NO WAY is this a good idea!!.

MarqSox
05-20-2003, 02:03 PM
Originally posted by steff3603
NO WAY is this a good idea!!.

You may be right, but would you care to elaborate?

Hangar18
05-20-2003, 03:40 PM
I could totally see a Brawl starting between sox fans and cub tourists. Then, the media would cover it as another example of Sox Fans Gone Wild. The media would help turn this against us.

Dan H
05-21-2003, 01:07 PM
I totally agree with you on the conflict of interest angle. Tribune reporters get awfully defensive about this, and try to say it has no impact on their reporting. But there is Paul Sullivan trying to tell us that Wrigley is the best ball park in the majors. No conflict of interest?

WSCR does it have its own conflict as you pointed out. It is direct competition with MVP. I don't have any real arguement with not bothering with The Score. The station does little for me, and as I said in my earlier post, the station has no respect for fans.

One other thing on what we can agree: Cubdom has been shoved down our throats. Wrigley is great, their fans are loyal, and isn't this the way a team should be run? Greg Couch exposed these hypocrites for what they really are. A bunch of bottom line bums who cheat the very fans that they say are the best in baseball.

My final point is this: I still think the Chicago sports media has done more to libel and slander Sox fans than the team itself. I think it has created an aura of bitterness and anger around the team that isn't necessary. Yes, grumpy Sox fans like me complain a lot. But I long since tired of a Chicago media blaming us only for the condition of the franchise. Just take a look at the coverage of the Sox during the last stages of the 2000 campaign. Attendance was not what it should have been, and we were daily lectured by the media. The media never really examined why Sox fans didn't return in the numbers as was hoped. The media just said we were ingrates, and the Sox organization seemed to agree.

Believe me, I am no big fan of the columnists or the talk show opinion makers. I just think the problems the Sox face are truly complicated, and that the organization has no clue on how to address them.

Hangar18
05-30-2003, 12:50 AM
In case any of you forgot about this, I sent a couple of emails out today. It is YOUR duty as a Sox Fan to let the media and the establishment know that your not happy with the medias biased attraction to all things cub. Tell them your not happy that some cub fan runs the field and we take the Flak for it, and Yet when same cub fan throws a Cell Phone at a Padres Player, Your Very Unhappy that the story Gets Buried in the 2 sentence section

ewokpelts
06-07-2003, 01:14 PM
Hey all,

Interesting thread on trying to change the media perception of our beloved White Sox. One company we should DEFINTELY contact is US Cellular. They provide a ot of advertising in the Sun-times and the Trib, AND those damm annoying Joan Cussack commercials run on all the local stations. Considering that they dropped 68 million to rename Comiskey, i think they shoul;d flex thier corporate muscle and help us lowly Sox fans get a fair shake in our own damm city. Why is that the media cannot shut up about two isolated incidents involving fans attacking on field personel @ Comiskey, YET, we are all told to take adeep breath and not judge Sammy"I beat my wife, mismanage my charity, leave suspicious bags of money lying around, and cheat on the field" Sosa because "he made a mistake"? John E. Rooney, are you listening?

Dan H
06-09-2003, 02:30 PM
Steve Rosenbloom made one of his rare good points on the radio over the weekend. While the overrated Cubs-Yankees series was hyped all over the place, almost no mention has been made of the Sox-Giants series even thought the Giants are defending NL champs, and have one of the greatest home run hitters of all time. I am not one to blame the media directly for many of the problems the Sox have, but this hype was shameless and unfair. After all, it was only a three game series. Yes, it was a good one, but not worth the attention it received. This constant of fawning over the losing Cub tradition is sickening. And if I see one more book on why the Cubs blew the 1969 season, I'll vomit.

TommyJohn
06-09-2003, 11:49 PM
Originally posted by Dan H
Steve Rosenbloom made one of his rare good points on the radio over the weekend. While the overrated Cubs-Yankees series was hyped all over the place, almost no mention has been made of the Sox-Giants series even thought the Giants are defending NL champs, and have one of the greatest home run hitters of all time. I am not one to blame the media directly for many of the problems the Sox have, but this hype was shameless and unfair. After all, it was only a three game series. Yes, it was a good one, but not worth the attention it received. This constant of fawning over the losing Cub tradition is sickening. And if I see one more book on why the Cubs blew the 1969 season, I'll vomit.

Excellent point, Dan. I wrote to Ron Rapaport myself and pointed out something similar. I wrote him that while the media was fawn
ing all over the Yankee-Cub series, saying "this is the first time
that the Yankees are in Wrigley since they swept our Cubbies in
1932 and 1938!" the Giants are coming to the South Side for the
first time since the 1917 World Series, in which the White Sox
DEFEATED the NEW YORK Giants 4 games to 2. I pointed out to
Rapaport that this was the ONE time that Chicago actually beat
New York in World Series play! He wrote me back that he liked my
point and he used it in his column last Wednesday. It was the
first mention I saw of it in print in either the Times or Trib.

I must say that my e-mail to him was not angry, it actually was a
thank you note. After all, he pointed out that the Yankees have
played here for 100 years, and that the Babe and Larrupin' Lou
were in several of those games.

miker
06-10-2003, 05:35 PM
This thread is awesome. It's the reason I've supported WSI since I came across it a couple years ago.

Keep it up Sox fans! This is OUR voice.

Hangar18
06-10-2003, 05:52 PM
Originally posted by miker
This thread is awesome. It's the reason I've supported WSI since I came across it a couple years ago.

Keep it up Sox fans! This is OUR voice.

you came across it 2 yrs ago, and youve only posted 4 times?
I'll need an explanation please.... It is your duty to post :smile:

miker
06-11-2003, 11:14 AM
10. Man of few words.
9. Work at company that has an incestuous relationship with Tribune.
8. All the good ideas are already posted by WSI's brilliant members.
7. Waste too much time putting up with s*** from the Cubs' so-called fans.
6. Laying low as to not jeopardize my inside connection with the Sox' front office.
5. Laughing too hard after another rip on Chicago's poor excuse for sports journalists.
4. Senor Sock scares me.
3. I don't like computers -- I work in the I.T. department of a major bank.
2. Hey, I don't listen to sports radio either, except for Sox coverage on AM 1000.

...and the Number One reason I don't post often:

TOO BUSY PULLING FOR THE WHITE SOX!

Hangar18
06-11-2003, 11:31 AM
Originally posted by miker

6. Laying low as to not jeopardize my inside connection with the Sox' front office.
5. Laughing too hard after another rip on Chicago's poor excuse for sports journalists.
4. Senor Sock scares me.
3. I don't like computers -- I work in the I.T. department of a major bank.
2. Hey, I don't listen to sports radio either, except for Sox coverage on AM 1000.

...and the Number One reason I don't post often:

TOO BUSY PULLING FOR THE WHITE SOX!

Heh heh. ok, you get a pass. Post more, even if its to agree
with someone/something here. I like hearing/reading from
everyone even if I dont agree with it sometimes..... :gulp:

booter14
06-17-2003, 03:04 PM
most of these posts perpetuate the "its everyone in the world against the White Sox" notion.

In recent years the coverage was fairly positive, including the early 90's, and 2000. In my opinion, the blame falls squarely on White Sox ownership for not being able to establish an organization similar to Atlanta or the Yanks or even Boston.

After the Sox removed the franchise killer know as Hawk Harrelson from the GM office, they made a series of good moves. They hired Larry Himes as GM and he built the best farm system in baseball in less than five years, and he also made some risky transactions for good players like Wilson Alvarez and Sammy Sosa. After a brilliant 1990 season he was fired shortly thereafter. Point A to Point B b.s. These are the kinds of decisions that demonstrate a team without vision or direction. People who do what they are told are more important than people who know what they are doing. This is the message that was sent 13 years ago, and still reverberates today.

Even after 90', the Sox were one of the biggest draws in the league for 3-4 years running. I think through 1995 they had the second best record next to Atlanta. Not too bad. Then your owner basically kills the franchise by organizing a lockout when your team is clearly the best team in baseball. The clincher. Reinsdorf has continually been let off the hook for this move.

Over the last two years the White Sox have been lucky with the media coverage. If anything, both papers should be holding a daily death watch for both Manual & Williams heads. Neither of these guys should still be around. In good baseball towns like NY, Boston or even Philly we would have a new GM & field manager. Chicago is a football town and baseball just keeps us preoccupied until July, maybe August.

If anything, the media has failed to truly address how frustrated Sox fans are with their franchise. Instead of reporting how low Konerko's BA is or how many error Valentin has, they should be applying pressure to Williams & Reinsdorf. The team is in disarry, but no one seems to care except the fans. In this sense, the media coverage has not been too negative. It has been too apathetic.

xil357
06-17-2003, 05:54 PM
Originally posted by booter14
most of these posts perpetuate the "its everyone in the world against the White Sox" notion.

In recent years the coverage was fairly positive, including the early 90's, and 2000. In my opinion, the blame falls squarely on White Sox ownership for not being able to establish an organization similar to Atlanta or the Yanks or even Boston.

After the Sox removed the franchise killer know as Hawk Harrelson from the GM office, they made a series of good moves. They hired Larry Himes as GM and he built the best farm system in baseball in less than five years, and he also made some risky transactions for good players like Wilson Alvarez and Sammy Sosa. After a brilliant 1990 season he was fired shortly thereafter. Point A to Point B b.s. These are the kinds of decisions that demonstrate a team without vision or direction. People who do what they are told are more important than people who know what they are doing. This is the message that was sent 13 years ago, and still reverberates today.

Even after 90', the Sox were one of the biggest draws in the league for 3-4 years running. I think through 1995 they had the second best record next to Atlanta. Not too bad. Then your owner basically kills the franchise by organizing a lockout when your team is clearly the best team in baseball. The clincher. Reinsdorf has continually been let off the hook for this move.

Over the last two years the White Sox have been lucky with the media coverage. If anything, both papers should be holding a daily death watch for both Manual & Williams heads. Neither of these guys should still be around. In good baseball towns like NY, Boston or even Philly we would have a new GM & field manager. Chicago is a football town and baseball just keeps us preoccupied until July, maybe August.

If anything, the media has failed to truly address how frustrated Sox fans are with their franchise. Instead of reporting how low Konerko's BA is or how many error Valentin has, they should be applying pressure to Williams & Reinsdorf. The team is in disarry, but no one seems to care except the fans. In this sense, the media coverage has not been too negative. It has been too apathetic.

As the originator of this thread (and a member of the militant wing -- or the Delta Force, if you will -- of the Sox Army), I must take exception to parts of your post.

While I agree that Sox ownership has an abysmal track record and their management (both for baseball operations and media / public relations) is less than perfect, you have to admit that there is a fundamental pro-Cubs bias in the Chicago and national media that both reflects and perpetuates a myth around the Cubs and their horrible stadium and ignorant fans.

It is not an "everyone in the world against the White Sox" conspiracy, because the reasons for it are legitimate, legal and understandable in a market-based capitalist system.

While I applaud the efforts of Tribune beat writers and columnists to go out of their way to say that they are not influenced by the fact that their newspaper is owned by the same conglomerate that owns the Cubs (even going as far as to say they love the Sox), you cannot deny that there is a fundamental conflict of interest when a media company owns a team and then covers that team and claims to be fair and balanced. They may try, but the conflict of interest and the potential for revenue generation is too apparent and obvious.

When the General Manager of the WB station in Dallas (I have met him twice and had lunch with him once so I am not making this up) touts the Cubs as one of the jewels of the Tribune company empire, the corporation's conflict of interest is as obvious as the fact that the sky is blue.

The fact that up until recently all Cubs games have been on WGN, which is available to everyone with a TV in the Chicago area everyone in the U.S. with cable or satellite, is the first factor which has made the Cubs visible on a national scale. So, generations of retired people and schoolchildren home for the summer with nothing else to do but watch TV have been exposed to Cubs baseball. So, by default they became Cubs fans, especially when the camera panned over the crowd to show pretty girls soaking up the sun in tight shirts at Wrigley. This was the beginning of the Cubs "mystique."

Next, on any given day, in Chicago's #1 newspaper, given equal results on equally good or bad teams, the Cubs are going to get top billing in the Tribune. (Case in point, last season when both teams were losing, the Cubs got more coverage in the Trib.) This is not a conspiracy, it is understandable that the Tribune, whose first duty is to make money and promote the success of the corporation, is going to play up the Cubs with more coverage. Why go out of your way to promote your cross-town competitor when your a member of your corporate family had the same result on the same day?

Because the Trib is the #1 paper in Chicago, and because the North Side and North Suburbs generally are more populated and affluent and because North Siders are believed to be mostly Cubs fans and South Siders are believed to be mostly Sox fans, the other media outlets who are chasing the same monied demographics are going to attempt to appeal to what they think their desired target demographics want to see. It makes perfect business sense if that is all the data that you have.

These factors have created a mystique around the ballpark, with the endless shots of beautiful women, beer and sunshine, which the vacuous lemmings in the public are willing to consume in large quantities.

This is a self-fulfilling prophesy as long as the feedback loop continues.

1. People buy into the Cubs mystique and think it is cool to go to Wrigley
2. Attendance at Wrigley goes up
3. Media outlets, seeking to maximize profits, believe there are more Cubs fans and devote more resources in an attempt to serve what they believe is a growing demographic
4. The Cubs get more coverage in the media
5. More people buy into the Cubs mystique and think it is cool to go to Wrigley.

These people so desire escapist entertainment that they become so programmed to believe that it is cool to go to Cubs games that they ignore the piss in the sinks, the watered-down beer, the piss-poor traffic and parking, the higher crime rate, the sunburn, the obstructed views, the lines, the little-league dimensions, the fact that home run balls are NOT thrown back on the field and the corked bat. They come out in droves. They are not baseball fans.

Inevitably, comparisons must be made between Sox and Cubs attendance. Rather than talking to lots of Sox fans to accurately report on their reasons for staying away from the Cell, most of the reporters take the easy way out and look for the "obvious" reasons that become "fact" because PERCEPTION IS REALITY. It is reported that the upper deck is too high, too steep. There is a hate crime in Bridgeport. "That must mean that crime is out of control next to the Cell!" A Cubs fan runs on the field and attacks an umpire. "Sox security is unable to handle bad behavior and Sox fans are all a bunch of drunks because Bill Veeck once called old Comiskey the world's largest saloon!"

You have over-the-top Cubs fans like Mike Murphy who capitalize on the "bleacher bum" and growing demographic of Cubs fans who get the morning drive show on the #1 sports station in town and who maintains interest among Cubs fans (who must be, like, 99 percent of the listeners!) by baiting them to call in to bust an audio nut over their love for the "lovable losers."

Sox fans, who on the whole are more intelligent on baseball matters (and other matters as well), don't go out to support a loser. So, rather than doing their homework, reporters tend to just assume that "Gee, attendance is down, there must be fewer Sox fans out there." Publishers and advertising executives think that this means that there are fewer dollars to be spent by Sox fans on their products and therefore don't target what they believe is a small and declining demographic of Sox fans.

All in all it adds up to a situation that can't help but come out to be advantageous for the Cubs and disadvantageous for the competition, the Sox. It is not a conspiracy. It is not illegal or immoral. It is the way things are.

Now, I am a believer that only people who offer solutions should have the right to complain. Well, for those who are interested in seeing the Sox stay in Chicago and remain a viable major league franchise, they need to make their power as consumers felt in the Chicago market. Boycotting Cubs sponsors -- and telling them clearly why you are doing it -- is the surest way of doing this. Media corporations, like any other businesses, are not going to change unless they believe that their profits are threatened.

We can debate and argue over the on-the-field exploits of the team, over Sox public relations strategies (or lack thereof) and over wishing that Reinsdorf would sell. But there isn't much we can do about other than continuing to make our voices heard. However, if we can change the media coverage, over the long term we might be able to get more Sax games on free TV, get more coverage for the Sox and eventually cause the value of the franchise to increase to the point that Reinsdorf's partners want to sell the team and cash in their profits. (most ownership groups do not make much money when they own the team but rather realize profits upon selling the team at a higher price.) This is the hope, anyway. At the very least its an opportunity to let off steam and maybe correct some flawed perceptions in the media and the public.

hsnterprize
06-18-2003, 07:58 AM
"As the originator of this thread (and a member of the militant wing -- or the Delta Force, if you will -- of the Sox Army), I must take exception to parts of your post.

While I agree that Sox ownership has an abysmal track record and their management (both for baseball operations and media / public relations) is less than perfect, you have to admit that there is a fundamental pro-Cubs bias in the Chicago and national media that both reflects and perpetuates a myth around the Cubs and their horrible stadium and ignorant fans.

It is not an "everyone in the world against the White Sox" conspiracy, because the reasons for it are legitimate, legal and understandable in a market-based capitalist system.

While I applaud the efforts of Tribune beat writers and columnists to go out of their way to say that they are not influenced by the fact that their newspaper is owned by the same conglomerate that owns the Cubs (even going as far as to say they love the Sox), you cannot deny that there is a fundamental conflict of interest when a media company owns a team and then covers that team and claims to be fair and balanced. They may try, but the conflict of interest and the potential for revenue generation is too apparent and obvious.

When the General Manager of the WB station in Dallas (I have met him twice and had lunch with him once so I am not making this up) touts the Cubs as one of the jewels of the Tribune company empire, the corporation's conflict of interest is as obvious as the fact that the sky is blue.

The fact that up until recently all Cubs games have been on WGN, which is available to everyone with a TV in the Chicago area everyone in the U.S. with cable or satellite, is the first factor which has made the Cubs visible on a national scale. So, generations of retired people and schoolchildren home for the summer with nothing else to do but watch TV have been exposed to Cubs baseball. So, by default they became Cubs fans, especially when the camera panned over the crowd to show pretty girls soaking up the sun in tight shirts at Wrigley. This was the beginning of the Cubs "mystique."

Next, on any given day, in Chicago's #1 newspaper, given equal results on equally good or bad teams, the Cubs are going to get top billing in the Tribune. (Case in point, last season when both teams were losing, the Cubs got more coverage in the Trib.) This is not a conspiracy, it is understandable that the Tribune, whose first duty is to make money and promote the success of the corporation, is going to play up the Cubs with more coverage. Why go out of your way to promote your cross-town competitor when your a member of your corporate family had the same result on the same day?

Because the Trib is the #1 paper in Chicago, and because the North Side and North Suburbs generally are more populated and affluent and because North Siders are believed to be mostly Cubs fans and South Siders are believed to be mostly Sox fans, the other media outlets who are chasing the same monied demographics are going to attempt to appeal to what they think their desired target demographics want to see. It makes perfect business sense if that is all the data that you have.

These factors have created a mystique around the ballpark, with the endless shots of beautiful women, beer and sunshine, which the vacuous lemmings in the public are willing to consume in large quantities.

This is a self-fulfilling prophesy as long as the feedback loop continues.

1. People buy into the Cubs mystique and think it is cool to go to Wrigley
2. Attendance at Wrigley goes up
3. Media outlets, seeking to maximize profits, believe there are more Cubs fans and devote more resources in an attempt to serve what they believe is a growing demographic
4. The Cubs get more coverage in the media
5. More people buy into the Cubs mystique and think it is cool to go to Wrigley.

These people so desire escapist entertainment that they become so programmed to believe that it is cool to go to Cubs games that they ignore the piss in the sinks, the watered-down beer, the piss-poor traffic and parking, the higher crime rate, the sunburn, the obstructed views, the lines, the little-league dimensions, the fact that home run balls are NOT thrown back on the field and the corked bat. They come out in droves. They are not baseball fans.

Inevitably, comparisons must be made between Sox and Cubs attendance. Rather than talking to lots of Sox fans to accurately report on their reasons for staying away from the Cell, most of the reporters take the easy way out and look for the "obvious" reasons that become "fact" because PERCEPTION IS REALITY. It is reported that the upper deck is too high, too steep. There is a hate crime in Bridgeport. "That must mean that crime is out of control next to the Cell!" A Cubs fan runs on the field and attacks an umpire. "Sox security is unable to handle bad behavior and Sox fans are all a bunch of drunks because Bill Veeck once called old Comiskey the world's largest saloon!""

I must admit, this post is very well written. You clearly explain the fact that no matter what the Sox do, other than a complete overhaul of their current system and an aggressive approach to re-establishing their place within the Chicago media, there isn't much of a way for the Sox to get the legitimate respect they deserve in the press unless the Cubs are out of the way. Case in point...2000. That year, the Sox had the best record in the American League. In spite of losing the game that clinched the division title, we constantly saw empty, blue seats in the ballpark, and heard constant ramblings by reporters about why we Sox fans aren't supporting our team. We heard constant references to the lack of attendance on the South Side, while constantly seeing pictures of a sold-out Wrigley Field in spite of the Cubs nearly losing 100 games. You're right when you say there is a strong perception that the area near the "Cell" is worse than the area around Wrigley Field, even though we know the numbers reflect the opposite. And it also doesn't help when there is a front office that appears not to be interested in fighting the "competition" here in town head on. That often frustrates me because it seems like no matter what the Sox do to try to improve themselves in the public eye, something goes wrong, and the press run amok over the situation. Now, don't misunderstand me...a fan running the field and attacking an umpire is serious business no matter where it is. However, I have the feeling that if that incident happened at Wrigley Field, I don't think it would've gotten as much negative scrutiny and press the incident received. Or at least, with the Tribune company owning the Cubs, and negative reporting about the situation would've been quickly countered with positive spin about Wrigley Field, the neighborhood, the Cubs, or anything they could in order to squelch the negative image the incident brings. I mean...look at all the squelching the Cubs did when that fight broke out between fans and L.A. Dodgers' players. Even though a fan recently won a $475,000 court decision against the Cubs, the fan said he's still a Cub fan, and the story was only reported on for 1 day. Now as of today, the fan who attacked the K.C. Royals' coach is supposed to be sentenced. Of course it's a big story, but I'd like to see how long the story gets reported, and what kind of spin it gets. For the most part, the press has been fair about this situation. I'm still skeptical about how it will be covered only because it's a chance for Cub fans...especially Cub fans in the press...to smear all Sox fans like that Ligue idiot.

The bottom line in all of this is that there are a lot of people at fault as far as the Sox perception is concerned. And as far as I'm concerned, if the Sox don't take responsibility for their part in this public image debacle, no matter if the team went 162-0, the Cubs will still be the top team in this town.

Lip Man 1
06-18-2003, 10:52 AM
The last three posts all bring up excellent points, to me the "key" to the Sox situation is this....

After 23 years it's time for new ownership and at least a fighting chance...period.

FYI, Bob Vanderberg said the same thing as one of the posters in his interview...how he's sick of the "defeatist" attitude that current Sox ownership has and how it permeates the entire organization.

Perhaps a reason why no matter who the Sox get in trades they fall apart?

Lip

Hangar18
06-18-2003, 11:06 AM
XIL's points 1 thru 5 are Exactly how this thing called "cub magic"
keeps on going and going and going. Yes, We can all sit around and wait for a Comet to fly by and deposit a Hall Of Fame
Caliber Pitcher on the Sox Doorstep (and the SOX getting credit
for being the beneficiary of this Comet Deposit) and we can
All Count the Days till Jerry Reinsdorf Eventually Dies (he will, thats guaranteed, were all destined for the big ball park in the sky someday) and we can even count the days til the Media
wakes up, and Decides the Cubs arent "Cool" anymore, and are Passe, and time to pick another team to throw their Coverage and Devotion towards. But we can also do what WE SAID WE WERE GOING TO DO. Begin Boycotting Products and Sponsors.
It really is this simple. we just have to do it. Theres nothing
worse than a cub fan spouting off all the reasons theyre more
"popular" and same fan doesnt even acknowledge Points
1 thru 5. That is annoying and frustrating. Esp because they
think this is the way its always been.

xil357
06-18-2003, 12:52 PM
Originally posted by Hangar18
XIL's points 1 thru 5 are Exactly how this thing called "cub magic"
keeps on going and going and going. Yes, We can all sit around and wait for a Comet to fly by and deposit a Hall Of Fame
Caliber Pitcher on the Sox Doorstep (and the SOX getting credit
for being the beneficiary of this Comet Deposit) and we can
All Count the Days till Jerry Reinsdorf Eventually Dies (he will, thats guaranteed, were all destined for the big ball park in the sky someday) and we can even count the days til the Media
wakes up, and Decides the Cubs arent "Cool" anymore, and are Passe, and time to pick another team to throw their Coverage and Devotion towards. But we can also do what WE SAID WE WERE GOING TO DO. Begin Boycotting Products and Sponsors.
It really is this simple. we just have to do it. Theres nothing
worse than a cub fan spouting off all the reasons theyre more
"popular" and same fan doesnt even acknowledge Points
1 thru 5. That is annoying and frustrating. Esp because they
think this is the way its always been.

Thank you, Hangar.

Just look at what Mike Downey had to write about in his column yesterday in the Trib (at least on-line, I don't get the print edition in Texas):

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-0306170238jun17,1,3092845.column?coll=cs-columnists

Although he disagrees with our premise and says he is a Sox fan, obviously SOMETHING in the letters to the editor got his attention as the #1 columnist (he's listed above Morrissey on-line) for the #1 paper in the market!

I don't know how many of you have been sending letters to the Trib and/or advertisers, but IT IS WORKING ALREADY!

Even Rosenbloom took a break from his typical sarcasm to write a whole column about Frank's at bat against Pedro.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-030617rosenbloomcolumn,1,3318611.column?coll=cs-columnists

So, now is the time to write those letters to the Trib, thanking them for their attention to our concern in the form of Downey's and Rosenbloom's columns, and that you want to see more of this. In your letters, tell them that you want all the stories written from this point forward about the idiot who attacked the ump at the Cell to mention in the first or second paragraph that he is an admitted Cub fan who earlier in the day got plastered at Wrigley! Tell them you want to see a well-researched and nuanced feature story about Sox fans like the ones who post at WSI -- real baseball fans who hate Reinsdorf for 94 and 97, hate the media for their love fest with the Cubs, hate Sox public relations efforts and boneheaded moves on and off the field BUT ABSOLUTELY LIVE AND DIE WITH THE SUCCESSES AND FAILURES OF THE TEAM.

And tell them that the boycott CONTINUES, because there are more than 20 years of pro-Cubs coverage to overcome that cannot be excused overnight. Tell them that you still are not renewing your subscription and you will deliberately give false demographic information when registering for the Trib web site so as to thwart their ad sales and marketing efforts, while you still will consume their product for free. Tell them you will continue to boycott their big advertisers and that you will tell them WHY you are boycotting them. Tell them you are going to instead give your hard-earned dollars to businesses who sponsor the White Sox, like Fifth-Third Bank and U.S. Cellular. Tell those businesses that you are switching to them because AND ONLY BECAUSE they support the team, and carbon copy those letters to the Trib editors as well.

This is no time to rest on our laurels! Let's keep those letters coming! Tell them you are "mad as hell, and not going to take it anymore."

The only thing to which they will react is a threat to their bottom line. They have to sell ads to make money. They have to have demographcs to sell ads. If the demographics suck, they have to change their product to satisfy the demographic. The same thing goes for the Sun Times and WSCR and Channels 2, 5, 7, 9 and 32. Over the past 20 years they have changed their product to chase the "Cubs fan majority" demographic. Well, make it known that as a result of their actions of the past 20 years, they are losing the much larger, much more prosperous and much more intelligent White Sox fan demographic. They say that one letter usually represents the way 100 or 1,000 people really feel about the issue. Let's flex our Sox Army muscle.

booter14
06-18-2003, 02:46 PM
Sox fans boycotting the Cub machine would be futile. The Trib does not need or expect revenue from Sox fans, so boycotting would be a blip on the radar.

My advice: Boycott the White Sox organization. Don't go to games, don't watch Fox or GN, and don't listen to the boobs on 1000.

Reinsdorf runs his organization exactly like the Trib Co. The only difference is 1 million stupid sheep. From 1995 to 1999, revenue increased on the South Side from $56 million to $80 mil. 40% increase. Over the same period, player salaries were REDUCED 40% from $40mil to $25mil. Fan attendence varied from 1.8 mil to 1.4 mil. Bottom line: JR made a butt load, no matter what his accountant says. (reported.http://roadsidephotos.com/baseball/data.htm)

JR is sapping the life out of this franchise, and he is making money doing it. The only way to revive the franchise is to hurt JR where it hurts, and boycott games. Unlike before the Cell was built, he no longer has any leverage. He can't move the team because he has a modern stadium, and the Anti-Trust agreement supplied by the US governement forbids it. He would be forced to sell. However, it needs to happen quick because when the current collective bargaining agreement expires in 2006 the concensus is that the government will revoke the anit-trust claus for baseball. (Football does not have it, and teams move left and right)

The Sox receive negative coverage in the chicago media because the entire franchise is a joke. top to bottom. The Cub machine is based on Big Business Entertainment, but the Sox require a successful baseball team in order to draw fans and positive media interest. We need to get rid of this owner and find one that will pay for talent.

For whatever reason , JR seems to be invisible to the local media. He has destroyed the Bulls, but yet has made more money over the last 5 years then he did over the previous 8. Despite doing this to the Bulls, not one peep from the media. Instead they set their sights on his scapegoat Jerry Krause.

Boycott JR, Boycott JR. ruin him and the investors that he represents, and that will solve all the Sox problems. This franchise and fans deserve better.

MarqSox
06-18-2003, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by booter14

JR is sapping the life out of this franchise, and he is making money doing it. The only way to revive the franchise is to hurt JR where it hurts, and boycott games.

It's theories like this that have the Sox in this mess to begin with. JR WILL NOT sell the Sox, at least not in the forseeable future, no matter how bad attendence gets. In fact, boycotting the Sox will do nothing more than reduce the payroll and make the Sox even worse -- not to mention increase the liklihood that the team will flee Chicago altogether.

It's one thing to avoid going to games because you don't want to support a crappy product, but PLEASE don't fool yourself by thinking you're somehow helping the situation.

JUGGERNAUT
06-21-2003, 12:46 PM
What you should do:
USE THIS SITE TO YOUR ADVANTAGE!
Setup some petition links to where you can collect signatures & addresses for your cause.

Those who frequent WSI en-masse will be able to add their names & addresses.
I suggest you keep it secure & private in terms of viewing it on-line. Just let WSIers know how many names are on the list.

Every week send your constructive criticism e-mail along with the petition list to all the advertisers & media outlets you wish to influence. Every week you can indicate a new number of those who have joined the boycott & petition.

I think the media & advertisers will take notice because:
1) the sheer volume of names
2) the automated & professional approach

All that is required from the bulk of WSIers is to add their name & address to the petition/boycott lists in private.

Then the Delta Force if you will makes use of that list to effectively target media & advertisers.


Should you do it?:
The truth is that the BULK of SOX fans both present, past, & future LOATHE & DETEST the present ownership. This is fueled both by the BULLS debacle & the SOX reluctance to spend.

As long as there was 10-15mil diff in payroll betw the Cubs & SOX most SOX fans ignored that. But now we are talking a 30mil diff & the Cubs have definitely raised the threshold for how much they are willing to spend to remain competitive.

There are no more excuses to made for JR & company. The SOX have a lower payroll in their own division than:
CLE, MIN, DET. They are 4th.
If KC ever gets that new stadium
they will likely fall to 5th. Amazing when you consider the SOX are 18th in total revenue in MLB.

The Cubs in comparison are now tied with the STL in payroll in their div.

Let's talk about the improvements to SOX park this past off-season. Did JR really consider the fan in all this? Seats closest to the bull pens have an obstructed view of the new Jumbo tron. The fan deck is nice, but someone should have checked the views from most of the lower deck seats.

The new LED's are nothing but AD grids! How does this enhance the feel of the game for SOX fans? If JR gave a crap about the fans he would have posted scores & stats along the grids in CONJUNCTION with the ads. Maybe even put up some more frog races or something like that on the LED's. Something OTHER THAN ADS to INTERACT with the fans! I think the advertisers would have liked that as well, because the way they are now most fans I talk to grow a disliking to the advertisers on those grids because the constant stream of ADS detracts from the game.

It's time MLB put the pressure on JR to give up the SOX. In this decade he is quickly driving this team into the ground at the same time his biggest competitor(Cubs) is expanding it's base.

It's hard to believe that just 5 yrs ago this team was ranked 12th in total revenue.

What's it say about your team when the most marketable player is the guy most of you hate: FRANK THOMAS?

I'm sorry but the facts are too overwhelming to disregard. JR is the biggest negative influence on this team. NOBODY in this city likes him.
It's long past the time for him to go.

If it takes the SOX dropping to #20 in rev to do it, then so be it.

Lip Man 1
06-21-2003, 12:56 PM
I can't argue with your points. Well said!

Lip

Dan H
06-27-2003, 10:24 AM
Greg Couch of the Sun-Times mentions WSI today(June 27). The White Sox have not wanted to cooperate with the site in securing interviews of present or past players for WSI. While I am sure the organization doesn't and never will appreciate what is written or posted on this site, the snubbing of WSI is a big mistake in my opinion. The site is gaining attention, and this would be a great way to reach their fan base. But I have no illusions of any relationship with the team. Their loss.

hsnterprize
07-02-2003, 08:12 AM
...it seems like there's nothing else going on in the Chicago sports world. Of course the Cubs chocked again, but that's being treated as a near after-thought after the Sox got Roberto Alomar and Carl Everett for basically next to nothing. I've been reporting sports on the radio this morning, and the deals plus the Sox' 6 to 1 win over Minnesota is all I have time to talk about. That's how big this story is. There is so much fervor over the deals and the Sox' hot streak that even the most staunchiest of Cub lovers in the press can't ignore it. Now, if the Sox can keep up the momentum, we'll keep seeing just how much the Cubs lovers on radio and TV tout their "beloved" north siders. You know as soon as the Cubs start winning again, they'll be all over it...especially if the Sox go on a losing streak.

Lip Man 1
08-05-2003, 12:43 AM
The Sox sure performed well on national TV in front of 40,ooo+ fans against the Royals didn't they?

Friggin' morons

Lip

Hangar18
08-05-2003, 09:02 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
The Sox sure performed well on national TV in front of 40,ooo+ fans against the Royals didn't they?

Friggin' morons

Lip

yup. i thought that too. a chance for the baseball world to
see whats going on here....43,000 people here....buzz in the air...
and they played like that.....

hsnterprize
08-05-2003, 01:37 PM
Originally posted by Hangar18
yup. i thought that too. a chance for the baseball world to
see whats going on here....43,000 people here....buzz in the air...
and they played like that..... Well..don't get too down about it. I think either ESPN or ESPN2 will be broadcasting the Wednesday afternoon game. Okay...so it won't be as big as Monday night, but at least there can be a better showing from the players on the field...hopefully.

Hangar18
08-12-2003, 10:42 AM
IT WORKS! Ive complained and hassled wxrt for quite some time about their total/pro cub coverage (i asked them since when did they become the official fm station of the cubs) They admitted
that they did get out of hand with the cub giveaways, live cub game reports, cub outings. They claimed that many of them prefer the sox, "theyre cooler" (whatever that means) and they would make an effort to to have more sox related functions in the future. Well, the future may be here now with that station finally....

xil357
08-12-2003, 02:24 PM
Originally posted by Hangar18
IT WORKS! Ive complained and hassled wxrt for quite some time about their total/pro cub coverage (i asked them since when did they become the official fm station of the cubs) They admitted
that they did get out of hand with the cub giveaways, live cub game reports, cub outings. They claimed that many of them prefer the sox, "theyre cooler" (whatever that means) and they would make an effort to to have more sox related functions in the future. Well, the future may be here now with that station finally....

I nominate Hangar for promotion to five-star general and supreme allied commander of Delta Force (militant wing and tip of the sword) operations for the Sox Army for distinguished service and tireless combat on behalf of the Sox, WSI and disgruntled Sox fans everywhere against the corporate-owned pro-Cubs media monolith.

MarqSox
08-12-2003, 02:31 PM
Originally posted by xil357
I nominate Hangar for promotion to five-star general and supreme allied commander of Delta Force (militant wing and tip of the sword) operations for the Sox Army for distinguished service and tireless combat on behalf of the Sox, WSI and disgruntled Sox fans everywhere against the corporate-owned pro-Cubs media monolith.
I don't know about five-star general, but he's certainly earned some kind of title! Here's a toast to the great Hangar! :gulp: :gulp:

Hangar18
08-12-2003, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by MarqSox
I don't know about five-star general, but he's certainly earned some kind of title! Here's a toast to the great Hangar! :gulp: :gulp:

I'll take the title, and a nite on the tiles .......
But alas, our work is not finished. this is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. we've much work to be done, we will
take back what is rightfully ours...... ...

miker
08-15-2003, 01:59 PM
If you want to have fun with the management at XRT, keep telling them that they are no longer hip and trendy, but mainstream and therefore culturally irrelevant.

That should put their Yuppie/Alternative-Livestyle undies in a bunch!

MarqSox
08-18-2003, 03:43 PM
I found this buried in an article about Tom Skilling today. It caught my eye because it's a flattering Sox mention that didn't need to exist, or could have just as easily been Cub-related. It comes from media critic Allan Johnson:
And for a guy who can talk a good piece about weather patterns as easily as a South Sider might talk about the White Sox, Skilling can succinctly sum up the coolest thing about his job:

"It's a game we play with Mother Nature. You say, `You're going to try and outsmart me and do something tomorrow, and I'm going to try to figure out what you've got on your mind.'"


We're making slow but steady progress, Sox Army!

xil357
09-09-2003, 03:32 PM
Hey, why isn't this thread STUCK to the top of the Sox Clubhouse forum anymore? The boycott information would be greatly helpful now that both teams are in a pennant race and the media coverage is GROSSLY one-sided in favor of the Cubs. WSI has lots of new members who may want to do what they can to rectify the decided pro-Cubs slant in the Chicago and national media. We do have the power, we just have to be willing to exercise it, like Hangar with WXRT.

Hangar18
09-09-2003, 05:00 PM
My constant bugging Xrt has helped. theyve had more sox commercials, as well as discussed them a bit more in the AM's.
Very big......considering this station was a cub outlet

TDog
09-10-2003, 03:38 AM
I was listening to WDRV on the Internet when I got home from work Monday, and between song the woman announcer announced, "Yippy-I-Ay, the Sox won today," and detailed the Sox climb into unshared first-place.

I was listening to this station this summer in Wisconsin when an announcer said it was good the Sox beat the Cubs two out of three at Wrigley.

I hear things like that, and I don't feel so second class.