cheeses_h_rice
07-25-2004, 08:29 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0407250363jul25,1,2112983.story?coll=chi-news-hed
Your friend Ann Marie's quote is pretty funny. I changed the colors accordingly:
Chicago Tribune Editor Ann Marie Lipinski said the newspaper covers the Chicago Cubs as it would any other local team. "The Chicago Tribune, which does not own a baseball team, covers the Cubs as aggressively as any other sports franchise in Chicago," she said. "Any suggestion to the contrary would come as a surprise to our reporters and our readers." So the Cubune not being the official owner of the Cubs -- that role would fall to the Cubune's PARENT company, the Cubune Co. -- is now her built-in excuse for why there couldn't possibly be any bias in the way the Cubune covers the Cubs? Unreal. Or does she mean the Cubune's "aggressive" coverage of the Cubs in terms of how many column inches they routinely give the Cubs over the Sox?
"There is a concern. If there's a grouping of problems with one building, like at Wrigley, then someone has to go look at it and stabilize the building," he said. "If they are isolated problems, then you can correct them easily. I'd think if there was a major problem, we would have seen it by now."
<snip>
With routine maintenance, Williams said, stadiums such as Wrigley can last much longer.
"There's no reason to tear down Wrigley," he said. "It's not going anywhere."
<snip>
Guralnick said it would be unfair to pin the problems on Wrigley's age.
"Age as such is not a problem," he said. "The Colosseum is a stadium, and it's 2,000 years old and parts of it are still standing. . . . There are plenty of structures that are quite old and are still satisfactory." LMAO. So I guess the Flubs will be moving their games to Rome if Wrigley has more problems? I mean, after all, the Colosseum is "satisfactory," isn't it?
And why is it unfair to pin problems like falling concrete on Wrigley's age? Don't old buildings deteriorate as a matter of physics?
Seems to me this article was all about downplaying the problems the park is having and desperately trying to reassure the general public.
Spin? Nah. Never at the Cubune.
Your friend Ann Marie's quote is pretty funny. I changed the colors accordingly:
Chicago Tribune Editor Ann Marie Lipinski said the newspaper covers the Chicago Cubs as it would any other local team. "The Chicago Tribune, which does not own a baseball team, covers the Cubs as aggressively as any other sports franchise in Chicago," she said. "Any suggestion to the contrary would come as a surprise to our reporters and our readers." So the Cubune not being the official owner of the Cubs -- that role would fall to the Cubune's PARENT company, the Cubune Co. -- is now her built-in excuse for why there couldn't possibly be any bias in the way the Cubune covers the Cubs? Unreal. Or does she mean the Cubune's "aggressive" coverage of the Cubs in terms of how many column inches they routinely give the Cubs over the Sox?
"There is a concern. If there's a grouping of problems with one building, like at Wrigley, then someone has to go look at it and stabilize the building," he said. "If they are isolated problems, then you can correct them easily. I'd think if there was a major problem, we would have seen it by now."
<snip>
With routine maintenance, Williams said, stadiums such as Wrigley can last much longer.
"There's no reason to tear down Wrigley," he said. "It's not going anywhere."
<snip>
Guralnick said it would be unfair to pin the problems on Wrigley's age.
"Age as such is not a problem," he said. "The Colosseum is a stadium, and it's 2,000 years old and parts of it are still standing. . . . There are plenty of structures that are quite old and are still satisfactory." LMAO. So I guess the Flubs will be moving their games to Rome if Wrigley has more problems? I mean, after all, the Colosseum is "satisfactory," isn't it?
And why is it unfair to pin problems like falling concrete on Wrigley's age? Don't old buildings deteriorate as a matter of physics?
Seems to me this article was all about downplaying the problems the park is having and desperately trying to reassure the general public.
Spin? Nah. Never at the Cubune.