PDA

View Full Version : Negative Article About Frank By Paul Sullivan In The Cubune...


DrCrawdad
07-31-2005, 01:24 AM
Surprise, surprise, negative article about Frank in the Cubune.

Irishsox1
07-31-2005, 01:39 AM
Waste of paper and bandwidth.

I ran into Sullivan at Justin's on Southport 3 years ago and he told me flat out the he is a Cub fan and hated covering the White Sox. The guy is a little dweb and a total loser.

TornLabrum
07-31-2005, 01:50 AM
I just read the article. Of all of those items (I lost count at 10), only two could be construed as Frank acting petulant, nasty, or any other negative. The rest seemed to describe the feelings of media, Paul Konerko, or whoever about what Frank said or did.

dickallen15
07-31-2005, 01:54 AM
Of course Sullivan had to get a couple Frank/Ozzie battles in there, and he couldn't leave out Ozzie insulting White Sox fans in 1993. Mr. Sullivan probably is out spending his bonus tonight, and celebrating a lifetime of job security. That "article" is total BS. The Tribune should be ashamed, and pull it from the printing press. Its really is about as pathetic as they have ever been.

chisoxfanatic
07-31-2005, 01:57 AM
What do you expect out of the Cubune? The only saving grace from that poor excuse for a newspaper is Rick Morrissey. Everything else is futile!

Lip Man 1
07-31-2005, 01:59 AM
Irish:

I did an extensive interview with the man for WSI and he told me he has been a Sox fan for years, was at the Andy Hawkins no hit loss game in 1990 and requested leaving the Sox beat because he had it up to here with Terry Bevington's attitude and arrogance.

He also told me earlier this season that he expects to be back on the Sox beat next year.

Take it for what it's worth.

I was disappointed with the tone of the story no question. I thought it was fitting that Frank's greatest hits should have been highlighted instead which is why I sent the media a copy of my comments to start that thread here at WSI and the link to the other fan's comments. We will see if anybody picks up on it.

Lip

RadioheadRocks
07-31-2005, 02:00 AM
What do you expect out of the Cubune? The only saving grace from that poor excuse for a newspaper is Rick Morrissey. Everything else is futile!


But you're forgetting how useful the Cubune is for wrapping fish or lining the bottom of the birdcage! :D:

TornLabrum
07-31-2005, 02:00 AM
Irish:

I did an extensive interview with the man for WSI and he told me he has been a Sox fan for years, was at the Andy Hawkins no hit loss game in 1990 and requested leaving the Sox beat because he had it up to here with Terry Bevington's attitude and arrogance.

He also told me earlier this season that he expects to be back on the Sox beat next year.

Take it for what it's worth.

I was disappointed with the tone of the story no question. I thought it was fitting that Frank's greatest hits should have been highlighted instead which is why I sent the media a copy of my comments to start that thread here at WSI and the link to the other fan's comments. We will see if anybody picks up on it.

Lip

I guarantee that no one in the Chicago media will.

Foulke You
07-31-2005, 03:10 AM
I guarantee that no one in the Chicago media will.
Correct. The Chicago Media made their mind up about Frank a long time ago. They don't like him and they never will give him a fair shake, no matter what.

tsamdog
07-31-2005, 07:30 AM
I just find it more than a bit disheartening that ANY paper would run such an article at this time. Frank's accomplishments far outweigh his faults and to literally kick a man when he's down (and more than likely out) in print is cheap and displays a true lack of class. Frank will be inducted into the HOF, and when that time comes, and the windsock turns 180, it will be interesting to see who in the media changes his/her tune. I'm afraid that Lip's positive, retrospective post, and those that followed, will not make an appearance until that time. Until then, the wrath of Pravda (on the eve of one of their own's induction, no less) will continue.

ChiWhiteSox1337
07-31-2005, 07:50 AM
:angry::angry: This article just makes me mad. I rarely read anything from the Chicago sport writers, and this is the perfect reason why. I just love how he fit the Ozzie's quote about Sox fans into the article, and the David Wells bit as well. Did the Tribune run the same type of article about Sammy when he left Chicago, after years of the media butt-kissing of him? I'm guessing yes, just because that's the way the media is in this town.

Trav
07-31-2005, 08:32 AM
I sent Sullivan an e-mail about this suggesting that he come back with a greatest swings...on the field (similar to Lip's thread) to at least maintain the act that he is a journalist. We shall see. I'm not holding my breath, however.

samram
07-31-2005, 08:53 AM
Irish:

I did an extensive interview with the man for WSI and he told me he has been a Sox fan for years, was at the Andy Hawkins no hit loss game in 1990 and requested leaving the Sox beat because he had it up to here with Terry Bevington's attitude and arrogance.

He also told me earlier this season that he expects to be back on the Sox beat next year.

Take it for what it's worth.

I was disappointed with the tone of the story no question. I thought it was fitting that Frank's greatest hits should have been highlighted instead which is why I sent the media a copy of my comments to start that thread here at WSI and the link to the other fan's comments. We will see if anybody picks up on it.

Lip

It occurs to me that every member of the Chicago sports media you interview tells you he is a Sox fan, and has been one for many years, and then proceeds to rip the Sox or their players or their fans every time they get a chance to do so. My guess is they're lying to you because they know your allegiance.

I agree with TL- most of those anecdotes had nothing to do with a media rant by Frank.

TommyJohn
07-31-2005, 08:54 AM
I sent Sullivan an e-mail about this suggesting that he come back with a greatest swings...on the field (similar to Lip's thread) to at least maintain the act that he is a journalist. We shall see. I'm not holding my breath, however.

Dear Trav,

Why would I do that? Frank is the worst person ever, I don't care if he didn't
cork his bat or use steroids. The fact that I am a Cub fan has nothing to do
with it. The fact that Frank is a tall, handsome, muscular bronze god who
can get tons of women while I look like Frodo has nothing to do with it
either. You Sox fans are just jealous because God created the Cubs.

Sincerely,

Paulie Frodo Sullivan

jabrch
07-31-2005, 09:52 AM
But you're forgetting how useful the Cubune is for wrapping fish or lining the bottom of the birdcage! :D:

My bird even hates that kind of crap.

Realist
07-31-2005, 10:11 AM
What do you expect out of the Cubune? The only saving grace from that poor excuse for a newspaper is Rick Morrissey. Everything else is futile!

Morrisey is the Tribune's inoculation against being exposed as the complete lap dogs for the Cubs that they truly are. It's a pretty simple and very effective procedure.

First the editorial staff encourages positive stories about the Cubs from their writers through very subtle subliminal choices in words and body language during the meetings to determine what should and shouldn't be written about. These clues are often subconscious in nature and shouldn't be confused with any sort of overt or conscious agenda or conspiracy. It's simply human nature - People want to please their bosses. Everybody that works for that rag knows that they own the Cubs.

On a whole, nobody wants to piss off their boss in any job setting, let alone a plumb job writing for a heavy hitter in the main stream media. No matter how much any of these lackeys may "claim" to be attempting to be objective, more often than not the primary need for the writers is to maintain their jobs and continue up the "ladder of success" ultimately drives their subconscious and choice of topics and even the choice of semantics for their articles.

The end result being - even though they may not sincerely see it, their bias bleeds forth and is very apparent to even the most casual Sox fan. The sports editors and sports writers for the Trib aren't even aware of their bias because they are so mired in the b.s. of their concern to please their bosses that they wouldn't know objectivity if it slapped them in the face. I believe they honestly believe they're being objective reporters when they write this crap.

Within this pattern as I see it is the occasional glorious story that strikes a chord in all Soxdom. We all uniformly jump out of our seats and proclaim, "YES! Finally a truthful story!" This acts as a sort-of safety valve to help alleviate that mysterious uneasiness the sports editors and writers feel when the weight of their subconscious and unintentional bias grows so large that it makes even their own stomachs quiver. It's at this time they allow one of their rebellious, open minded and proudly independent writers to sneak an off color and anti-Cubs story into the Tribune's sports section.

On the occasion these few and far between articles are allowed to pass from the pages of the Tribune to the public, the Tribune's staff breathes a slight sigh of relief - "Ya see? We're not biased at all. We printed a whole article that that criticizes all that is Cubbiedom while not ripping on the Sox at all. Sox fans are then asked to please cease and desists all claims that the Trib is biased in anyway.

The inoculation is complete and we're all asked to please **** about any hint of pro-Cubs or anti-Sox bias within the Tribune. In the mean time, the assassination of the White Sox and what they represent marches forward with death by a thousand paper cuts.

[sorry if this is too rambling or full of errors of grammer or typos. I'm pooped and just wanted to get it down and posted.]

voodoochile
07-31-2005, 11:02 AM
So many of those are just non-issues, IMO.

It's kind of weird to read those as supposed examples of "why Thomas is a bad guy." I mean there just isn't much substance there.

The money thing is about the only one which really sticks out at me and it fails to mention that Frank still was in camp on-time according to the rules of the CBA.

That PK quote is the beginning of his media career.

Why include the Wells quote at all? I mean, Boomer got it wrong, period.

shoota
07-31-2005, 11:14 AM
Until then, the wrath of Pravda (on the eve of one of their own's induction, no less) will continue.

What's Pravda?

MarySwiss
07-31-2005, 11:39 AM
Well, it's just more of the same old crap. The Sox are winning, the team chemistry is good, and the media haven't got anything current to slam, so they have to dig up some junk from the past. That's why hardly a day goes by when we don't hear about the Black Sox.

I'm convinced that the day after we win the World Series, the headline in the Cubune (probably on page 3 of the sports section) will read something like "Sox win first World Series since they threw one."

DumpJerry
07-31-2005, 11:40 AM
When I saw the article, I called the Trib to inform them they had accidentally sent me an old paper. Thie same article appeared a few months ago around Opening Day. Why don't they get original and come up with something new?

Pasqua's Posers
07-31-2005, 11:42 AM
Sullivan is just a piece of garbage...why doesn't he do a highlight article about Thomas' accomplishments? Jagoff...:angry:

DrCrawdad
07-31-2005, 11:43 AM
Morrisey is the Tribune's inoculation against being exposed as the complete lap dogs for the Cubs that they truly are. It's a pretty simple and very effective procedure.

First the editorial staff encourages positive stories about the Cubs from their writers through very subtle subliminal choices in words and body language during the meetings to determine what should and shouldn't be written about. These clues are often subconscious in nature and shouldn't be confused with any sort of overt or conscious agenda or conspiracy. It's simply human nature - People want to please their bosses. Everybody that works for that rag knows that they own the Cubs.

On a whole, nobody wants to piss off their boss in any job setting, let alone a plumb job writing for a heavy hitter in the main stream media. No matter how much any of these lackeys may "claim" to be attempting to be objective, more often than not the primary need for the writers is to maintain their jobs and continue up the "ladder of success" ultimately drives their subconscious and choice of topics and even the choice of semantics for their articles.

The end result being - even though they may not sincerely see it, their bias bleeds forth and is very apparent to even the most casual Sox fan. The sports editors and sports writers for the Trib aren't even aware of their bias because they are so mired in the b.s. of their concern to please their bosses that they wouldn't know objectivity if it slapped them in the face. I believe they honestly believe they're being objective reporters when they write this crap.

Within this pattern as I see it is the occasional glorious story that strikes a chord in all Soxdom. We all uniformly jump out of our seats and proclaim, "YES! Finally a truthful story!" This acts as a sort-of safety valve to help alleviate that mysterious uneasiness the sports editors and writers feel when the weight of their subconscious and unintentional bias grows so large that it makes even their own stomachs quiver. It's at this time they allow one of their rebellious, open minded and proudly independent writers to sneak an off color and anti-Cubs story into the Tribune's sports section.

On the occasion these few and far between articles are allowed to pass from the pages of the Tribune to the public, the Tribune's staff breathes a slight sigh of relief - "Ya see? We're not biased at all. We printed a whole article that that criticizes all that is Cubbiedom while not ripping on the Sox at all. Sox fans are then asked to please cease and desists all claims that the Trib is biased in anyway.

The inoculation is complete and we're all asked to please **** about any hint of pro-Cubs or anti-Sox bias within the Tribune. In the mean time, the assassination of the White Sox and what they represent marches forward with death by a thousand paper cuts.

[sorry if this is too rambling or full of errors of grammer or typos. I'm pooped and just wanted to get it down and posted.]

Good points Realist. This quote sums it up to me:

"A corporate mentality needn't be imposed by direct fiat; it's a virus that metastasizes in the bureaucratic bloodstream." - New York Times, July 10, 2005

C-Dawg
07-31-2005, 11:58 AM
Frank's accomplishments far outweigh his faults and to literally kick a man when he's down (and more than likely out) in print is cheap and displays a true lack of class.

Those were exactly my thoughts while reading the article; you summed it up very well.

I've never seen a negative article about a Cub player printed on the day after a serious injury. Can you imagine them reminding us how the Marlins came back and beat Mark Prior in Game 6 of the 2003 playoffs, on the day after he took the line-drive to the elbow? Or - a better example - what if they did an article about Sosa's alleged beating-wife-with-rum-bottle on the very next day after he took that pitch to the head that shattered his batting helmet?

My cynical therory is that the Tribune is laying the groundwork to keep Thomas OUT of the Hall of Fame.

Unregistered
07-31-2005, 12:10 PM
Funny how they didn't do this when Sosa was run out of town. They certainly could have filled a few pages with all the awful things that scumbag has done in and out of a Cubs uniform...

jerry
07-31-2005, 12:12 PM
I used to buy both papers every Sunday. Ever since the Tribune bought the Cubs, I have never purchased it. From what I hear, it was a good choice. Even before they bought the Cubs, they never gave the Sox proper coverage. If they had any journalistic integrity, they would state the facts, Frank is the best hitter in White Sox history and one of the best right handed hitters in baseball history. We will never read that there, and I will continue to not buy the paper. I just hope Frank comes back and with the Sox where he belongs.

Palehose13
07-31-2005, 12:33 PM
Surprisingly, I agree with the sentiment regarding thsi article. However, did anyone else find this amusing:

August 2002

Thomas and Carlos Lee engage in a heated shouting match in the clubhouse at Tropicana Field over Thomas' non-slide into the plate in a game against the Devil Rays. "That's the last guy to tell me what to do," Thomas barks, referring to Lee's baserunning blunders

Gotta agree with Frank 100% there.

BTW..anyone catch Phil Rogers positive article about Frank and how he should be in the HOF?

Ol' No. 2
07-31-2005, 12:43 PM
Surprisingly, I agree with the sentiment regarding thsi article. However, did anyone else find this amusing:



Gotta agree with Frank 100% there.

BTW..anyone catch Phil Rogers positive article about Frank and how he should be in the HOF?I was just going to mention Rogers' article. Very nice. At least that one was on page 1 and the Sullivan article was buried inside.

chisoxt
07-31-2005, 12:49 PM
Waste of paper and bandwidth.

I ran into Sullivan at Justin's on Southport 3 years ago and he told me flat out the he is a Cub fan and hated covering the White Sox. The guy is a little dweb and a total loser.

Wow, I met him at a barber shop in Roscoe Village two years ago and he professed to be a fan a both teams growing up. I think that what happens is that when you work for the sports media or, as a talk show host, you want to cover the more 'popular story', regardless of your allegiance.

voodoochile
07-31-2005, 12:50 PM
I was just going to mention Rogers' article. Very nice. At least that one was on page 1 and the Sullivan article was buried inside.

Agreed - thanks for pointing it out...

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-0507310237jul31,1,7987377.column?coll=cs-columnists

hose
07-31-2005, 12:52 PM
What's Pravda?

A Russian newspaper.

DrCrawdad
07-31-2005, 01:03 PM
I was just going to mention Rogers' article. Very nice. At least that one was on page 1 and the Sullivan article was buried inside.

Good point. When I posted this topic the only article was Sullivan's slam.

So at least there was a positive, frontpage article on Frank. The point is though why did they feel compelled to publish this smear on Frank? Would the Cubune, or have they, done the same thing to Cubbie players? When Sandberg played perhaps his last game as a Cubbie, did they feel the need to run an article about every real and imagined negative thing about him? No, there aren't any that they've told us...

voodoochile
07-31-2005, 01:10 PM
Good point. When I posted this topic the only article was Sullivan's slam.

So at least there was a positive, frontpage article on Frank. The point is though why did they feel compelled to publish this smear on Frank? Would the Cubune, or have they, done the same thing to Cubbie players? When Sandberg played perhaps his last game as a Cubbie, did they feel the need to run an article about every real and imagined negative thing about him? No, there aren't any that they've told us...

I still don't get why half those things are considered bad things Frank has done.

Most of them are teammates or managers ripping him for being badly injured ( :?: ) or commenting on how they would have slid or run over or whatever in a given situation (no mention of how most of those guys could have benefitted massively from at least trying to hit like Frank).

One of them is a comment about how Frank made an innocuous comment about receiving the wrong bat model and changing jersey numbers.

Most of Frank's negative comments are a direct reply to someone else saying something negative first.

There's the rip because Frank had the diminished skills clause invoked and some comment from KW about playing the game the right way (when hasn't he?)

I just don't get it and the comment from another poster that this all comes on the heels of a potentially career ending injury seems odd to say the least. Couldn't it wait a day or a week or a month or even until his election into the HOF is upon us? It is truly sick to be doing this now. The title is out of proportion to the content of the article...

TornLabrum
07-31-2005, 01:15 PM
After this rip job on Frank, I looked to find an article about Cindy Sandberg or of Wade Boggs's marital infidelities, both of which were highly publicized, and which would be about as appropriate as they enter the HOF as is the Thomas article by Sullivan as Frank's career possibly comes to an end. There were none.

TommyJohn
07-31-2005, 01:31 PM
After this rip job on Frank, I looked to find an article about Cindy Sandberg or of Wade Boggs's marital infidelities, both of which were highly publicized, and which would be about as appropriate as they enter the HOF as is the Thomas article by Sullivan as Frank's career possibly comes to an end. There were none.

Tribune Exclusive: Margo Adams reacts to Wade Boggs enshrinement: "he'll be doing endorsement deals worth millions now. I just sent him some flowers and a note asking if he wanted to get back together."

Irishsox1
07-31-2005, 02:23 PM
Irish:

I did an extensive interview with the man for WSI and he told me he has been a Sox fan for years, was at the Andy Hawkins no hit loss game in 1990 and requested leaving the Sox beat because he had it up to here with Terry Bevington's attitude and arrogance.

He also told me earlier this season that he expects to be back on the Sox beat next year.

Take it for what it's worth.

I was disappointed with the tone of the story no question. I thought it was fitting that Frank's greatest hits should have been highlighted instead which is why I sent the media a copy of my comments to start that thread here at WSI and the link to the other fan's comments. We will see if anybody picks up on it.

Lip

When I ran into him, he was drunk. I asked him why he's back covering the Cubs. He told me that he wrote a negative article about the Cubs and was transfered to the Sox the next year, where he covered the Sox for a couple of years. He said it sucked because he's a Cub fan, lives right by Wrigley and would rather cover the Cubs. That was right out of his drunken mouth.

TommyJohn
07-31-2005, 02:56 PM
When I ran into him, he was drunk. I asked him why he's back covering the Cubs. He told me that he wrote a negative article about the Cubs and was transfered to the Sox the next year, where he covered the Sox for a couple of years. He said it sucked because he's a Cub fan, lives right by Wrigley and would rather cover the Cubs. That was right out of his drunken mouth.

Does he also look like Frodo?

fox2
07-31-2005, 03:26 PM
What's Pravda?

"Pravda" was the Communist Party newspaper in the old USSR, and it means "truth" in Russian. And under the Communists, their idea of "truth" was about the same as the Tribune's sports section.

Jerome
07-31-2005, 03:26 PM
Why would they run this article at THIS time? Maybe do it the next time Frank does something 'controversial' if you want to keep any integrity. I like how it was on the back of the hugs-and-kisses career summary of Ryno as well.

Vernam
07-31-2005, 03:43 PM
Good points Realist. This quote sums it up to me:

"A corporate mentality needn't be imposed by direct fiat; it's a virus that metastasizes in the bureaucratic bloodstream." - New York Times, July 10, 2005Well, yes, as pointed out in the "Cubgate" thread I started about that NYT story several weeks ago: http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=53865. Uh, nice catch. :cool:

I think Realist's post is on the money. A neighbor of mine is one of their "brand name" columnists (not covering sports), and he told me last week that there's on-going controversy within the company because Sox fans on the payroll complain bitterly about the anti-Sox slant. The Trib sports staff likes to paint us as wacked-out conspiracy theorists, but I found it interesting that their own co-workers think the bias is real.

Here's more evidence of how the Trib Co's profit motives infect their newsrooms: http://tinyurl.com/7svwx. The L.A. Times has a new editor because the old one -- despite 13 Pulitzer Prizes -- ran afoul of the parent company in Chicago. If the main editorial operation is subject to this kind of pressure, it completely puts the laugh to George Knue's and others' claims that the Sports Desk is immune to such influence.

VC

C-Dawg
07-31-2005, 05:12 PM
Funny how they didn't do this when Sosa was run out of town.

Well, they did do such an article; I don't remember who wrote it (maybe someone knows how to find it?). But it wasn't timed to coincide with a possible season- or career-ending injury, like it is in Frank's case. This is just a cheap shot at Frank, when he's down for the count, sadly.

Pulaski
07-31-2005, 05:28 PM
When I opened the paper this morning and saw the article I knew it would be negative. I didn't even waste my time reading his garbage!

SoxNation
07-31-2005, 05:49 PM
Waste of paper and bandwidth.

I ran into Sullivan at Justin's on Southport 3 years ago and he told me flat out the he is a Cub fan and hated covering the White Sox. The guy is a little dweb and a total loser.
Paul is a friend of mine and an objective writer...He's also a Sox fan...

SoxNation
07-31-2005, 05:58 PM
Irish:

I did an extensive interview with the man for WSI and he told me he has been a Sox fan for years, was at the Andy Hawkins no hit loss game in 1990 and requested leaving the Sox beat because he had it up to here with Terry Bevington's attitude and arrogance.

He also told me earlier this season that he expects to be back on the Sox beat next year.

Take it for what it's worth.

I was disappointed with the tone of the story no question. I thought it was fitting that Frank's greatest hits should have been highlighted instead which is why I sent the media a copy of my comments to start that thread here at WSI and the link to the other fan's comments. We will see if anybody picks up on it.

LipYep....I posted earlier in this thread...I've worked with Sully during the spring as I am a freelancer with regular spring gigs in Arizona...Sully is a Sox fan and he was outstanding on the Sox' beat....I've gotten a lot of inside stuff from both he and Josh Paul the past two seasons.

mr_genius
07-31-2005, 06:03 PM
Paul is a friend of mine and an objective writer...

*****!

he might be your friend but he is about as objective towards the Sox as Rush Limbaugh is towards Democrats

voodoochile
07-31-2005, 07:00 PM
Yep....I posted earlier in this thread...I've worked with Sully during the spring as I am a freelancer with regular spring gigs in Arizona...Sully is a Sox fan and he was outstanding on the Sox' beat....I've gotten a lot of inside stuff from both he and Josh Paul the past two seasons.

Speaking of liars, you have two posts and this is number two. The first one is directly above it in the tread.

Paul is that you?

SoxNation
07-31-2005, 08:31 PM
*****!

he might be your friend but he is about as objective towards the Sox as Rush Limbaugh is towards Democrats

Could you give me one sample of where Paul Sullivan has been unfair or unobjective toward the Sox, ever?

voodoochile
07-31-2005, 08:34 PM
Could you give me one sample of where Paul Sullivan has been unfair or unobjective toward the Sox, ever?

Other than the article being discussed you mean?

SoxNation
07-31-2005, 08:48 PM
Other than the article being discussed you mean?
You can draw from anywhere you want, Mr. Voo.
I didn't see anything unfair in today's, either.

chisoxfan64
07-31-2005, 08:49 PM
Were your eyes closed?:cool:

SoxNation
07-31-2005, 08:52 PM
[QUOTE=chisoxfan64]Were your eyes closed?:cool:[/QUOTE
.....nobody has yet to come up with just one sample.
I had a feeling this was going to happen.

voodoochile
07-31-2005, 08:54 PM
You can draw from anywhere you want, Mr. Voo.
I didn't see anything unfair in today's, either.

Really?

I thought it was a pile of overhyped crap.

I still don't see the big issue in most of those stories. Sullivan is trying to stir things up...

SoxNation
07-31-2005, 08:55 PM
Really?

I thought it was a pile of overhyped crap.

I still don't see the big issue in most of those stories. Sullivan is trying to stir things up...
Will you be able to give me just one sample? Anyone?

PaleHoseGeorge
07-31-2005, 08:55 PM
.....nobody has yet to come up with just one sample.
I had a feeling this was going to happen.

Spending an entire column recounting nothing but a career's worth of lowlights -- including several allegations made in error that Sully fails to correct -- that's your idea of making a point? And this on the very weekend we find out the best hitter on the Sox may have played his last game for the ballclub?

Tell your pal Sullivan he's a piece of **** for me, okay?

chisoxfan64
07-31-2005, 08:55 PM
[QUOTE=chisoxfan64]Were your eyes closed?:cool:[/QUOTE
.....nobody has yet to come up with just one sample.
I had a feeling this was going to happen.

We had a feeling you would not come up with any original thought of your own either. You just spew what other media people write and say its fact.

Give me something original that Frank did that was so bad, not that some hack friend of yours made up. Something you researched and can prove to be a fact.

voodoochile
07-31-2005, 08:56 PM
[QUOTE=chisoxfan64]Were your eyes closed?:cool:[/QUOTE
.....nobody has yet to come up with just one sample.
I had a feeling this was going to happen.

Here's one...

How is Boomer ripping on Frank for being legitimately injured an example of Frank being a bad guy?

FarWestChicago
07-31-2005, 08:57 PM
[QUOTE=SoxNation]

Here's one...

How is Boomer ripping on Frank for being legitimately injured an example of Frank being a bad guy?LOL, I guess it's serious proof to this SoxNation gasbrain. :redneck

Daver
07-31-2005, 08:58 PM
[QUOTE=SoxNation]

Here's one...

How is Boomer ripping on Frank for being legitimately injured an example of Frank being a bad guy?

Don't hold your breath waiting for an answer.

MarySwiss
07-31-2005, 09:01 PM
You can draw from anywhere you want, Mr. Voo.
I didn't see anything unfair in today's, either.

Sorry, guy. I'd love to support a fellow Arizonan, but if you are the "lifelong Sox fan" you claim to be, and you didn't "see anything unfair" in "Sully's" article which drew upon basically rehashed old news, then you should probably look up "objectivity" in Web 11.

That article was a total rip job.

voodoochile
07-31-2005, 09:01 PM
[QUOTE=voodoochile]

Don't hold your breath waiting for an answer.

Funny, he was in this thread until I posted that question...

Things that make you go hmmm....

DrCrawdad
07-31-2005, 09:06 PM
You can draw from anywhere you want, Mr. Voo.
I didn't see anything unfair in today's, either.

"SoxNation," are you a fan of the Cubs?

If the article is fair, as you claim or perhaps not unfair, can you give me examples of the Cubune printing negative articles about Santo or Sandberg?

Do you consider Sullivan's article negative?

Daver
07-31-2005, 09:07 PM
Funny, he was in this thread until I posted that question...

Things that make you go hmmm....


He has since joined the band with his other three usernames.

DrCrawdad
07-31-2005, 09:13 PM
He has since joined the band with his other three usernames.

Is this the same person who posted about his love for "Ryno?"

:dtroll:

tebman
07-31-2005, 11:04 PM
Well, yes, as pointed out in the "Cubgate" thread I started about that NYT story several weeks ago: http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=53865. Uh, nice catch. :cool:

I think Realist's post is on the money. A neighbor of mine is one of their "brand name" columnists (not covering sports), and he told me last week that there's on-going controversy within the company because Sox fans on the payroll complain bitterly about the anti-Sox slant. The Trib sports staff likes to paint us as wacked-out conspiracy theorists, but I found it interesting that their own co-workers think the bias is real.

Here's more evidence of how the Trib Co's profit motives infect their newsrooms: http://tinyurl.com/7svwx. The L.A. Times has a new editor because the old one -- despite 13 Pulitzer Prizes -- ran afoul of the parent company in Chicago. If the main editorial operation is subject to this kind of pressure, it completely puts the laugh to George Knue's and others' claims that the Sports Desk is immune to such influence.

VC
I'm surprised George Knue hasn't made an appearance to scold us all for our impudence. Realist did nail it in his post, and Vernam's quote from the NY Times summarizes the whole phenomenon: "A corporate mentality needn't be imposed by direct fiat; it's a virus that metastasizes in the bureaucratic bloodstream."

I went looking for that article and just shook my head. What is it with those people? The day after a possible career-ending injury to the greatest pure hitter Chicago has ever seen, this hatchet job appears to remind us all how inherently deficient the White Sox (and by implication, their fans) are.

We cancelled our subscription to the Tribune some years ago. Not just because of all the Cub posterior-bussing but also because of a tone of arrogance and condecension that had crept back into the paper in its other coverage as well. Colonel McCormick would be proud of the way his progeny are caring for his properties. That's the way McCormick ran the paper when he was alive: target the competitors, identify them as the enemy, and fire at will. Though the contemporary Tribune is more subtle and nuanced in its tactics than Colonel Gasbag was, its purpose is still the same -- protect its own properties and make sure its comfortable target readership is not offended by the rabble who dare to hold opposing views.

Sorry if I rant, but arrogance of position really gets to me.

ode to veeck
08-03-2005, 12:50 PM
What a worthless article by Sullivan, I just managed the time to read it, unfortunately.

How are Thomas' "mood swings" characterized by the utterings of a buffoon like Boomer (he had a great committed career for Chcago didn't he?!?!) or not taking Ritchie Allen's number?!? wrong bats are delivered?!? or the chairman invokes the "diminished skills" clause?!?! What a pile of crap. Why not list the other 29,000 articles of total BS by the press (again someone else's words and actions, not Frank's) as other evidence of Frank's Mood Swings. Put it right next to the Giant Snails on the front page of the Enquirer, er uh, the Cubune

This just goes to prove what a Myth this whole line of crap is about Frank, stirred up by the likes of the Tribune Co. and folks like Sullivan. Don't bother coming back to cover the Sox Sullie, we don't want you. What a horrible article to print about the greatest right handed hitter of all time, and by the home town press, on the day after he DLs on perhaps a career ending injury.

Steelrod
08-04-2005, 04:46 AM
You can draw from anywhere you want, Mr. Voo.
I didn't see anything unfair in today's, either.
If Pauls your buddy and gives you the inside scoop, why don't you do him a favor a give him a great idea for a follow up story;
Dusty Baker...
He can start with the Internal Revenue Service, San Francisco rejoicing at his departure, his son's field presence (which caused a rule change for batboys, his inability to get allong with Alou, Sosa, Carey, Stone, etc., his berating the fans for giving their opinions.... his molding of the team you see today.
God, it could be a two part series. No Sox fan like Paul should be able to resist this one!!!

Trav
08-04-2005, 05:57 PM
If Pauls your buddy and gives you the inside scoop, why don't you do him a favor a give him a great idea for a follow up story;
Dusty Baker...
He can start with the Internal Revenue Service, San Francisco rejoicing at his departure, his son's field presence (which caused a rule change for batboys, his inability to get allong with Alou, Sosa, Carey, Stone, etc., his berating the fans for giving their opinions.... his molding of the team you see today.
God, it could be a two part series. No Sox fan like Paul should be able to resist this one!!!
No, he should do a piece with Thomas' on the field swings. All he would need to do is read through Lip's thread. Maybe if he can muster up some positve things to say on his own he could include them in there. I all ready e-mailed him so don't bother. He doesn't have any interest in puting out a story that Sox fans would enjoy.