View Full Version : Rating Media Coverage

10-30-2005, 11:01 AM
What grade would you give local media coverage (newspapers, TV, radio) for coverage of the Sox in post-season play?

10-30-2005, 11:54 AM
Local coverage, especially from the Tribune has been exceptional and 100x better than I had expected it would be

10-30-2005, 12:04 PM
newspapers A, radio A, tv A. but i clicked B for the hell of it

10-30-2005, 12:18 PM
Corey McPherrin was the only downside to the local media coverage. I still voted an A.

10-30-2005, 12:30 PM
The Cubune had suprisingly good coverage, the Cub-Times was pretty good. The Southtown had good coverage as expected, The local news broadcasts were fairly decent. I'd say B.

10-30-2005, 12:42 PM
I gave the coverage a "C".Nothing out of the ordinary.
Good job by Comcast.But the papers,especially the Cub-Une
with their "Soxtober":rolleyes: :rolleyes: crap made me want to upchuck
every day.Soxtober??Hey,true Sox fans know what happens
now.It's back to the 90/10 rule.90 percent for the sCrUBS,
10 for the Sox.The only thing the Cub-Une and Scum Times
are good for is lining bird cages.:angry: :angry:

10-30-2005, 12:53 PM
I gave a B. Take away the so-called "controversy" about the roof being open in Houston and I thought it was all terrific.

10-30-2005, 01:10 PM
way to much on the AJ call

10-30-2005, 01:26 PM
Corey McPherrin was the only downside to the local media coverage. I still voted an A.

If it's possible to let your Sox fandom interfere with your job, McPherrin was a case study. He was the reason I lowered my grade from A to B.

10-30-2005, 01:28 PM
I say overall A.

Newspapers: A
Local TV: B+

Both papers, did a great job covering the postseason. Not only did the sun-times have the pull out sections, they added 2-3 pages in the news sections with Sox coverage.

Comcast Sports Net was all over everything. They basically moved everything aside to cover the Sox. Most local news stations led off with Sox coverage for the 10pm news on game nights.

10-30-2005, 02:47 PM
Cubune "Playoff Section/s" were the biggest joke. Boasting of EIGHT PAGES OF SOX........when the reality was, eight pages to hold the 3 pages of ads, one page of 1919 BLack Sox rehash, some opposition info, a page of current Sox info and the columns written by 5 usual suspects Morrissey, Downey, Rodgers, Vanderberg and Titsonaboar Gonzales.

Thankfully the Cubune didn't include a separate 1919 reference, though Vanderberg couldn't help himself, in the WS edition.

Lots of big pictures though! Something had to cover the pages that had no words to describe the feelings only reserved for Sox fans!!!!!!!! Apparently the scribes aren't close enough to the action and the sentiment of the crowds to relay those emotions into the print word. But they did fit their copy into the space provided.

Again, perhaps I should be thankful that the writers remained less wordy than they could ahve been anticipated. Any more space might have prompted them to venture into unknown territory.....actually praising the Sox!

10-30-2005, 03:55 PM
Corey McPherrin was the only downside to the local media coverage. I still voted an A.

I thought it was really touching though after the white sox won the ALCS when Corey nearly broke down in tears on camera talking about how much this meant to his father.

Black Jack was a pretty good second host for the FOX coverage as well.

10-30-2005, 04:00 PM
I'd say B. It was better than the coverage in 2000, but not as good as they covered the Flubs in 2003.

10-30-2005, 04:27 PM
I gave it an A. I was surprised at how the Tribune jumped into the deep end of the pool with their coverage. And in today's paper there's a full-page congratulatory ad from the Cubs and another one from the Tribune Company. :thud:

The only TV coverage I followed much was Comcast Sports, and they've done a great job.

10-30-2005, 04:28 PM
I give Comcast an A b/c I was able to follow everything even though I don't live in the Chicago area (got it via satellite).

10-30-2005, 04:46 PM
Overall, I was pleasantly surprised at the quality and quantity of coverage. However, I gave them a B because at least once in every broadcast there was some kind of comparison between the Sox and Cubs, or Sox fans and Cub fans. No reason for the Cubs to be mentioned at all.... THEY WEREN'T PLAYING!! I don't remember any of them mentioning the Sox in October of 2003. Although I could be wrong about that-- that whole period was so traumatic, I have since blocked it out of my memory. Well, up until the Bartman incident anyway. :smile: