PDA

View Full Version : Inexcusable media mistakes


veeter
11-25-2005, 11:47 AM
Today, the Trib's Fred Mitchell explained how ALCS MVP, Joe Crede received a key to his hometown. Uh,..the ALCS MVP would be Paul Konerko. Also, "he wrote" the bat used by Orlando Palmeiro, who grounded out to White Sox shortstop JOSE Uribe to end the series, was up for auction. JOSE Uribe? Come on Fred. What makes it worse, was this blurb was copied word for word from an INCORRECT AP blurb from TWO days ago. Some journalistic integrity. Then our little pal Ryne Sandberg wrote today, that world series MVP Paul Konerko would not be returning to the Sox because they signed Jim Thome. Jermaine Dye was the world series MVP, jackass! Man, I think I'm going to start applying for writing jobs. How hard can it be to get one?

hose
11-25-2005, 11:50 AM
Return the favor and refer to him as Lydell Mitchell.

veeter
11-25-2005, 11:53 AM
Return the favor and refer to him as Lydell Mitchell. I should have. I e-mailed him on this and suggested he makes the corrections tomorrow. Just like Crash Davis hates when people get the words wrong, so do I. This stuff irritates me to no end. It is their JOB! I mean, Sanberg is a idiot, so I can see it. But Mitchell is some respected columnist.

DumpJerry
11-25-2005, 11:53 AM
Let the sports editor of the Cubune know about this via email or snail mail. Editors hate these kinds of mistakes, hurts the credibility of the publication (insert sarcastic jokes here) and their ability to advance in their careers.

tebman
11-25-2005, 11:54 AM
'Harrumph! How dare you impugn the integrity of my minions!
If The Tribune says it is so, then it is so!'

"Harrumph!"


http://img.timeinc.net/time/magazine/archive/covers/1947/1101470609_400.jpg

The Deacon
11-25-2005, 11:58 AM
Today, the Trib's Fred Mitchell explained how ALCS MVP, Joe Crede received a key to his hometown. Uh,..the ALCS MVP would be Paul Konerko. Also, "he wrote" the bat used by Orlando Palmeiro, who grounded out to White Sox shortstop JOSE Uribe to end the series, was up for auction. JOSE Uribe? Come on Fred. What makes it worse, was this blurb was copied word for word from an INCORRECT AP blurb from TWO days ago. Some journalistic integrity. Then our little pal Ryne Sandberg wrote today, that world series MVP Paul Konerko would not be returning to the Sox because they signed Jim Thome. Jermaine Dye was the world series MVP, jackass! Man, I think I'm going to start applying for writing jobs. How hard can it be to get one?

I read that this morning too and wanted to cry.
Don't know if its been mentioned here but in the SI World Series Commemorative White Sox edition the writer Andrew Lawrence, the 'long-time SOX fan' writes how at the World Series "there, we stood together in the cold and rain as brothers, our spirits high and voices hoarse from a night spent sipping OLD STYLE and singing the team's fight song" um, OLD STYLE?? Unless he is going to the Beers of the World stand in LF every inning, he ain't drinking Old Style at the Cell. Cubs fan.

veeter
11-25-2005, 11:59 AM
'Harrumph! How dare you impugn the integrity of my minions!
If The Tribune says it is so, then it is so!'

"Harrumph!"


http://img.timeinc.net/time/magazine/archive/covers/1947/1101470609_400.jpg Well, there's no doubt of the arrogance over there. Very good.

veeter
11-25-2005, 12:09 PM
I read that this morning too and wanted to cry.
Don't know if its been mentioned here but in the SI World Series Commemorative White Sox edition the writer Andrew Lawrence, the 'long-time SOX fan' writes how at the World Series "there, we stood together in the cold and rain as brothers, our spirits high and voices hoarse from a night spent sipping OLD STYLE and singing the team's fight song" um, OLD STYLE?? Unless he is going to the Beers of the World stand in LF every inning, he ain't drinking Old Style at the Cell. Cubs fan. The media in this town is a joke.

TDog
11-25-2005, 12:16 PM
The media in this town is a joke.

No one in management cares, however, because rules and standards of journalism aren't applied to sports.

MarySwiss
11-25-2005, 12:46 PM
The media in this town is a joke.

I disagree, veeter. Jokes are funny. :wink:

C-Dawg
11-25-2005, 01:05 PM
In the Tribune's World Series commemerative book, they list among the pitchers used in the marathon extra-inning Game 3, one "Jose Viscaino". He's later correctly identified as Luis in the team roster section.


Just in case anyone's looking for more dirt to throw.

SOXSINCE'70
11-25-2005, 01:12 PM
Return the favor and refer to him as Lydell Mitchell.

I like Claudell Mitchell better.:D: :D: :D:

Honestly,what do you expect from the Cub-Une?? I've come to the
conclusion the only thing that paper is good for is wiping my kiester
after nature calls.:angry: :angry: :angry:

pearso66
11-25-2005, 01:45 PM
I read somewhere, I can't remember where anymore, but they referred to Uribe as John Uribe. It's dumb how a sports writer, for any publication, can't get names right.

SoxEd
11-25-2005, 09:52 PM
No one in management cares, however, because rules and standards of journalism aren't applied to sports.

Is that just with the Trib, or does it hold true across all US papers/media?

The 'Sports' writers on the papers here are held to just as high standards as their 'News' colleagues.

Our photo-caption writers got a bunch of stuff wrong during the WS to do with how the game is played (hey, they've probably never even seen it) but I don't recall even them spelling players' names wrong, let alone Sportswriters doing it - that's just inexcusable!

Especially in this day and age, when they are all up on the Official Team websites, from which you can cut-and-paste them in to your article - no, wait, that would require something people call 'Research', right?

TDog
11-25-2005, 10:40 PM
Is that just with the Trib, or does it hold true across all US papers/media?

The 'Sports' writers on the papers here are held to just as high standards as their 'News' colleagues. ...

In general, American journalistic standards aren't rigidly applied to sports coverage. For example, unnamed sources are frequently used in situations in sports stories where they would not be allowed in stories dealing with politics or crime. In game coverage, objectivity doesn't seem to be an objective, not just in live coverage and among columnists, but among beat writers. There used to be "no cheering in the press box." Jerome Holtzman, a one-time Trib writer, edited a book by that title. There is plenty of cheering for local teams (even the White Sox when it was over) in the media. Some people who post at WSI think it's OK, because newspapers are in the business of making money.

Some newspapers and electronic media are better than others in upholding journalistic standards. But even in England, you see a difference between the Times and the Sun.

Brian26
11-25-2005, 10:42 PM
In the Tribune's World Series commemerative book, they list among the pitchers used in the marathon extra-inning Game 3, one "Jose Viscaino". He's later correctly identified as Luis in the team roster section.


Just in case anyone's looking for more dirt to throw.

I caught that Vizcaino mistake. There were two spelling mistakes I caught in the photo captions as well. My guess is that the editing on the book was limited by time. It's a miracle they were able to print hundreds of thousands of copies of the book and have them on the shelves literally 3 days after the end of the World Series, so I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

BeeBeeRichard
11-26-2005, 12:17 AM
Here's the deal with the print sports media ... they're for the most part a bunch of jock sniffers who think they've come across the perfect way to live the dream they could never fulfill on the field themselves by coasting through a career relying on their varying levels of sports knowledge and often-limited understanding of the English language and some basic skills like spellin' and grammar. Since they're coasting, they're not going to the extra effort, such as fact-checking items lifted from the AP or remembering the dizzying array of MLB players named Vizcaino--these are the things that fall outside their innate expertise. (Only some of them--others may have similar problems with the Uribes, etc.) Sadly, what falls outside their sometimes narrow expertise suffers-- see White Sox coverage, etc. Another vivid example of this in Chicago would be the entire sport of hockey. Since it's safe to say most of these lazy schmucks never put a skate on either of their flat feet, they have NO understanding of the game and NO interest in giving it the coverage it warrants, because that would require doing some ACTUAL WORK to learn about the game. (Let me note that I am well aware that Bill Wirtz is the No. 1 enemy of hockey popularity in Chicago, and nothing will improve until he croaks. However, the media gets a big assist on this non-scoring play.) So, when you look to the media for "expert" insight--remember this, they're experts at stealing a paycheck and not much else. Of course, if they've spent any time stealing that paycheck from a World Class #$^#^@ like Conrad Black, better luck to them

tebman
11-26-2005, 12:30 AM
No one in management cares, however, because rules and standards of journalism aren't applied to sports.
Is that just with the Trib, or does it hold true across all US papers/media?

The 'Sports' writers on the papers here are held to just as high standards as their 'News' colleagues.

Our photo-caption writers got a bunch of stuff wrong during the WS to do with how the game is played (hey, they've probably never even seen it) but I don't recall even them spelling players' names wrong, let alone Sportswriters doing it - that's just inexcusable!

Especially in this day and age, when they are all up on the Official Team websites, from which you can cut-and-paste them in to your article - no, wait, that would require something people call 'Research', right?
Anybody who frequents this site knows that we have, ahem, "issues" with the Tribune and its coverage of the White Sox. Mitchell's incredible screwups of Sox players' names in his story only reinforce the idea that the Tribune is, at best, indifferent to the White Sox.

George Knue, the Tribune's online sports editor, spent a lot his blood pressure arguing with us a few months ago that the Tribune is virtuous and free from tawdry influences like bias and profit-making concerns. Those of us who complained the loudest and longest about the Tribune's behavior relative to the Sox were simply wrong, according to Knue: "...all of you who insist that every decision made at every property owned by the Tribune is made based on what is good for the Cubs … that’s just ridiculous."

I see Mitchell's cavalier treatment of the Sox in his story as evidence of the Tribune's narcissism -- they own the Cubs, so why waste any more time on that other team by bothering to learn their names? I would refer anyone who has an interest in the Tribune Company's behavior to read the story "Fault Line" in the October 10, 2005, issue of The New Yorker. It describes the Tribune's purchase of the L.A. Times and the relentless squeezing that Tribune Tower has put on the L.A. Times since then. While the Tribune bosses didn't force the Cubs down the L.A. Times' throat, the Trib's meddling and profit obsessions are very similar to their marketing of the Cubs in Chicago.

Churlish slights like Mitchell's story are symptoms of the larger disease of self-importance and marketing fixation that drives the Tribune. It is what it is, but hey, we won the World Series!

DrCrawdad
11-26-2005, 08:16 AM
Ok, this Sun-Times error is not inexcusable but the caption is wrong just the same. I believe the player in this photo is actually Brian Anderson.

http://home.mindspring.com/%7Edcrosby101/BlumORAnderson.JPG

miker
11-26-2005, 12:27 PM
No one in management cares, however, because rules and standards of journalism aren't applied to sports.
That implies that rules and standards of journalism are applied to the rest of the paper.:(:

I've long debated whether or not the media is a cause of or a symptom of society's ignorance. I'm leaning toward the position that the media is simply representative of the public's lack of knowledge and understanding, but served with an unhealthy amount of self-righteous arrogance all while falsely upholding the banners of "truth" and "objectivity".

buehrle4cy05
11-26-2005, 12:44 PM
Wow. Way to earn your pay.

As a sportswriter for my school newspaper, I know how costly mistakes like these are. We get chewed out for getting a name wrong. The same should happen to Mitchell, but it won't. And also, using something that you didn't write is complete bull**** by Mitchell. Do your job.

Lip Man 1
11-26-2005, 02:03 PM
Bee Bee:

Generalizing isn't the smartest thing to do. I've been in the media since 1979. I've never stolen a paycheck in my life. I'll stack up my interviews for WSI against anyone's regardless of market size anywhere.

Thank you.

Lip

SOXSINCE'70
11-26-2005, 04:31 PM
I'll stack up my interviews for WSI against anyone's regardless of market size anywhere.

I wish more of the sports jokers I read conducted interviews
as honestly as you,Lip.You ask the questions that any Sox fan would
ask.This Sox fan appreciates it.:cool: :cool:

SOXPHILE
11-26-2005, 04:32 PM
:knue "Bitch, bitch bitch ! Stop your whining Sox fans. So a few mistakes were made. It's not like anyone's really going to notice or care anyway. I mean, there's only a few hundred of you in the whole world, and this was the lowest rated World Series ever. Nobody watched. So quit all the crying and complaining. What would everyone's hero here, former Sox owner Phil Veck, think of all this whining ?"

SoxEd
11-26-2005, 05:19 PM
George Knue, the Tribune's online sports editor, spent a lot his blood pressure arguing with us a few months ago that the Tribune is virtuous and free from tawdry influences like bias and profit-making concerns. Those of us who complained the loudest and longest about the Tribune's behavior relative to the Sox were simply wrong, according to Knue: "...all of you who insist that every decision made at every property owned by the Tribune is made based on what is good for the Cubs … that’s just ridiculous."


I remember the Knue threads with fondness.

Kudos to him for coming here to defend his paper's record - he didn't have to do that, as he was only ever going to be on a hiding to nothing with us - we do, after all, admit that we are "Totally Biased, Utterly Petty, Completely Unobjective"© PHG/Gary Craig...

Also, kudos to him for changing that headline on Chicagosports.com.

Unfortunately for him, someone (ownership?) switched it back to headlines commensurate with an 'anti-Sox' policy very soon afterwards, and he had very little answer when some of our posters shot his justifications down in flames - especially with comparisons between the Trib's coverage of the Cubs with their Sox coverage.

I wonder if we managed to convince him we were right about the bias, or whether he was never 'converted', and just gave up trying to 'remove the blinkers from our eyes'...

To be fair, I did notice a bit of a change in tone on the Trib's website's headlines once we got to the Series - but then again, it'd be pretty hard to justify negative comments/angles/phrasing when the Sox were the first Chicago team to get there since they last did it in 1959.

What do you think it will be like in 2006? :redneck

bigfoot
11-26-2005, 07:40 PM
[ To be fair, I did notice a bit of a change in tone on the Trib's website's headlines once we got to the Series - but then again, it'd be pretty hard to justify negative comments/angles/phrasing when the Sox were the first Chicago team to get there since they last did it in 1959.


What do you think it will be like in 2006? :redneck[/QUOTE]

Sounds like yet another "Tomorrow's Cubune Headline" thread starting.........:rolleyes:

PaulDrake
11-26-2005, 10:47 PM
Bee Bee:

Generalizing isn't the smartest thing to do. I've been in the media since 1979. I've never stolen a paycheck in my life. I'll stack up my interviews for WSI against anyone's regardless of market size anywhere.

Thank you.

Lip I'm one of your biggest supporters. That being said the quality of all forms of journalism in this country has taken a serious nosedive in my lifetime. Just my opinion.

Lip Man 1
11-27-2005, 02:08 PM
Paul:

You are exactly correct. It's called the 'dumbing down' syndrome. Back in the mid 70's Walter Cronkite issued a serious rip job of his own business at the convention in San Antonio for editors and news directors. Ted Kopple on Charlie Rose recently did the same thing.

My point to Bee Bee was that his comment grouped ALL media folks into the same boat which is completely wrong. I'm not in that boat, Dave Wills isn't in that boat nor is someone like Vin Scully. (and by no stretch am I comparing myself in quality to those two professionals...)

I'm just saying if you have a beef with the media fine. Just don't categorize ALL members of the media the same way. Just like with any profession (doctors, lawyers, agents, plumbers for example...) there are great ones, good ones and dumb ones. Identify the bad broadcasters, bad editors, bad journalists and attack them, don't attack the profession in general.

Lip

Mercy!
11-27-2005, 04:38 PM
Paul:

....My point to Bee Bee was that his comment grouped ALL media folks into the same boat which is completely wrong. I'm not in that boat, Dave Wills isn't in that boat nor is someone like Vin Scully. (and by no stretch am I comparing myself in quality to those two professionals...)

I'm just saying if you have a beef with the media fine. Just don't categorize ALL members of the media the same way. Just like with any profession (doctors, lawyers, agents, plumbers for example...) there are great ones, good ones and dumb ones. Identify the bad broadcasters, bad editors, bad journalists and attack them, don't attack the profession in general.

Lip
I disagree with most of BeeBee’s overarching generalizations in that post. But in the interest of accuracy, please note that BeeBee did not claim to be critiquing ALL media, but staked out her/his specific target in the first sentence: "Here's the deal with the print sports media." All the examples listed in that post appear to be confined to those parameters - not to online postings or broadcast journalists, for instance.

MarySwiss
11-27-2005, 05:50 PM
I disagree with most of BeeBee’s overarching generalizations in that post. But in the interest of accuracy, please note that BeeBee did not claim to be critiquing ALL media, but staked out her/his specific target in the first sentence: "Here's the deal with the print sports media." All the examples listed in that post appear to be confined to those parameters - not to online postings or broadcast journalists, for instance.



Well, yeah. But even if his generalizations were limited to a specific group, he's still generalizing. Which I believe was Lip's point.

And FWIW, as a writer and editor, generalizations bother me too. Wherever they exist.