PDA

View Full Version : I've had enough of Cubs fans and media already


PatK
04-13-2006, 09:27 AM
We're not even into the third week of the season, and I'm already sick and tired of the media and the Cubs fans.

Yes Cubs fans, you're 5-2. You're tied with Houston. Everyone else but the Pirates is 5-3. You're not running away with the division yet. You aren't close to the playoffs yet, and you haven't won the World Series yet. Settle down.

But you'd never know that's the case from the way the fans and media are acting. So far, there's two MVP candiates, Barrett and Lee, and Greg Maddux is the front runner for the Cy Young, it seems.

I remember last year with the Sox getting off to a similar start, but us Sox fans were mostly like "it doesn't mean anything unless we're playing in October" and "it's too early to say anything".

Even once we made the playoffs, we didn't act like we won anything until we won.

And I remember the media reminding us every day with every win how we should remember our past and that choking is part of Chicago history.

It seems like every media outlet in Chicago has the Cubs walking away with the league and the Sox floundering.

Every where I go, it seems like I'm surrounded by moronic Cubs fans. I can't listen to Mac, Jurko, and Harry any more because of the supreme stupidity that constantly spews from the mouth of Mr. Tinywaist and Jurko.

Maybe I was just foolish to think that by winning the World Series, the Sox and their fans would get some respect in this town. But I guess the majority would rather embrace the mediocre.

Ol' No. 2
04-13-2006, 09:31 AM
When you're a Cubs fan you can't be too picky about opportunities to celebrate.

henchmanUK
04-13-2006, 09:32 AM
I think the Cubby circle jerk is HILARIOUS! Let them wallow in their own mediocrity.

SOXPHILE
04-13-2006, 09:35 AM
We're not even into the third week of the season, and I'm already sick and tired of the media and the Cubs fans.

Yes Cubs fans, you're 5-2. You're tied with Houston. Everyone else but the Pirates is 5-3. You're not running away with the division yet. You aren't close to the playoffs yet, and you haven't won the World Series yet. Settle down.

But you'd never know that's the case from the way the fans and media are acting. So far, there's two MVP candiates, Barrett and Lee, and Greg Maddux is the front runner for the Cy Young, it seems.

I remember last year with the Sox getting off to a similar start, but us Sox fans were mostly like "it doesn't mean anything unless we're playing in October" and "it's too early to say anything".

Even once we made the playoffs, we didn't act like we won anything until we won.

And I remember the media reminding us every day with every win how we should remember our past and that choking is part of Chicago history.

It seems like every media outlet in Chicago has the Cubs walking away with the league and the Sox floundering.

Every where I go, it seems like I'm surrounded by moronic Cubs fans. I can't listen to Mac, Jurko, and Harry any more because of the supreme stupidity that constantly spews from the mouth of Mr. Tinywaist and Jurko.

Maybe I was just foolish to think that by winning the World Series, the Sox and their fans would get some respect in this town. But I guess the majority would rather embrace the mediocre.

Yeah, but you're forgetting: 2004 the Red Sox won it all, then last year, the White Sox won it all. So that means that this year, it's the Cubs turn. That's why.:rolleyes:

SOecks
04-13-2006, 09:43 AM
I'm actually finding it amusing in an ICantWaitUntilTheWheelsFallOffAndIWatchYouCryAndCo mplainAsUsual type of way. I hope they get off to the hottest start in baseball history just so they can blow it all again.

PatK
04-13-2006, 10:03 AM
The sad thing is, after the Sox won last year, I lost a lot of my animosity towards the Cubs (until recently). We were the champs, I didn't need to care about what they did, and as a fan of baseball, I could watch them as a fan of the game if the Sox weren't playing.

It seems like they go out of their way to make you hate them.

Either that, or I've been giving entirely way too much credit to the intelligence of the people of Chicago.

CaptainBallz
04-13-2006, 10:05 AM
I'm actually finding it amusing in an ICantWaitUntilTheWheelsFallOffAndIWatchYouCryAndCo mplainAsUsual type of way. I hope they get off to the hottest start in baseball history just so they can blow it all again.

That's basically all one can do. I'd like to believe another winning season for the Sox and another crapper by the Flubs would turn the tables, but as we're seeing, it just might be hopeless. The Cubs are "the spectacle" and its the media's job to uphold "the spectacle" with all it's might, reality and reason be damned.

Really though, is the national media going to stop broadcasting the playoffs because the Sox are in it? NO. The Chicago media can remain as ignorant as it wants, the rest of the country/ world will soon see the absurdity.

MarySwiss
04-13-2006, 10:07 AM
I'm actually finding it amusing in an ICantWaitUntilTheWheelsFallOffAndIWatchYouCryAndCo mplainAsUsual type of way. I hope they get off to the hottest start in baseball history just so they can blow it all again.

Wow! Can you imagine that? I know we're just being ridiculous here because they'll be done by the All-Star break as usual, but just picture the Cubs being way ahead heading into August and then choking and missing the playoffs the year after the mediots were saying that's what the Sox were going to do.

White Sox Randy
04-13-2006, 10:19 AM
Really, what can you expect from fans that are still celebrating 1969 when their team won...umm....nothing.

Is there anything more pathetic than a franchise so bad that their most beloved season is one where they weren't even the story of the baseball season - The Orioles winning 109 games and the Amazing Mets were the stories. The flubs finished almost 10 games back and had the 5th best record and this still consumes them.

cub fans are the biggest joke on earth.

Hangar18
04-13-2006, 10:22 AM
Really, what can you expect from fans that are still celebrating 1969 when their team won...umm....nothing.

Is there anything more pathetic than a franchise so bad that their most beloved season is one where they weren't even the story of the baseball season - The Orioles winning 109 games and the Amazing Mets were the stories. The flubs finished almost 10 games back and had the 5th best record and this still consumes them.

cub fans are the biggest joke on earth.

:santo
" 1969 ............ really brought Chicago together"

SOecks
04-13-2006, 10:31 AM
Here's what I'm also expecting/hoping for to go along with the Cubs' best start in history. They're way up in first place and cruising along in late May/Early June when BOTH Wood and Prior come back to the team fully healthy. They then proceed to get continually shelled in each of their outings, going out in the 3rd or 4th innings and wearing out their newly improved bullpen. Hilarity ensues.

jdm2662
04-13-2006, 10:37 AM
Dude, (which is appropiate since we are in What's the Score...)

This stuff would've bothered me last year of before, but know I just laugh it off. All you got to do is say, when you get that piece of hardware, then call me. They will shut up in due time, or get even more upset.

Chicken Dinner
04-13-2006, 11:30 AM
The Cubs are what they are. Get a grip and let it go. Who gives a ****.

skobabe8
04-13-2006, 11:40 AM
The sad thing is, after the Sox won last year, I lost a lot of my animosity towards the Cubs (until recently). We were the champs, I didn't need to care about what they did, and as a fan of baseball, I could watch them as a fan of the game if the Sox weren't playing.

It seems like they go out of their way to make you hate them.

Either that, or I've been giving entirely way too much credit to the intelligence of the people of Chicago.

Everything said is so true.

Irishsox1
04-13-2006, 11:49 AM
I know this is hard to comprehend, but I don't dislike the Cubs per say. I dislike the Chicago media, especially the Tribune Corporation and their influence over the national media (what the hell happened to fair and balanced media coverage?), the endless 20 something "die-hard" Cubs fans from Iowa, Texas, Kansas etc. who all grew up watching the Cubs on WGN who move to Chicago party at Wrigley, meet some chick, get married and then move back to their po-dunk town only to be replaced by a younger version of that dude and the didn't play at the "mecca" known as Wrigley Field.

If the Cubs were not owned by the Tribune Corporation, didn't influenced the media as much and didn't play at "The Shrine", then I'm sure I wouldn't hate them as much. But that will never happen, so, I'll continue to Fight the Power!

chisoxmike
04-13-2006, 11:52 AM
Really who cares, its all about the record at the END of the season. Who will have it remains to be seen. Neither team has won or loss anything yet.

CaptainBallz
04-13-2006, 11:55 AM
Really who cares, its all about the record at the END of the season. Who will have it remains to be seen. Neither team has won or loss anything yet.

Actually, The Chicago White Sox won The World Series as recently as 2005.:redneck

Layla
04-13-2006, 03:25 PM
One thing I will never forget was the game when Bartman touched the ball.

The next day Mariotti had a column that basically said that Wood and Prior had never lost back to back games that year.

Right there I knew karma was going to kick in.

So last year, when I got stuff from the Cubs fans at work about how "we were 5 outs away" I brought up this article. And they told me that it was true.

I had to point out therein lies the difference. The Sox decided it didn't matter what happened in the season. That was then. The playoffs were a whole new ballgame.

And I heard "you almost choked." Yeah, well, we didn't.

And that's why no matter what, when it's all said and done, The Chicago White Sox are, and will be forever, the 2005 World Series Champions.

Unregistered
04-13-2006, 03:34 PM
Yeah, but you're forgetting: 2004 the Red Sox won it all, then last year, the White Sox won it all. So that means that this year, it's the Cubs turn. That's why.:rolleyes: The one I like that I've heard several times which makes even more sense is the ol' "No, we won't win this year. Not until 2008 - the 100 year anniversary of our last Championship."

Yep. Can't argue with science... :?: :dunno:

1951Campbell
04-13-2006, 04:00 PM
Yeah, but you're forgetting: 2004 the Red Sox won it all, then last year, the White Sox won it all. So that means that this year, it's the Cubs turn. That's why.:rolleyes:

I would say "2003 was their year, and they blew it."

TomBradley72
04-13-2006, 04:13 PM
All this hype will just make the return to earth and the annual "swoon" all the sweeter....

TheOldRoman
04-13-2006, 04:23 PM
Of course it is ridiculous. The national sports media sucks, and the Chicago sports media blows. However, just smirk at the Cubs fans, because they are clueless. I will say the same thing I did last year:

No matter what, the Cubs are not a good team. Let them win all they want in April and May, because they will still finish with 90 losses when the season is done.

Besides that, the mindless stooges got plenty surly towards the end of the year, when their "great expectations" weren't met. Add on top of that the Sox winning the World Series, and their failure this year will be epic. Heads will roll at the urinal. It will be fun to watch.:cool:

viagracat
04-13-2006, 04:38 PM
Is it me, or is the Trib more balanced than the Cub-Times these days?

In all fairness, Maddux deserved his props today because he's about to turn 40, just won his 320th career game (pretty good :thumbsup:), is a certain Hall Of Famer and seems to be one of baseball's good guys. Yet the Trib more or less kept the column inches equal, at least today. Kass and Sherman are also avowed Sox fans. OK, Zorn is a Cub fan, but you can't win 'em all.

The Times, OTOH, have Moronotti, Kiley, Slezak, et al.

Hangar18
04-13-2006, 04:43 PM
Is it me, or is the Trib more balanced than the Cub-Times these days?


No. both are very bad. The Cubs last year had way more stories at this exact point, and were 3-4 while the SOX were 6-2 and in 1st place.
This year, its the SOX who came into today at 4-4 while the Cubs find themselves at 5-2 and tied for 1st place.
Did the SOX have way more stories this time around? NOPE. For a team thats accomplished absolutely NOTHING, they sure get a lot of press.

robertks61
04-13-2006, 05:51 PM
The sad thing is, after the Sox won last year, I lost a lot of my animosity towards the Cubs (until recently). We were the champs, I didn't need to care about what they did, and as a fan of baseball, I could watch them as a fan of the game if the Sox weren't playing.

It seems like they go out of their way to make you hate them.

Either that, or I've been giving entirely way too much credit to the intelligence of the people of Chicago.

My exact feelings!

peeonwrigley
04-13-2006, 06:09 PM
I would say "2003 was their year, and they blew it."

That's my preferred response when some Cub fan presents that theory to me.

I also like to remind them that their success that year was gifted to them by the Pittsburgh Pirates, and in the future teams are less likely to do that.

TornLabrum
04-13-2006, 06:26 PM
The Cubs are what they are. Get a grip and let it go. Who gives a ****.
Hmmm...Did you say, "Who gives a ****, or did you say who gives a ****"? Because when it comes to the Cubs I don't give a ****, but I do give a ****. :redneck

SBSoxFan
04-13-2006, 06:53 PM
We're not even into the third week of the season, and I'm already sick and tired of the media and the Cubs fans.

Then don't look at SI.com today. They've counted down the top 10 1-2 pitching combos in the game this season. At #9? Zambrano and Prior. :?: No White Sox made the list. Probably because the SI writer's brains exploded while trying to pick only two. Of the 10 listed, I think you'd be hard pressed to take any more than 2 or 3 combos over any 2 starters on the Sox.

RadioheadRocks
04-13-2006, 08:09 PM
And I heard "you almost choked." Yeah, well, we didn't.


To which I always reply, "Horseshoes and hand grenades... almost doesn't count anywhere else!" :D:

Tragg
04-13-2006, 08:13 PM
When you're a Cubs fan you can't be too picky about opportunities to celebrate.
The one I liked was after they beat the Giants in a one-day playoff game a few years back, some of their fans called it winning "the wild card championship"

Beer Can Chicken
04-13-2006, 08:17 PM
We're not even into the third week of the season, and I'm already sick and tired of the media and the Cubs fans.

Yes Cubs fans, you're 5-2. You're tied with Houston. Everyone else but the Pirates is 5-3. You're not running away with the division yet. You aren't close to the playoffs yet, and you haven't won the World Series yet. Settle down.

But you'd never know that's the case from the way the fans and media are acting. So far, there's two MVP candiates, Barrett and Lee, and Greg Maddux is the front runner for the Cy Young, it seems.

I remember last year with the Sox getting off to a similar start, but us Sox fans were mostly like "it doesn't mean anything unless we're playing in October" and "it's too early to say anything".

Even once we made the playoffs, we didn't act like we won anything until we won.

And I remember the media reminding us every day with every win how we should remember our past and that choking is part of Chicago history.

It seems like every media outlet in Chicago has the Cubs walking away with the league and the Sox floundering.

Every where I go, it seems like I'm surrounded by moronic Cubs fans. I can't listen to Mac, Jurko, and Harry any more because of the supreme stupidity that constantly spews from the mouth of Mr. Tinywaist and Jurko.

Maybe I was just foolish to think that by winning the World Series, the Sox and their fans would get some respect in this town. But I guess the majority would rather embrace the mediocre.
We won the World Series. SOX fans unite, stop worrying about the cubs and most importantly PLEASE take the chip off your shoulder.
Even cubs fan have the right to get excited over halfway respectable start. Sorry, buts its true.

Go Sox.

MarySwiss
04-13-2006, 08:25 PM
Hmmm...Did you say, "Who gives a ****, or did you say who gives a ****"? Because when it comes to the Cubs I don't give a ****, but I do give a ****. :redneck

The scary thing here is, I understood this post! :redneck

MadetoOrta
04-13-2006, 09:28 PM
Dude, (which is appropiate since we are in What's the Score...)

This stuff would've bothered me last year of before, but know I just laugh it off. All you got to do is say, when you get that piece of hardware, then call me. They will shut up in due time, or get even more upset.

Amen. Shuts 'em up EVERY TIME. I usually conclude my counter-attack with "remember children, Who's your Daddy now? The Chicago White Sox."

Hangar18
04-14-2006, 08:27 AM
Even cubs fan have the right to get excited over halfway respectable start. Sorry, buts its true.

Go Sox.

Im ok with the sheep being excited about a 5-3 start. But when the SOX go 5-3, and were ignored, and they go 5-3, and the Chicago Media GOES HOG WILD, and pees-their-pants talking about World Series in October (again, this is after 8 games people), some will tend to get miffed and call the media out on this lunacy.

"....a cub team that looked so October worthy" 4/14/06 Chris DeLuca SunTimes. This is an actual line, and an actual quote. I read that and immediately could smell the urine on the front of DeLucas slacks, soaked thru and seeping thru the pages of the newspaper.

comet2k
04-14-2006, 10:01 AM
We won the World Series. SOX fans unite, stop worrying about the cubs and most importantly PLEASE take the chip off your shoulder.
Even cubs fan have the right to get excited over halfway respectable start. Sorry, buts its true.

Go Sox.

Careful, Beer Can. Solid reasoning like that could get you into trouble with the WSI bullies, who insist that everything White sox has to be good, and everything to do with the Cubs is bad or wrong. :smile:

Why can't everyone just let it go? When the Cubs draw 40,881 on a weekday in April, that means they have a lot of fans -- more than the Sox. So what? The Sox did something a Cubs team hasn't done for 98 years. Enjoy it, and get over your inferiority complex about the Cubs.

Iwritecode
04-14-2006, 10:08 AM
The one I liked was after they beat the Giants in a one-day playoff game a few years back, some of their fans called it winning "the wild card championship"

If you watch the World Series DVD you'll see that Houston did the same thing. They even had a banner in the stadium that said "NL Wild Card Champions". Luckily they were able to replace it with a NL Championship banner.

Hangar18
04-14-2006, 10:38 AM
Why can't everyone just let it go? When the Cubs draw 40,881 on a weekday in April, that means they have a lot of fans -- more than the Sox. So what? The Sox did something a Cubs team hasn't done for 98 years. Enjoy it, and get over your inferiority complex about the Cubs.


Again, its fine and dandy if they draw 40,881 on a weekday. But when the media then takes that fact as a means to rip on sox fans and point out that we "only" had 38,000, and that must mean they are the better fans, is when I have a problem with it. Or when we get the same 40,881 ...........
it goes unreported. Or they point out that us having 40,881 pales in comparison to what theyve been getting for years.

Thats the problem I and others have.

Ol' No. 2
04-14-2006, 10:49 AM
Again, its fine and dandy if they draw 40,881 on a weekday. But when the media then takes that fact as a means to rip on sox fans and point out that we "only" had 38,000, and that must mean they are the better fans, is when I have a problem with it. Or when we get the same 40,881 ...........
it goes unreported. Or they point out that us having 40,881 pales in comparison to what theyve been getting for years.

Thats the problem I and others have.So somehow you feel inferior if the Sox have fewer people in the park? That must mean you buy into the whole attendance thing. Otherwise, why would you care?

Hangar18
04-14-2006, 10:54 AM
So somehow you feel inferior if the Sox have fewer people in the park? That must mean you buy into the whole attendance thing. Otherwise, why would you care?


No, your missing my point. The Media here will make it a point, no matter what the story is about, to remind everyone that the SOX had a different attendance number than the other team. What does it matter is what I say to myself, and why do they keep doing that? to heap negative press on the sox, no matter how subliminal they think they are or how subtle it is,
we see thru it.

I wouldnt care. But when the SOX dont get the rightful attention, because now people keep perceiving us (Perceptions hurt. dont think otherwise, why do you think the Trib/STimes keep on doing it?) as tattooed, tshirt wearing, field-running hooligans, who dont fill upthe park,
you tend to care a little bit.

Ol' No. 2
04-14-2006, 10:57 AM
No, your missing my point. The Media here will make it a point, no matter what the story is about, to remind everyone that the SOX had a different attendance number than the other team. What does it matter is what I say to myself, and why do they keep doing that? to heap negative press on the sox, no matter how subliminal they think they are or how subtle it is,
we see thru it.

I wouldnt care. But when the SOX dont get the rightful attention, because now people keep perceiving us (Perceptions hurt. dont think otherwise, why do you think the Trib/STimes keep on doing it?) as tattooed, tshirt wearing, field-running hooligans, who dont fill upthe park,
you tend to care a little bit.I don't. Never have. Why would you care what they said about attendance unless you believed attendance actually mattered? :dunno:

comet2k
04-14-2006, 11:15 AM
Again, its fine and dandy if they draw 40,881 on a weekday. But when the media then takes that fact as a means to rip on sox fans and point out that we "only" had 38,000, and that must mean they are the better fans, is when I have a problem with it. Or when we get the same 40,881 ...........
it goes unreported. Or they point out that us having 40,881 pales in comparison to what theyve been getting for years.

Thats the problem I and others have.

Hangar,

Did you ever see "Spinal Tap," when the group's manager says their fans are becoming "more selective"?

Come on, let go of it. There's no media conspiracy locally or nationally (aside from the grassy knoll near Tribune Tower :D: ).

Hangar18
04-14-2006, 11:18 AM
Come on, let go of it. There's no media conspiracy locally or nationally


after all of the proof I and others have offered here over the years ............ you still dont think theres a conspiracy? :roflmao:

CaptainBallz
04-14-2006, 11:47 AM
Come on, let go of it. There's no media conspiracy locally or nationally (aside from the grassy knoll near Tribune Tower :D: ).

You're wrong. Sorry. Replace "conspiracy" with "strategy" and I think you'll get the point.

comet2k
04-14-2006, 12:05 PM
So who's in on the media conspiracy (or "strategy")? Is it just the Tribune? Sun-Times, too? Other local media? National?

Ol' No. 2
04-14-2006, 12:14 PM
You're wrong. Sorry. Replace "conspiracy" with "strategy" and I think you'll get the point.While the Tribune has an obvious reason for a bias, why would the Sun-Times and the major TV stations be biased? There is a perception by media outlets (and not incidentally, advertisers) that Cubs fans are more numerous and better advertising targets. THAT is what's driving it. As that misperception becomes disproven, the bias will disappear. I think they were all shocked at the number of people who turned out for the parade, and are already re-thinking their long-held beliefs. Even in the suburbs, long a bastion of Cubdom, I'd say the number of people sporting Sox gear is up 10 fold. This kind of thing tends to snowball. The Sox could be the chic team in Chicago a lot sooner than any of us ever thought.

comet2k
04-14-2006, 12:30 PM
While the Tribune has an obvious reason for a bias, why would the Sun-Times and the major TV stations be biased?

Darn good question, No. 2. Why would the Sun-Times want to help a Tribune Co. entity, the Cubs, when the Tribune's most likely goal is to put the Sun-Times out of business? Why would any media competitor want to help the Tribune?

Why would any media organization skew its coverage so that it risks alientating potential readers/listerners/viewers?

I think you have to answer those questions before you can claim there is a media conspiracy/strategy against the Sox. Expressing opinions is one thing, but for a media organization to make it a strategy to alienate potential customers is absurd.

Ol' No. 2
04-14-2006, 12:38 PM
Darn good question, No. 2. Why would the Sun-Times want to help a Tribune Co. entity, the Cubs, when the Tribune's most likely goal is to put the Sun-Times out of business? Why would any media competitor want to help the Tribune?

Why would any media organization skew its coverage so that it risks alientating potential readers/listerners/viewers?

I think you have to answer those questions before you can claim there is a media conspiracy/strategy against the Sox. Expressing opinions is one thing, but for a media organization to make it a strategy to alienate potential customers is absurd.It's a strategy, all right. But not the kind the conspiracy theorists think. As long as advertisers deem certain demographic groups to be more desirable targets, media outlets will slant their coverage to try to attract those groups. Up until recently, Cubs fans were perceived as being more numerous and having more disposable income. As those perceptions change, the coverage will follow.

comet2k
04-14-2006, 12:46 PM
It's a strategy, all right. But not the kind the conspiracy theorists think. As long as advertisers deem certain demographic groups to be more desirable targets, media outlets will slant their coverage to try to attract those groups. Up until recently, Cubs fans were perceived as being more numerous and having more disposable income. As those perceptions change, the coverage will follow.

The only part of that I disagree with is that it isn't just "perception." The Cubs have greater attendance and higher TV and radio ratings (though the Sox smoked 'em in the playoffs last fall :D: ). As the numbers go up for the Sox, advertisers and general attention are sure to follow.

Taliesinrk
04-14-2006, 12:55 PM
Darn good question, No. 2. Why would the Sun-Times want to help a Tribune Co. entity, the Cubs, when the Tribune's most likely goal is to put the Sun-Times out of business? Why would any media competitor want to help the Tribune?

Why would any media organization skew its coverage so that it risks alientating potential readers/listerners/viewers?

I think you have to answer those questions before you can claim there is a media conspiracy/strategy against the Sox. Expressing opinions is one thing, but for a media organization to make it a strategy to alienate potential customers is absurd.

While I ya go overboard a bit on this stuff Hangar; I do have to agree here (only a bit though).

Comet.. if you don't think that there is a conspiracy by the Tribune Co. against the Sox then you've gotta be blind.. and deaf.
Secondly, while I don't know the answer to whether or not the STimes and co. would be against the Sox; it's not necessarily how you lay it out. The STimes, while perhaps being the Tribune's competitor, could very well be along side the Tribune on something like this. This is because they, like the Tribune, realize that the Cubs will sell more papers because there are more Cubs "fans"... this is a fact. There are more people who relate to/with or "root" for the Cubs. While they maybe complete idiots, and know nothing of the game; in their own minds, they are Cubs fans. Like it or not, because of the images and portrayal of the Sox vs. the Cubs; younger baseball fans who are "better off" or have more money (this, of course, is a generalization) are not drawn towards the Cubs, they're pushed that way. That's who everyone like them likes (according to the Media). Unless you're an uneducated dead-beat, you like the Sox over the Cubs... at least that's what the media will make you think. With a more wealthy fan-base, and just a larger one overall; both the Tribune and STimes realize that the Cubs will sell more than the White Sox. While this problem has perhaps been created most by the media; its biggest problem is that it is currently perpetuated by papers like the Tribune especially, and those who employ that M guy, as well....

after all that, i hope it makes sense.:wink:

CaptainBallz
04-14-2006, 12:57 PM
While the Tribune has an obvious reason for a bias, why would the Sun-Times and the major TV stations be biased? There is a perception by media outlets (and not incidentally, advertisers) that Cubs fans are more numerous and better advertising targets. THAT is what's driving it.

These outlets are at the mercy of the advertising dollar as much as the Tribune is. Tribune has helped to artificially inflate the number of "followers" the Cubs organization can claim. Other media outlets such as the Sun-times and TV stations want to attract, naturally, the larger market. They just follow suit. Of course, its idiotic and alienates a large market of Sox fans. They see this as a reasonable sacrifice to the cash-cow of Cubbie faithful. Since they generated this fanbase, its in everyone's best interest to keep them chock full of propaganda. It helps to keep the adverising dollars rolling in. All one has to do is follow the money to see how this all works. Unfortunately, the Tribune is the largest media outlet in the city and happens to own the worse team. Therefore, the lopsided amount of coverage by all media parties for what has proven to be an inferior product.

comet2k
04-14-2006, 01:25 PM
You guys got me thinking about this, and I decided to check it out for myself. You're right, the Tribune is at the center of a propaganda campaign to promote the Cubs over the Sox. I didn't have to look far to find evidence, either.

Here's a prime example a Tribune columnist promoting the company line:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/bb/2699302.html

How could I be so blind to miss that?

mccoydp
04-14-2006, 01:28 PM
This thread is ****house bound....:D:

Iwritecode
04-14-2006, 01:34 PM
You guys got me thinking about this, and I decided to check it out for myself. You're right, the Tribune is at the center of a propaganda campaign to promote the Cubs over the Sox. I didn't have to look far to find evidence, either.

Here's a prime example a Tribune columnist promoting the company line:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/bb/2699302.html

How could I be so blind to miss that?

That was a great article. It's too bad we'll never see a similair one in a Chicago paper...

Hangar18
04-14-2006, 01:36 PM
Here's a prime example a Tribune columnist promoting the company line:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/bb/2699302.html

How could I be so blind to miss that?

for every one of those aforementioned articles, you'll see about 10 of these:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-060403morrissey,1,5205257.column?coll=chi-sportscolumnist-hed

sprinkled in with a few of these .......

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-060330morrissey,1,4615432.column?coll=chi-sportscolumnist-hed

Hangar18
04-14-2006, 01:39 PM
I remember the article he wrote, about Frank Thomas, and how Chicago just never really liked him and would love to see him out of town.
Frank gets a Standing O his very next atbat.

Hes also the guy who incorrectly surmised that the only reason there were 2million people at the SOX ws champion parade, was most were cub fans, curious to check out a parade. great stuff.

SOXPHILE
04-14-2006, 01:41 PM
You guys got me thinking about this, and I decided to check it out for myself. You're right, the Tribune is at the center of a propaganda campaign to promote the Cubs over the Sox. I didn't have to look far to find evidence, either.

Here's a prime example a Tribune columnist promoting the company line:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/bb/2699302.html

How could I be so blind to miss that?

Yes that was a good aritcle. The problem with people like lil' Ricky is that they usually follow up an article like this with 10 more on the wonderful pennant fever sweeping Chicago after a 5-3 Cubs start, and that Sox fans are ready to declare the area around U.S. Cellular a disaster area due to the White Sox 1-4 start. Or he'll write stories taking us unwashed masses to task for having the gaul to criticize him and TribCo. for their biased coverage of their blue team, and claim that he always knew or suspected Sammy was a juicer, and always called him out. Trouble is, nobody really recalls exactly which articles those were from 1998-2004.

comet2k
04-14-2006, 01:46 PM
Hangar,

How can the second article you list possible be construed as an example of a Tribune writer promoting the company line? The company's stance is that the Cubs aren't for sale.

Maye it just boils down to the fact that -- like you -- columnists express opinions that other people disagree with -- again, like you. If you agreed with everything that Morrissey, Marriotti and Joe Schmoe said there wouldn't any reason to read their columns. You could just talk to yourself.

Here's another example of a Tribune writer blatantly buttering the corporate bread:

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-060329downey,1,3644976.column?coll=cs-home-utility

Have they no shame?

Ol' No. 2
04-14-2006, 02:43 PM
These outlets are at the mercy of the advertising dollar as much as the Tribune is. Tribune has helped to artificially inflate the number of "followers" the Cubs organization can claim. Other media outlets such as the Sun-times and TV stations want to attract, naturally, the larger market. They just follow suit. Of course, its idiotic and alienates a large market of Sox fans. They see this as a reasonable sacrifice to the cash-cow of Cubbie faithful. Since they generated this fanbase, its in everyone's best interest to keep them chock full of propaganda. It helps to keep the adverising dollars rolling in. All one has to do is follow the money to see how this all works. Unfortunately, the Tribune is the largest media outlet in the city and happens to own the worse team. Therefore, the lopsided amount of coverage by all media parties for what has proven to be an inferior product.Agree right down the line. When the Tribune Co. bought the Cubs in the first place it was because they saw a "synergy". I hope I don't have to explain what that means. But again, you can only keep selling **** sandwiches until someone else offers something better. That day is at hand. The times, they are a' changing.