PDA

View Full Version : Chicago NewsMedia Watch 4/17/06


Hangar18
04-17-2006, 12:44 PM
The weekend wasnt too kind to the SOX media-wise, as the SOX are not able to make much of a dent in media-coverage despite moving into 1st place for the first time since last season. Mike Kiley continued his propagandistic writing stylings over the weekend, saying the "young cubs" were showing their mettle and were signs of things to come in the future. He even peed his pants breathlessly referring to Cedeno as "gold-glove". The SOX meanwhile get a couple of puff pieces today, on Luis Aparicio and Mackowiak
Not enough to make a dent in the huge lead Juan Pierre currently still holds.

Despite Winning the World Series in 2005, the White Sox inexplicably find themselves still lagging behind the 4th place in 05 Cubs for media attention.
The Cubs, who've only won 90 games in a season a jaw-dropping 3 times since 1950, amazingly have dominated the SOX in media coverage over the last 2 decades. Whats wrong with this picture?

Chicago Tribune:
3 cub stories
5 sox stories
Chicago SunTimes:
3 cub stories
3 sox stories
Standings as of Monday April 17th, 2006
Priviledged, Media Owned, Media Favored, 4th place in 2005 CUBS 263
Underdog, Media Maligned, Media Ignored, WS Champs in 2005 SOX 228

It's Time
04-17-2006, 12:55 PM
Hangar:

I'm just curious as what the purpose of all the media threads are? Do you REALLY think that the media is going to change because of you? Haha! This team won the World Series last year and that didn't change it.

Do you think posting on this message board is going to magically make the media say: Gee, Hangar has a point, we will now give the White Sox the lions share of coverage.

The White Sox winning the ****ing Series didn't change and you think you will?

Spend time rooting for the White Sox and less time sweating about the media. You'll live longer and not look so cubsessed in the process.


The White Sox are the ****ing champions and you're freaking out about the media. My friendly advice is to give it a rest.

Meixner007
04-17-2006, 01:01 PM
Hangar:

I'm just curious as what the purpose of all the media threads are? Do you REALLY think that the media is going to change because of you? Haha! This team won the World Series last year and that didn't change it.

Do you think posting on this message board is going to magically make the media say: Gee, Hangar has a point, we will now give the White Sox the lions share of coverage.

The White Sox winning the ****ing Series didn't change and you think you will?

Spend time rooting for the White Sox and less time sweating about the media. You'll live longer and not look so cubsessed in the process.


The White Sox are the ****ing champions and you're freaking out about the media. My friendly advice is to give it a rest.

Some people, myself included, like to see a running tab on the stories. I don't think Henry thinks his media watch will change anything, but rather he's pointing out the imbalance in today's papers and how much of a joke it's become.

CaptainBallz
04-17-2006, 01:02 PM
Hangar:

I'm just curious as what the purpose of all the media threads are? Do you REALLY think that the media is going to change because of you? Haha! This team won the World Series last year and that didn't change it.

Do you think posting on this message board is going to magically make the media say: Gee, Hangar has a point, we will now give the White Sox the lions share of coverage.

The White Sox winning the ****ing Series didn't change and you think you will?

Spend time rooting for the White Sox and less time sweating about the media. You'll live longer and not look so cubsessed in the process.


The White Sox are the ****ing champions and you're freaking out about the media. My friendly advice is to give it a rest.

That's loser talk...

Hangar18
04-17-2006, 01:03 PM
Hangar:

I'm just curious as what the purpose of all the media threads are? Do you REALLY think that the media is going to change because of you? Haha! This team won the World Series last year and that didn't change it.

Do you think posting on this message board is going to magically make the media say: Gee, Hangar has a point, we will now give the White Sox the lions share of coverage.

The White Sox winning the ****ing Series didn't change and you think you will?

Spend time rooting for the White Sox and less time sweating about the media. You'll live longer and not look so cubsessed in the process.


Pointing out the ridiculousness of the Media is FUN and COMPELLING at the same time. its like a daily pie-in-the-face to the media, and they do notice whats going on here, and let me tell you, they DONT LIKE IT.

BainesHOF
04-17-2006, 01:04 PM
Keep posting, Hangar. There's nothing like cold, hard facts to prove an argument. The Chicago papers should be ashamed of themselves.

It's Time
04-17-2006, 01:10 PM
That's loser talk...

Really? So because I watch my team and couldn't care less about the ****ing media it's "loser talk"?

Interesting observation.

It's Time
04-17-2006, 01:15 PM
they DONT LIKE IT.

So much so that they are now giving the White Sox the lions share of coverage.

WhteSox725
04-17-2006, 01:28 PM
The weekend wasnt too kind to the SOX media-wise, as the SOX are not able to make much of a dent in media-coverage despite moving into 1st place for the first time since last season.

I guess somebody practices the same way of reporting things incorrectly like the papers around here. The White Sox were in first place all by themselves after the first game of the season.

Hangar18
04-17-2006, 01:33 PM
Really? So because I watch my team and couldn't care less about the ****ing media it's "loser talk"?

Interesting observation.

Im not sure if youve noticed whats been happening in this town for the last 20 years or so .................
but in a nutshell, a media outlet decided they wanted to favor one team over the other. A second outlet, in competition with them, followed suit.
The extra coverage continued and one outlet decided to also start negatively cover the other team. Second outlet followed suit. This continued unchecked for a number of years, and the negative and lack of attention
NEGATIVELY AFFECTED the one organization.

I point this out. Your not seeing it, either your eyes are closed, or your oblivious. Thats fine. Im simply showing you, plain as day, that the media outlets had a motive for doing this.

It's Time
04-17-2006, 01:36 PM
Im not sure if youve noticed whats been happening in this town for the last 20 years or so .................
but in a nutshell, a media outlet decided they wanted to favor one team over the other. A second outlet, in competition with them, followed suit.
The extra coverage continued and one outlet decided to also start negatively cover the other team. Second outlet followed suit. This continued unchecked for a number of years, and the negative and lack of attention
NEGATIVELY AFFECTED the one organization.

I point this out. Your not seeing it, either your eyes are closed, or your oblivious. Thats fine. Im simply showing you, plain as day, that the media outlets had a motive for doing this.


And what do you hope to accomplish? As I said, the World Series didn't change it and you think you will? I guess I like to use my time for things that matter.

To each his own.

Dick Allen
04-17-2006, 01:37 PM
Really? So because I watch my team and couldn't care less about the ****ing media it's "loser talk"?

Interesting observation.Hangar's been posting these stats for a long time. If it doesn't interest you, then don't read the threads and don't be telling him what should and shouldn't interest HIM.

Hangar18
04-17-2006, 01:39 PM
And what do you hope to accomplish? As I said, the World Series didn't change it and you think you will? I guess I like to use my time for things that matter.

To each his own.


Well this way is more convenient right? I post the info and you guys can read it. The White Sox tried to Ignore this saying it wasnt a problem.
They found out the hard way just how harmful this really was, and will take YEARS to reverse the damage done. Were on our way thats for sure, they need to be reminded just how YELLOW and BIASED they really are. If we look the other way and just "ignore" the media, that wont change the problem either. Guys like Kiley, Murphy, Morrissey are as YELLOW as they come and arent writers, but propogandistas

CHISOXFAN13
04-17-2006, 01:40 PM
Hangar's been posting these stats for a long time. If it doesn't interest you, then don't read the threads and don't be telling him what should and shouldn't interest HIM.

But it's ok for you to tell said poster what to do? :?:

Dick Allen
04-17-2006, 01:40 PM
Hangar, you neglected to mentioned Carol "Pulitzer Prize" Slezak's two-page spread on Michael Barrett in the Sunday S-T. Top quality journalism. I e-mailed her, the nicest thing I said to her is that she's a loser.

Dick Allen
04-17-2006, 01:41 PM
But it's ok for you to tell said poster what to do? :?:Oh, gimme a break. What he said borders on judgmental. There's a difference, pal.

CHISOXFAN13
04-17-2006, 01:44 PM
Oh, gimme a break. What he said borders on judgmental. There's a difference, pal.

Fair enough, chief. I hadn't read his entire post, but I can see what you are saying after doing so.

It's Time
04-17-2006, 01:46 PM
Oh, gimme a break. What he said borders on judgmental. There's a difference, pal.

Giving advice is judgmental?:?: I think he could find better ways to spend his energy other than flipping out about the Cubs.

I know I can.

Dan Mega
04-17-2006, 01:48 PM
Hangar, you neglected to mentioned Carol "Pulitzer Prize" Slezak's two-page spread on Michael Barrett in the Sunday S-T. Top quality journalism. I e-mailed her, the nicest thing I said to her is that she's a loser.

As Carol herself once said, "I didn't see it, therefore nobody cares."

CaptainBallz
04-17-2006, 01:48 PM
Giving advice is judgmental?:?: I think he could find better ways to spend his energy other than flipping about about the Cubs.

I know I can.

I think that's the second time you've mentioned all the "better things" you could be doing. Noone here is really trying to stop you....

itsnotrequired
04-17-2006, 01:48 PM
Giving advice is judgmental?:?: I think he could find better ways to spend his energy other than flipping about about the Cubs.

I know I can.

Look, Hangar has been doing this for a while and isn't about to change his ways.

Battling with others over this issue is the real waste of time.

It's Time
04-17-2006, 01:51 PM
Look, Hangar has been doing this for a while and isn't about to change his ways.

Battling with others over this issue is the real waste of time.

You're right. With that, I'll let him have at it and IMO, waste his time. I just find it VERY embarrassing to White Sox fans that he is SO obsessed about the Cubs.

It's not just the media watches either. I'm out.

Hangar18
04-17-2006, 01:51 PM
Giving advice is judgmental?:?: I think he could find better ways to spend his energy other than flipping about about the Cubs.

I know I can.


OK, you really ARENT reading my posts are you? This thread is, and has been, about the Chicago Medias continued and disturbing love fest for the loser franchise 8 miles north. Our team has deserved more and better coverage the past 2 decades, but we havnt gotten it. They are treated like theyve won 20 championships, when in reality, they lost a disproportionate amount of games, and have lost fantastically over the course of 50 years or so. Want to know who is flubsessed? The Chicago Yellow Media. Keep looking the other way ..........things are bound to get better. They just have to right?

Lip Man 1
04-17-2006, 01:52 PM
My only request to Hangar is that he posts specific information on EXACTLY how he bases his totals.

I'd like to know the ground rules because as a laugh, I have checked Hangar's figures against my own and they are very different.

I'm not saying Hangar is deliberately 'cooking the totals,' I'd simply like to know how he arrives at his figures.

For example does he just use the print editions of the newspapers...does he include the internet sports sections...is it one or the other...what newspapers does he factor in and why. What newspapers does he leave out...why?

If you are going to 'do a study' then the parameters have be constant, consistent and unbiased.

Regarding the basic premise of the exercise....everyone already knows the Tribune Company is promoting their own franchise. It's against journalistic integrity but unfortunately that's the way things are. I just fail to see the point of the daily rantings.

And to be fair Hangar should put just as much effort into researching and condemning the White Sox culpability in all this. They GAVE the city to the Cubs over the past twenty years through a series of P.R. blunders.

'We have met the enemy and they are us...' - Pogo.

It's going to take time for Brooks, Bob and their staffs to undo twenty years of stupidity caused by that doofus Rob Gallas.

Thanks,

Lip

SOXPHILE
04-17-2006, 01:52 PM
Keep posting 'em Hangar. The postings here by George Knue and indirect references to it in the Cubune show that some in The Tower do read it, and it's a real burr under their saddle. How dare some of the unwashed masses, i.e. Sox fans, question the fairness and integrity of how they cover the two teams ???!!!!

Dick Allen
04-17-2006, 01:52 PM
Giving advice is judgmental?:?: I think he could find better ways to spend his energy other than flipping about about the Cubs.

I know I can.I think he spends plenty of his time rooting for the Sox, that's why the issue of media coverage can be aggravating, and he's pointing out facts to prove his point. I don't think he'll be taking your "advice" any time soon. Plenty of us appreciate his effort on this subject. If you don't, that's fine, just leave the rest of us be.

Hangar18
04-17-2006, 01:55 PM
You're right. With that, I'll let him have at it and IMO, waste his time. I just find it VERY embarrassing to White Sox fans that he is SO obsessed about the Cubs.

It's not just the media watches either. I'm out.

So if we look the other way, things will just work themselves out?

Dick Allen
04-17-2006, 01:55 PM
Fair enough, chief. I hadn't read his entire post, but I can see what you are saying after doing so.OK. Sorry for the outburst.

Hangar18
04-17-2006, 01:58 PM
My only request to Hangar is that he posts specific information on EXACTLY how he bases his totals.

I'd like to know the ground rules because as a laugh, I have checked Hangar's figures against my own and they are very different.

I'm not saying Hangar is deliberately 'cooking the totals,' I'd simply like to know how he arrives at his figures.

For example does he just use the print editions of the newspapers...does he include the internet sports sections...is it one or the other...what newspapers does he factor in and why. What newspapers does he leave out...why?

If you are going to 'do a study' then the parameters have be constant, consistent and unbiased.

Regarding the basic premise of the exercise....everyone already knows the Tribune Company is promoting their own franchise. It's against journalistic integrity but unfortunately that's the way things are. I just fail to see the point of the daily rantings.

And to be fair Hangar should put just as much effort into researching and condemning the White Sox culpability in all this. They GAVE the city to the Cubs over the past twenty years through a series of P.R. blunders.

'We have met the enemy and they are us...' - Pogo.

It's going to take time for Brooks, Bob and their staffs to undo twenty years of stupidity caused by that doofus Rob Gallas.

Thanks,

Lip

very good post, lip. yes, the SOX FOOLISHLY ignored this problem for years and years. As far as my sources, I use both, the internet editions, and the actual papers. Its hard to do this daily, but I try for the most part, and the figures arent that far off, if they are, to make a huge differences.

Lip Man 1
04-17-2006, 02:01 PM
Hangar:

'Looking the other way' or being 'involved' isn't the point.

The point is 'can you change things?'

The answer to that is 'no.'

Maybe I'm cynical but I think the media reads your material and gets a big laugh at your expense.

I'm not saying you are wrong to care, that's laudable but what you say doesn't change things one way or another.

The folks who do have the power to make a difference, Brooks, Bob, the White Sox marketing department and the media relations staff are doing what they can but it takes time....and all the harping and haranguing isn't going to change that in the slightest.

You have made your point and have given some good information but I think you have now gone overboard and it's becoming counterproductive.

Just my opinion.

Lip

Hangar18
04-17-2006, 02:08 PM
Hangar:

'Looking the other way' or being 'involved' isn't the point.

The point is 'can you change things?'

The answer to that is 'no.'

Maybe I'm cynical but I think the media reads your material and gets a big laugh at your expense.

I'm not saying you are wrong to care, that's laudable but what you say doesn't change things one way or another.

The folks who do have the power to make a difference, Brooks, Bob, the White Sox marketing department and the media relations staff are doing what they can but it takes time....and all the harping and haranguing isn't going to change that in the slightest.

You have made your point and have given some good information but I think you have now gone overboard and it's becoming counterproductive.

Just my opinion.

Lip

There are some in the media who LAUGH at this. There are some who LAUGH NERVOUSLY about all of this. There are also some who are now angered ............... never have they been challenged like this before, never has anyone ever called them out. Think about this, since Brooks came on, it was the 1st time the SOX ever acknowledged there was a "problem". Was also the first time certain SOX players made pointed and critical comments to the Chicago Media, making them blush. (AJ did this last nite on FOX for example) How could this be overboard, if what I point out is still the truth? if they are still behaving like a high-school newspaper? if theyre still ignoring the team? if theyre still making a concerted effort to point out whats wrong with the SOX and their fanbase? The Chicago Media is a Joke.

Realist
04-17-2006, 02:11 PM
Giving advice is judgmental?:?: I think he could find better ways to spend his energy other than flipping about about the Cubs.

I know I can.

Yeah... spending energy flipping about people flipping about the Cubs is a much better way of spending energy. :redneck

chuckn98229
04-17-2006, 02:21 PM
Keep it up, Henry. Love to see the hard evidence and the sniveling denials from the objective journalists!

palehozenychicty
04-17-2006, 02:39 PM
Hangar, just keep doing your thing. Today's front page on the Cubune (internet) is truly awful.

maurice
04-17-2006, 02:51 PM
The media bias continues, and people are noticing.

This morning, a casual baseball fan in my office (who knows nothing of WSI or the Media Watch) came up to me and said: "What's up with the Sunday Sun-Times? The entire back page was devoted to the Cubs!"

Everybody knows who won the WS. The Sox are the big story in town, not the Cubs. It's time for Chicago sports editors to get their heads out of their asses. People are sick of hearing about Juan Pierre, Felix Pie, Barry Bonds, and whatever negative crap they can manufacture re. the Sox.

Dick Allen
04-17-2006, 03:00 PM
The media bias continues, and people are noticing.

This morning, a casual baseball fan in my office (who knows nothing of WSI or the Media Watch) came up to me and said: "What's up with the Sunday Sun-Times? The entire back page was devoted to the Cubs!"

Everybody knows who won the WS. The Sox are the big story in town, not the Cubs. It's time for Chicago sports editors to get their heads out of their asses. People are sick of hearing about Juan Pierre, Felix Pie, Barry Bonds, and whatever negative crap they can manufacture re. the Sox.Actually, I think that was the early edition. The final Sunday edition had Konerko on the back page for his 2 HR's. But his point is well taken...

MadetoOrta
04-17-2006, 03:13 PM
Henry,

Keep it up!

MTO

Jaffar
04-17-2006, 04:37 PM
I hope you don't stop with the updates Henry. I'm curious to see what happens if/when the Cubs start to fall in the standings and the Sox keep doing there thing.

Craig Grebeck
04-17-2006, 09:22 PM
There are some in the media who LAUGH at this. There are some who LAUGH NERVOUSLY about all of this. There are also some who are now angered ............... never have they been challenged like this before, never has anyone ever called them out. Think about this, since Brooks came on, it was the 1st time the SOX ever acknowledged there was a "problem". Was also the first time certain SOX players made pointed and critical comments to the Chicago Media, making them blush. (AJ did this last nite on FOX for example) How could this be overboard, if what I point out is still the truth? if they are still behaving like a high-school newspaper? if theyre still ignoring the team? if theyre still making a concerted effort to point out whats wrong with the SOX and their fanbase? The Chicago Media is a Joke.
I really wish that members of the Sox aren't calling out the Chicago Media. It 's embarrassing to think that they would actually care whether or not the Cubs received one more story in the Tuesday Trib.

Lip Man 1
04-17-2006, 11:23 PM
Craig:

Bill Veeck used to take a ruler and measure the column inches in the papers devoted to the Sox and Cubs.

Lip

WSox8404
04-18-2006, 07:52 PM
Giving advice is judgmental?:?: I think he could find better ways to spend his energy other than flipping out about the Cubs.

I know I can.

And I am sure that you can find something better to do then waste your time and chastise Hangar for what he does. So go and find that better thing to do and leave him alone. Not everyone here likes the media watches, but they don't hassle Hangar about it. If you don't like it, then don't read it. I for one appreciate what he is doing.

gbergman
04-18-2006, 07:54 PM
Paranoia, Paranoia, everybody's coming to get me