PDA

View Full Version : Media members cry (Sox pressbox)


HotelWhiteSox
04-05-2007, 11:53 PM
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-070405greenstein,1,525803.column?page=1&coll=cs-home-utility

What, the media crying about how they're treated? Want to be treated fairly? That's unheard of in this city.

My favorite part is right under the heading:

Teams taking best seats for customers

Yeah, that sounds about right...poetic justice bitches

Whitesox029
04-05-2007, 11:59 PM
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-070405greenstein,1,525803.column?page=1&coll=cs-home-utility

What, the media crying about how they're treated? Want to be treated fairly? That's unheard of in this city.

My favorite part is right under the heading:


[/size]
Yeah, that sounds about right...poetic justice bitches

...isn't that perfectly logical for every business? If you ask me, the announcers booths should be closer than the press box too. At least they're employees. These morons get to watch every game free and they're complaining about being moved. They should be grateful they didn't get put up on the roof.

BainesHOF
04-06-2007, 02:26 AM
First of all, it's a media column. The writer is supposed to write about media matters.

Second of all, it'd be nice if reporters could actually see what they're supposed to be reporting. It's too bad the team has so little regard for the role of the media in communicating information about what took place on the field to fans.

And newspaper beat writers in particular work extremely hard. To suggest somehow they're on a free ride watching games for free is comical. The overall continued bashing of all things media around here is as stupid and immature as the people who ripped and trashed the team after two games. It's just childish, and it makes Sox fans look bad.

MUsoxfan
04-06-2007, 02:27 AM
"The White Sox made a big statement that says, 'We can make enough money to pay a backup shortstop at the expense of the guys who cover our ballclub every day.' It's patently wrong, and I think it shows contempt that owners have for the press.


:whiner::whiner::whiner:


The backup SS helps the team win. The press does nothing but bitch and moan about everything the club does "wrong". They really do have a "holier than thou" attitude and they're still mystified as to why everyone hates them

IlliniSox4Life
04-06-2007, 02:29 AM
My favorite part is how he starts by comparing them to the radio area for the Nuggets and how it detracts from the broadcast. Sure, I can see that. But the Sox aren't moving the announcers booth, they moved (what I think is just) the print press. What is so awful about that? The print media also has access to televisions where they can see plays EVEN BETTER than from their precious booth.

I'm all for respecting the media and treating them well, but for god's sake, the customers are the ones who pay for their papers as well as the team. I don't understand how you can bitch and moan managing to piss off both who you are covering and the people that pay for you to cover them. The moving off the press box was a no brainer IMO. How about he writes a story where the 4 mil in extra revenue allows us to keep Buehrle/Crede/Dye/someone long term and help us win a championship?

IlliniSox4Life
04-06-2007, 02:31 AM
:whiner::whiner::whiner:


The backup SS helps the team win. The press does nothing but bitch and moan about everything the club does "wrong". They really do have a "holier than thou" attitude and they're still mystified as to why everyone hates them

Yeah, "the contempt the owners have for the press"? What about the contempt the baseball writers have for the fans? Why should they get the best seats in the house for free when the ones who support the team and allow them to have a job can't?

IlliniSox4Life
04-06-2007, 02:41 AM
First of all, it's a media column. The writer is supposed to write about media matters.

Second of all, it'd be nice if reporters could actually see what they're supposed to be reporting. It's too bad the team has so little disregard for the role of the media in communicating information about what took place on the field to fans.

And newspaper beat writers in particular work extremely hard. To suggest somehow they're on a free ride watching games for free is comical. The overall continued bashing of all things media around here is as stupid and immature as the people who ripped and trashed the team after two games. It's just childish, and it makes Sox fans look bad.

He can write about it all he wants, but don't expect fans who pay good money for their seats to put up with it. If he doesn't like watching baseball he needs to get a new job. If he does like watching baseball than he needs to shut up and enjoy watching games for free while getting paid to write articles about it later.

IIRC, the press box has been relocated to just down first base line on the 400 level. While I haven't seen the view myself, I would assume around 80% of the seats in the upper deck are worse than that, and still some more in the lower level.




Who doesn't dislike some things about their job? But who likes to hear somebody else bitch about how bad their job is, or how their boss just screwed them over. I don't like hearing it from my friends who actually have ****ty jobs, let alone somebody who is paid to watch baseball and write about it. If I work at McDonalds and I just got moved from cashier to drive-thru, I don't tell every single person who comes through the drive thru that I'm being treated ****ty.

MUsoxfan
04-06-2007, 02:45 AM
IIRC, the press box has been relocated to just down first base line on the 400 level. While I haven't seen the view myself, I would assume around 80% of the seats in the upper deck are worse than that, and still some more in the lower level.






Exactly. I was 10 rows up in 509 for the ALDS. If need be, I could have written a fine article on it. Maybe these guys are just a bunch of slow adults

Frater Perdurabo
04-06-2007, 06:28 AM
I have to temper my comments on this one, because I work in a college journalism department and we have a difficult time finding students who want to be sports writers. Nevertheless, I'm always amused (nauseated) by many sports reporters' holier than thou sense of entitlement. I remember some Dallas radio guys bitching about how the Philadelphia Eagles' media buffet had french toast and other brunch items rather than the barbecue found at Texas Stadium's media buffet. (Yes, I too prefer barbecue, but I've also learned not to bitch about free food!)

Sports reporters don't cover, oh, important things like wars, political scandals, economic issues, crime, corruption, etc. They make a living covering a bunch of jocks chasing a ball (or a puck). And too many of them are all too eager to remind the reader, viewer, etc. what a tremendous public service they are doing just for them. Please.

Based on who I have encountered, many sports reporters (certainly not all) are former or wannabe jocks who obviously grew up worshipping athletes but were not good enough to compete at the higher levels themselves. A strange combination of hero worship and resentment drives their desire to be around players and then set up those players to say something stupid that the reporters then can pass off as "breaking news."

"Oooh, look at me, I just got Frank Thomas, Kenny Williams and Ozzie Guillen to say something inflammatory. I've uncovered a major scandal! Stop the presses! FitzSimons and Knue will love this story; maybe next year I'll get the Cubs' beat! Pulitzer Prize, here I come! Everything's coming up Milhouse!"

I do not mean to throw our own resident journalists, Lip, JB98, etc. under the bus. I've read Lip's journalism here and it's first rate. I'm sure JB98 does a great job, too. But so many sports reporters I have encountered in person fit the mold I just described.

hsnterprize
04-06-2007, 07:35 AM
Here's my take on the whole matter...

I covered games in the old press box at the Cell, and I do agree that the view was AWESOME. However, I remember one day I ran into Bruce Levine on the field during batting practice, and I overheard him talking about how much of a dread it was for him to be at the ballpark that day. Granted, I didn't know what he was going through at the time in case there were other, more pressing issues for him at the time. But, I told him that considering where we were (on the field within arms length of multi-millionaire baseball players taking batting practice), that we were privileged (sp?) to be able to attend Major League Baseball games for practically NOTHING (except paying $3.00 for either a hot dog or burger with curly fries, or $7.00 for a buffet-style meal before the game), get free Pepsi drinks and popcorn throughout the game, go into the dugouts, clubhouses, and other "restricted" areas with no problem, and other intangibles people would kill or pay top dollar to do. In other words, we in the media should me more than grateful we get to do this...and GET PAID to do it as well. Once he heard me, he fully agreed.

I haven't been in the new press box yet. I admit, it won't be the same nice view the press had before. But you know something...there are people who scrimp and save just to be able to take their families to half-price nights at the ballpark; let alone pay full prices for games, food, etc. So to anyone in the media who wants to complain about the Sox selling off the old press box to make some extra money, take those whiney, cry-baby complaints and shove 'em where the sun don't shine.

How many people do these reporters know that would pay the top-dollar folks would have to pay in order to get to areas within the Cell that we media types can get into for free with proper credentials? Hopefully, someone in the press who might read this and ultimately get a clue as to how fortunate we are to be able to watch our favorite sport in a great facility for next to nothing. What reporters write about the Sox and the game itself is one thing...complaining about not having the most-pristine view of the action is something else. Sure, some press boxes are better than others. The original press box at the Cell was awesome. But, a press box seat for free is still better than a bad chair in the seating area for full price.

Think about that one for your next column. :D:

jabrch
04-06-2007, 07:41 AM
If they don't like the new press box, they should consider other lines of work. If a 6 figure salary to write/talk about Major League Baseball is not good because they are not close enough to the game, nobody is making them stay.

My company is hiring in our call center. They'd be right in the center of the action, smack dab on the floor.

southside rocks
04-06-2007, 07:53 AM
I have to temper my comments on this one, because I work in a college journalism department and we have a difficult time finding students who want to be sports writers. Nevertheless, I'm always amused (nauseated) by many sports reporters' holier than thou sense of entitlement. I remember some Dallas radio guys bitching about how the Philadelphia Eagles' media buffet had french toast and other brunch items rather than the barbecue found at Texas Stadium's media buffet. (Yes, I too prefer barbecue, but I've also learned not to bitch about free food!)

Sports reporters don't cover, oh, important things like wars, political scandals, economic issues, crime, corruption, etc. They make a living covering a bunch of jocks chasing a ball (or a puck). And too many of them are all too eager to remind the reader, viewer, etc. what a tremendous public service they are doing just for them. Please.

Based on who I have encountered, many sports reporters (certainly not all) are former or wannabe jocks who obviously grew up worshipping athletes but were not good enough to compete at the higher levels themselves. A strange combination of hero worship and resentment drives their desire to be around players and then set up those players to say something stupid that the reporters then can pass off as "breaking news."

"Oooh, look at me, I just got Frank Thomas, Kenny Williams and Ozzie Guillen to say something inflammatory. I've uncovered a major scandal! Stop the presses! FitzSimons and Knue will love this story; maybe next year I'll get the Cubs' beat! Pulitzer Prize, here I come! Everything's coming up Milhouse!"

I do not mean to throw our own resident journalists, Lip, JB98, etc. under the bus. I've read Lip's journalism here and it's first rate. I'm sure JB98 does a great job, too. But so many sports reporters I have encountered in person fit the mold I just described.

Interesting post. I'm a former journalism major who wanted to be a sportswriter, at a time when women weren't much represented in sportswriting (30 years ago, and yes, I'm a woman). I went into something else entirely.

I rarely read the newspaper coverage of baseball in Chicago, and if I do read it I don't remember it for more than a few minutes, because I don't find much baseball written about in that coverage. I find it to be about personalities and often about manufactured controversies, like the "Sox are kicking Buehrle and the other starters to the curb! No one will be re-signed!" or the "Ozzie is on the hot seat -- he gone!!" nonsense of this spring. The sportswriters like to sound important, but they have little or no ability to actually analyze the game as it was played, should be played, or could be played. The Windsock is the foremost example of this, but there isn't a big difference between him and the rest of the crowd in the pressbox here, IMO.

Of course, this is a trend in all newswriting, not just sports. It's only too bad that the Britney/Paris/Anna Nicole style of coverage -- breathless, sensationalistic, and full of drama -- has also become the style used for AJ/Ozzie/Sweet Lou coverage. And I think it's for some of the reasons you mentioned, FP.

Steelrod
04-06-2007, 07:56 AM
Beat writers need good access. The moniters that they got gives them a better view than their old seats. It's not their job to argue balls and strikes anyhow. As for the other columnists, hangers on, etc up there, they are just watching a free game. The only function they have is to criticize, and critize they do. I only hope they have their "free parking" moved further away from their seats. (suites) They are just spoiled people, accostomed to taking advantage of the power to slam. They slam anyhow, so why should the team play (suck) up to them.
If your neighbor was sleeping with your wife, would you give him your spare bedroom for better access?

DumpJerry
04-06-2007, 07:59 AM
I liked this little admission:
the club, which has baseball's fourth-highest payroll at $109.7 million.
After reading the same Chicago Tribune, I thought after all the trades in the off season, the Sox were 30th in payroll....

All that was missing was the fact that the three teams ahead of the Sox were not named "Cubs" (Mets, Yanks, BoSox).

Law11
04-06-2007, 08:02 AM
The press has a point in their minds... It just doesnt hold up for the most part in ours. In any case its not like many of us will ever be in the new area for a game anyway, its still the high priced fan/company getting to view the game from up there. Either way it's a blip on the radar for me.

I know, I know, this is about the media and their crying about being treated like anything less than royalty but as long as they can think a thought and have a place to spew it we'll read or hear about it.

No they dont get any sympathy from me. I'll sit on the roof to cover the Sox.
And all I'd ask for is a teather to keep me from falling off.

DumpJerry
04-06-2007, 08:06 AM
I have to temper my comments on this one, because I work in a college journalism department and we have a difficult time finding students who want to be sports writers. Nevertheless, I'm always amused (nauseated) by many sports reporters' holier than thou sense of entitlement. I remember some Dallas radio guys bitching about how the Philadelphia Eagles' media buffet had french toast and other brunch items rather than the barbecue found at Texas Stadium's media buffet. (Yes, I too prefer barbecue, but I've also learned not to bitch about free food!)

Sports reporters don't cover, oh, important things like wars, political scandals, economic issues, crime, corruption, etc. They make a living covering a bunch of jocks chasing a ball (or a puck). And too many of them are all too eager to remind the reader, viewer, etc. what a tremendous public service they are doing just for them. Please.

Based on who I have encountered, many sports reporters (certainly not all) are former or wannabe jocks who obviously grew up worshipping athletes but were not good enough to compete at the higher levels themselves. A strange combination of hero worship and resentment drives their desire to be around players and then set up those players to say something stupid that the reporters then can pass off as "breaking news."

"Oooh, look at me, I just got Frank Thomas, Kenny Williams and Ozzie Guillen to say something inflammatory. I've uncovered a major scandal! Stop the presses! FitzSimons and Knue will love this story; maybe next year I'll get the Cubs' beat! Pulitzer Prize, here I come! Everything's coming up Milhouse!"

I do not mean to throw our own resident journalists, Lip, JB98, etc. under the bus. I've read Lip's journalism here and it's first rate. I'm sure JB98 does a great job, too. But so many sports reporters I have encountered in person fit the mold I just described.
Frater, you do have valid points. However, sports reporters also do stories on how sports have changed peoples' lives (athletes who were raised in poverty giving back to their home community, etc.) which are substanive. I've seen stories on OTL which are actually enlightening and interesting.

hose
04-06-2007, 08:15 AM
I watched the first 15 minutes of Chicago Tribune Live with Dan Jiggets yesterday.

The talk got to Nick Masset and Rick Morrisey admitted he didn't know anything about him or who he was.:?:

Why waste one of the best seats in the house on these people?

tebman
04-06-2007, 08:17 AM
I just read the piece about the press box and my only reaction is Give Me A Break! Their seats weren't eliminated, they were moved to the right!

Whiners -- it's never changed. This is from Ring Lardner's story "You Know Me Al" written almost a hundred years ago about a ballplayer sold by the White Sox to a Pacific Coast League team and ends up back in the bigs and makes it to the "World Serious." But he writes to his friend Al about his trouble with sportswriters:

New York, New York, September 16.
FRIEND AL: I opened the serious here and beat them easy but I know you must of saw about it in the Chi papers. At that they don't give me no fair show in the Chi papers. One of the boys bought one here and I seen in it where I was lucky to win that game in Cleveland. If I knowed which one of them reporters wrote that I would punch his jaw.


Now it's even harder to get a "fair show" from those writers because their seats shifted to the right. :whiner:

Hitmen77
04-06-2007, 08:21 AM
I liked this little admission:


the club, which has baseball's fourth-highest payroll at $109.7 million.

After reading the same Chicago Tribune, I thought after all the trades in the off season, the Sox were 30th in payroll....

All that was missing was the fact that the three teams ahead of the Sox were not named "Cubs" (Mets, Yanks, BoSox).

I was going to post the same thing. I love how the Tribune only selectively remembers this fact when there's a gripe to be made. The rest of the time, all we hear is how Jerry and KW are "cheap" and reneging on their promise to increase payroll w/ attendance.

Hondo
04-06-2007, 08:27 AM
All I can add to this is as a sportswriter for a small daily newspaper -I can empathize to an extent. I know it gets old putting up with crap from players, fans, parents of players, team/school officials for a meager paycheck.
(To whoever said that beat writers make six-figure salaries, that's inane.)Beat writers make WAY less than say your upper tier guys like your Mariotti's or Telanders.
But keep your gripes to yourself. By writing a column bitching about anything will engender NO sympathy from fans.
But I also think people have some sort of skewed perception of what BEAT writers do and confuse them with your average columnist.
People keep saying they get to watch the game for free, which is true but keep in mind not everybody who covers the White Sox is a White Sox fan.
So will it's still a privilege to watch sports for a living it's not like newspapers assign rabid fans like us to cover the games.
Bottom line is it's insane to think that a beat writer's life is glamorous. It involves a crap ton of travel, taking copious amount of crap from editors, fans, players and everyone under the sun for not a lot of money.
But it sure beats the hell out of, oh I don't know, working in a factory, at McDonald's, being a janitor, anything that involves putting your life on the line (i.e.-police officer, fire fighter, soldier) and countless other jobs.
Some sports writers really lack perspective sometimes and are so jaded and have become so myopic that can't see the forrest from the trees.

Steelrod
04-06-2007, 08:37 AM
Frater, you do have valid points. However, sports reporters also do stories on how sports have changed peoples' lives (athletes who were raised in poverty giving back to their home community, etc.) which are substanive. I've seen stories on OTL which are actually enlightening and interesting.
Good point, but such worthy articles do not necessitate a closer seat to watch a game!

PaleHoseGeorge
04-06-2007, 09:09 AM
First of all, it's a media column. The writer is supposed to write about media matters.

Second of all, it'd be nice if reporters could actually see what they're supposed to be reporting. It's too bad the team has so little disregard for the role of the media in communicating information about what took place on the field to fans.

And newspaper beat writers in particular work extremely hard. To suggest somehow they're on a free ride watching games for free is comical. The overall continued bashing of all things media around here is as stupid and immature as the people who ripped and trashed the team after two games. It's just childish, and it makes Sox fans look bad.

:violin:

Those guys are GETTING PAID to watch ballgames and write about them. I guarantee that 99 percent of the people reading your driveling whines on behalf of the Sox media corps are forced to work in conditions 1000-times less favorable than what these pampered jerks must deal with.

daveeym
04-06-2007, 09:21 AM
Good point, but such worthy articles do not necessitate a closer seat to watch a game!
Heck, in the Moron's case, he doesn't even need to be in the stadium to write about the Sox. So I don't know what these guys are griping about.

chisox77
04-06-2007, 09:32 AM
The media will learn to live with the new arrangement, because overall, they are still treated very well to do their jobs. You can't beat the conditions, the comps, and the other perks they get, but never think of because they are so used to it that way.

:cool:

Jurr
04-06-2007, 09:44 AM
Frater, you do have valid points. However, sports reporters also do stories on how sports have changed peoples' lives (athletes who were raised in poverty giving back to their home community, etc.) which are substanive. I've seen stories on OTL which are actually enlightening and interesting.
You have a good point, but here's my problem with it. These guys are WRITERS. Their main focus is getting into the clubhouse and doing interviews, which their press passes still allow them to do. A fringe benefit is getting to attend baseball games for free. That's a pretty nice perk. Do they need to see the action perfectly up close to get a better feel for what's going on? No!

They have flat screen monitors in their box to get any further insight to the game, and they have a view of the field, the crowd, and the atmosphere well within the limits of what they would write about. After the game, they get to go down and get player reactions. What's the big deal? These guys are just whining because they expect to be pampered - the best seats, a pristine view, etc. It's really not necessary for them to do their job. Period.

salty99
04-06-2007, 09:49 AM
:violin:

Those guys are GETTING PAID to watch ballgames and write about them. I guarantee that 99 percent of the people reading your driveling whines on behalf of the Sox media corps are forced to work in conditions 1000-times less favorable than what these pampered jerks must deal with.


DING DING DING!!! We Have a winner!

spiffie
04-06-2007, 09:53 AM
I would be more willing to listen to such complaints if I ever saw anything in the media which appeared to be an analysis of the game based on close observation. But there's rarely anything written about the game itself that couldn't be told from the highest seat in the upper deck or by a good HDTV broadcast. When we get columnists who start writing articles talking about how they noticed Jose's arm angle dropping slightly or Uribe's footwork on the double play, and they're not just regurgitating what they heard in the locker room, then this complaint has some merit.

Jurr
04-06-2007, 09:56 AM
I would be more willing to listen to such complaints if I ever saw anything in the media which appeared to be an analysis of the game based on close observation. But there's rarely anything written about the game itself that couldn't be told from the highest seat in the upper deck or by a good HDTV broadcast. When we get columnists who start writing articles talking about how they noticed Jose's arm angle dropping slightly or Uribe's footwork on the double play, and they're not just regurgitating what they heard in the locker room, then this complaint has some merit.
+1. This is exactly my beef. Sitting at a higher seat detracts from their writing material in no way, shape or form. With their clubhouse privileges, the writers get their quotes. From a TV, they could get the rest.

PaleHoseGeorge
04-06-2007, 10:03 AM
+1. This is exactly my beef. Sitting at a higher seat detracts from their writing material in no way, shape or form. With their clubhouse privileges, the writers get their quotes. From a TV, they could get the rest.

And let's not forget the main feature windsock's fat ass never leaves the cushioned bottom of his pressbox seat, instead relying on second-hand reports he gets from his runners down in the clubhouse.

Oh yeah, they've got it real bad...

:roflmao:

Frater Perdurabo
04-06-2007, 10:03 AM
I rarely read the newspaper coverage of baseball in Chicago, and if I do read it I don't remember it for more than a few minutes, because I don't find much baseball written about in that coverage. I find it to be about personalities and often about manufactured controversies, like the "Sox are kicking Buehrle and the other starters to the curb! No one will be re-signed!" or the "Ozzie is on the hot seat -- he gone!!" nonsense of this spring. The sportswriters like to sound important, but they have little or no ability to actually analyze the game as it was played, should be played, or could be played. The Windsock is the foremost example of this, but there isn't a big difference between him and the rest of the crowd in the pressbox here, IMO.

So true, so true.

Frater, you do have valid points. However, sports reporters also do stories on how sports have changed peoples' lives (athletes who were raised in poverty giving back to their home community, etc.) which are substanive. I've seen stories on OTL which are actually enlightening and interesting.

The positive stories stand out because they are the exception rather than the rule in the entire genre of sports journalism.

Lip Man 1
04-06-2007, 10:05 AM
Frater:

Thanks for the kind words. I'm glad you enjoy reading the material I do for WSI.

By the way George has a nice historical audio interactive piece coming out soon that I did and then he's got an interview in house with one of the finest pitchers of the last fifty years. He should be in the Hall of Fame and I think very soon will get in.

Lip

AZChiSoxFan
04-06-2007, 10:05 AM
First of all, it's a media column. The writer is supposed to write about media matters.

Second of all, it'd be nice if reporters could actually see what they're supposed to be reporting. It's too bad the team has so little disregard for the role of the media in communicating information about what took place on the field to fans.

And newspaper beat writers in particular work extremely hard. To suggest somehow they're on a free ride watching games for free is comical. The overall continued bashing of all things media around here is as stupid and immature as the people who ripped and trashed the team after two games. It's just childish, and it makes Sox fans look bad.

:rolleyes:

Cry me a river for the poor media members. They got moved a few feet farther away. Look, most of these guys watch the monitors anyway. That is, they watch the monitors when they're not busy stuffing their grills with the free food they get.

Ronald Reagan used to call Cub games on WHO in Des Moines by reading a presswire (telegram, whatever it was called) that described what was happening. Now these clowns with their LCD or plasma monitors and free food complain about getting moved a little farther away. GMAB.

News flash: When most media types starting acting like Mariotti, they brought the criticism of their "profession" upon themselves. The entire industry is a shell of what it used to be.

Frater Perdurabo
04-06-2007, 10:09 AM
And let's not forget the main feature windsock's fat ass never leaves the cushioned bottom of his pressbox seat, instead relying on second-hand reports he gets from his runners down in the clubhouse.

Oh yeah, they've got it real bad...

:roflmao:

Yep, he gets paid handsomely to bitch and whine. I wish Pie Man would exact sweet revenge on him - on video tape, of course.

champagne030
04-06-2007, 10:12 AM
I liked this little admission:


the club, which has baseball's fourth-highest payroll at $109.7 million.

After reading the same Chicago Tribune, I thought after all the trades in the off season, the Sox were 30th in payroll....

All that was missing was the fact that the three teams ahead of the Sox were not named "Cubs" (Mets, Yanks, BoSox).

7 Days ago they wouldn't have made that comment. They would have stated that the Sox were 8th or 9th after cash considerations are considered and the Flubs were 4th in payroll.

We're right in the ballpark with Detroit after you consider the cash we're getting back from our trades.

End of highjack........

As for the article itself....

Let 'em bitch if Uncle Jerry is going to buy a new winter home with the additional $4M/year. If he's saving the increased profits from the Jim Beam Club, general ticket price increases, increased broadcasting revenues, ect., to put back into the club - then I say **** 'em.

jdm2662
04-06-2007, 10:20 AM
I would be more willing to listen to such complaints if I ever saw anything in the media which appeared to be an analysis of the game based on close observation. But there's rarely anything written about the game itself that couldn't be told from the highest seat in the upper deck or by a good HDTV broadcast. When we get columnists who start writing articles talking about how they noticed Jose's arm angle dropping slightly or Uribe's footwork on the double play, and they're not just regurgitating what they heard in the locker room, then this complaint has some merit.

You actually want reporters to say something revelent to the game? Come on now. That's not journalism!

Considering some of the conditions I've worked in going back as far as a 17-year-old working at Dominick's, Van Dyke can kiss my ass. I'm sure he has to deal with quite a bit of flack at his job. Guess what, all jobs have their ups and downs. Call me when you have to deal with people who are taking online classes that don't even know what Windows is or even worse, working for the cable company. :o: And, what about those people who have to work in the heart of winter outside or have to retire early because their bodies are broken down before they are even 50? Sorry Dave, don't expect me to cry for you.

Fenway
04-06-2007, 10:23 AM
If the White Sox pull this off I can see the Yankees and Red Sox doing the same thing making the press box high price seating

MRM
04-06-2007, 10:28 AM
it'd be nice if reporters could actually see what they're supposed to be reporting. It's too bad the team has so little disregard for the role of the media in communicating information about what took place on the field to fans.

In the age of Sports Center, fans don't "need" the old time beat writer to communicate what took place on the field...they can watch it themselves, at their convienence. If a reporter wants a better view, nobody is stopping him or his organization from buying tickets. I see no reason why high revenue space is neccessary. As one writer in the article said "The space is better than I thought it would be, you just can tell balls and strikes." Since calling balls and strikes isn't the domain of a beat writer, I guess this is much ado about nothing from writers bitter that the team gave their prime seats back to the fans {gasp}.

Dan Mega
04-06-2007, 10:30 AM
7 Days ago they wouldn't have made that comment. They would have stated that the Sox were 8th or 9th after cash considerations are considered and the Flubs were 4th in payroll.


I have yet to see a reporter who called the Sox cheap actually discuss the payroll compared to their revenue. The Sox are 4th in payroll but I seriously doubt they generate the revenue of the Yanks, Mets, or Bo Sox. I wonder if there is anything out there showing what teams pay the highest percentage of their net or gross revenue, they should focus on that instead of payroll.

ewokpelts
04-06-2007, 10:39 AM
If the White Sox pull this off I can see the Yankees and Red Sox doing the same thing making the press box high price seatingwell...not the yankees, as they are LEAVING yankee stadium next year

cheeses_h_rice
04-06-2007, 10:40 AM
And let's not forget the main feature windsock's fat ass never leaves the cushioned bottom of his pressbox seat, instead relying on second-hand reports he gets from his runners down in the clubhouse.

Oh yeah, they've got it real bad...

:roflmao:


:moron

It's going to make my job railing on my whipping boys Kenny Williams and the Blizzard of Oz extremely difficult sitting in the 400 level down the first base line, George. Hear me now, the Sox will feel this in my upcoming columns...

TomBradley72
04-06-2007, 10:49 AM
First of all, it's a media column. The writer is supposed to write about media matters.

Second of all, it'd be nice if reporters could actually see what they're supposed to be reporting. It's too bad the team has so little disregard for the role of the media in communicating information about what took place on the field to fans.

And newspaper beat writers in particular work extremely hard. To suggest somehow they're on a free ride watching games for free is comical. The overall continued bashing of all things media around here is as stupid and immature as the people who ripped and trashed the team after two games. It's just childish, and it makes Sox fans look bad.

Gimme a break...their seats are fine...between monitors, binoculars and the sight lines...they can do their job just fine. The White Sox are supposed to give up $4,000,000 in annual revenue so Dave Van Dyck can have a better view.(and write about their 98 wins in 2005?) No way.

BainesHOF
04-06-2007, 10:51 AM
Wow. Just wow. And here I thought sports writers were bitter.

Fenway
04-06-2007, 10:58 AM
well...not the yankees, as they are LEAVING yankee stadium next year

touche :smile:

hose
04-06-2007, 10:58 AM
And let's not forget the main feature windsock's fat ass never leaves the cushioned bottom of his pressbox seat, instead relying on second-hand reports he gets from his runners down in the clubhouse.


"Hey back off man , Jay's pretty happy with my work"

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/afp/20070319/capt.sge.gmx25.190307025600.photo00.photo.default-512x353.jpg?x=380&y=262&sig=MxOBx8M2maL.3A4O25kFvA--

skobabe8
04-06-2007, 10:59 AM
First of all, it's a media column. The writer is supposed to write about media matters.

Second of all, it'd be nice if reporters could actually see what they're supposed to be reporting. It's too bad the team has so little disregard for the role of the media in communicating information about what took place on the field to fans.

And newspaper beat writers in particular work extremely hard. To suggest somehow they're on a free ride watching games for free is comical. The overall continued bashing of all things media around here is as stupid and immature as the people who ripped and trashed the team after two games. It's just childish, and it makes Sox fans look bad.

You cannot be serious.

You act like the new pressbox is underground. I would love to have those seats, even though a reporter sitting in my seats (533, r7) can do a fine job of reporting.

Stop it.

The Immigrant
04-06-2007, 11:03 AM
Wow. Just wow. And here I thought sports writers were bitter.

You'll have to pardon the Sox fans who don't feel much sympathy for the likes of Dave van Dyke and his cohorts. If it were up to me, they'd be sitting under the viaduct on 35th street listening to the game on the radio.

Hey Dave, let me know when Bud deigns to fix this problem for you, will ya? :rolleyes:

skobabe8
04-06-2007, 11:04 AM
Wow. Just wow. And here I thought sports writers were bitter.

LOL....Who's bitter?????? Read the title of the thread!

I HIGHLY DOUBT anyone posting here who isnt a writer (and some who are) is bitter about this.

DumpJerry
04-06-2007, 11:08 AM
:moron
You guys just don't get it. Sports teams exist for two reasons:
1. Feed my ego.
2. Feed my belly.

maurice
04-06-2007, 11:54 AM
The talk got to Nick Masset and Rick Morrisey admitted he didn't know anything about him or who he was.:?:

This happens all the time. Off the top of my head, I can think of 3 examples of media types being asked about young Sox players and then being forced to admit that they lack any relevant knowledge:
- Trib Sox beat writer Mark Gonzeles, a few months into his tenure
- WSCR "baseball expert" Mickey Morondini, during his short tenure
- WSCR "baseball expert" Steve Stone, right after the Cubs canned him

To his credit, Stone took his job seriously and took steps to learn about the players in the Sox org. after many years covering only the Cubs.

Dan Mega
04-06-2007, 11:59 AM
I'm still trying to who complained about having to wipe water off their seat and also on how the couches weren't leather or the coffee wasn't fancy.

TDog
04-06-2007, 12:14 PM
... But, a press box seat for free is still better than a bad chair in the seating area for full price. ...

Roger Angell wrote that he preferred to buy a ticket and sit in the stands than work from the pressbox. It's true that you can find out more about what is going on with scoring decisions and such. There is equipment to transmit copy to the office. If you're working on a deadline, you have to write parts of your story while the game is progressing, and you need a place to work.

Still, if your publication wanted to pay for a better seat for the game, I'm sure the team would accommodate you.

ewokpelts
04-06-2007, 01:04 PM
Roger Angell wrote that he preferred to buy a ticket and sit in the stands than work from the pressbox. It's true that you can find out more about what is going on with scoring decisions and such. There is equipment to transmit copy to the office. If you're working on a deadline, you have to write parts of your story while the game is progressing, and you need a place to work.

Still, if your publication wanted to pay for a better seat for the game, I'm sure the team would accommodate you.members of the press get up for four FREE tickets per game that are NOT in the press box.

PaleHoseGeorge
04-06-2007, 01:16 PM
Wow. Just wow. And here I thought sports writers were bitter.

Pot, meet the kettle. Here you are complaining on an internet message board about other posters who disagree with your whines that sportwriters are entitled to the best seats in the house.

And aren't you the same guy who also claims anyone with internet access ought not subscribe to newspapers? LMAO! So here you are wasting your internet time complaining in a thread with a clearly-marked subject header instead of using it for accessing your free internet news?

And you accuse US of being the ones who are bitter?
:roflmao:

So what else do you do in your free time? Pull the wings off butterflies?

ondafarm
04-06-2007, 02:45 PM
I love the line ". . . producing an inferior product."

No, that was taken care of when the quality of sportwriters dropped.

Nellie_Fox
04-06-2007, 03:18 PM
...It's too bad the team has so little disregard for the role of the media...Actually, I think they have a lot of disregard.

Dan Mega
04-06-2007, 03:23 PM
So what else do you do in your free time? Pull the wings off butterflies?

ZING!

And to second Nellie Fox, why SHOULD the Sox give any disregard to the media? Perhaps if the media gave any regard to the Sox they would get some in return eh?

soxinem1
04-06-2007, 03:32 PM
:violin:

Those guys are GETTING PAID to watch ballgames and write about them. I guarantee that 99 percent of the people reading your driveling whines on behalf of the Sox media corps are forced to work in conditions 1000-times less favorable than what these pampered jerks must deal with.

I couldn't agree more. If the beat reporters would write the facts and keep their personal opinions or 'sources' to themselves, I would care more for what they have to say.

No sportswriter in Chicago is a former MLB player, manager, or coach, so they need say nothing, ala Moronitti, about who is doing what right, wrong, etc. Too often their opinions (case in point, that stupid article a few years ago claiming the White Sox were fleeced in the Konerko/Cameron trade) are manipulated as facts.

Thus, sportswriting is about as quality as the National Enquirer, Star, Globe, and CNN broadcast. To say SpongeBob is better writing than most beat writers is an understatement.

What they need to do is stick to reporting the line score and the real facts.

itsnotrequired
04-06-2007, 03:44 PM
I couldn't agree more. If the beat reporters would write the facts and keep their personal opinions or 'sources' to themselves, I would care more for what they have to say.

No sportswriter in Chicago is a former MLB player, manager, or coach, so they need say nothing, ala Moronitti, about who is doing what right, wrong, etc. Too often their opinions (case in point, that stupid article a few years ago claiming the White Sox were fleeced in the Konerko/Cameron trade) are manipulated as facts.

Thus, sportswriting is about as quality as the National Enquirer, Star, Globe, and CNN broadcast. To say SpongeBob is better writing than most beat writers is an understatement.

What they need to do is stick to reporting the line score and the real facts.

I don't think the beat writers (i.e. Scott Merkin) are the ones complaining. It seem like it is the "big wig" reporters that only show up for a few games are the ones complaining.

Oblong
04-06-2007, 03:48 PM
I haven't read through all of this so I hope I"m not repeating what someone else said.

One thing that's always made me laugh about sports writers is the fact that with the explosion of available media, like the internet and cable, how many of them now multitask? It seems any columnist worth his weight has to have a radio show and be on ESPN at least twice a week. In addition to their "day" job. If they can pull that off then how hard can it really be?

Frater Perdurabo
04-06-2007, 03:58 PM
I haven't read through all of this so I hope I"m not repeating what someone else said.

One thing that's always made me laugh about sports writers is the fact that with the explosion of available media, like the internet and cable, how many of them now multitask? It seems any columnist worth his weight has to have a radio show and be on ESPN at least twice a week. In addition to their "day" job. If they can pull that off then how hard can it really be?

You're really talking about the columnists, and you're exactly right. They don't do anything much more than what we do here on WSI, or what we argue about with friends at a bar or in front of the TV. They just get paid to do it, and in exchange they are expected to use the English language properly most of the time.

The level of insight from many posters on WSI vastly exceeds the insight of virtually every single Chicago and DFW sports writer/columnist.

BainesHOF
04-06-2007, 04:42 PM
And aren't you the same guy who also claims anyone with internet access ought not subscribe to newspapers?

No.

Thankfully you're not a reporter of any kind. If you're going to criticize, you should at least get your facts straight.

UserNameBlank
04-06-2007, 04:43 PM
As long as the announcers and scorers can have the best view that is all that matters. Why do the local sports writers need a good view? They are watching the game for free for god's sake! Isn't that enough already? I could write an article on the game just by watching it on tv, so why can't they?

The notes about announcers being move in the NBA is real ****ty though. That game is so fast, there are so many uncalled plays and blown calls without everything being replayed, and much of the action is hard enough to follow as it is. Those guys need to be near the action on the floor to call a good game.

BainesHOF
04-06-2007, 04:44 PM
Actually, I think they have a lot of disregard.

You are correct, sir! You do ol' No. 2 proud.

PaleHoseGeorge
04-06-2007, 05:07 PM
No.

Thankfully you're not a reporter of any kind. If you're going to criticize, you should at least get your facts straight.

LOL! You thought I was holding myself up as some sort of reporter? That's rich...

As for criticizing your opinion on this matter, you've left yourself wide open to far more than the smirks I've directed your way.
:cool:

MarySwiss
04-06-2007, 05:14 PM
Haven't finished reading the whole thread yet, so someone might have already have mentioned this, but the day those clowns stop moaning over every stupid thing is the day we need to have someone check their basements and garages for large seed pods!

JB98
04-06-2007, 05:14 PM
If they don't like the new press box, they should consider other lines of work. If a 6 figure salary to write/talk about Major League Baseball is not good because they are not close enough to the game, nobody is making them stay.

My company is hiring in our call center. They'd be right in the center of the action, smack dab on the floor.

Six-figure salaries? There aren't too many rank-and-file sportswriters who make six figures. I'm an assistant sports editor, and I make $36,000 a year.

MarySwiss
04-06-2007, 05:29 PM
Wow. Just wow. And here I thought sports writers were bitter.

LOL....Who's bitter?????? Read the title of the thread!

I HIGHLY DOUBT anyone posting here who isnt a writer (and some who are) is bitter about this.

EXACTLY! As some know, I'm a writer by trade--although not making six figures!--and not bitter in the least, just amused. I think it is highly entertaining that these guys think they rate so highly. After all, not one of them is irreplaceable. If they all got sucked into a UFO tomorrow, there'd be other people writing their columns within hours.

doublem23
04-06-2007, 05:30 PM
well...not the yankees, as they are LEAVING yankee stadium next year

I'm sure they were originally going to have a pressbox in the traditional area.

What King George wants, King George gets.

http://www.jaimecervantes.netfirms.com/fotos/georgesteinbrenner.JPG

Money money money! Money!

P.S., I can't believe a thread about whiny mediots is getting so much attention. Next year, the Sox should just stick 'em all in a van outside the park.

NoNeckEra
04-06-2007, 05:41 PM
I don't think the beat writers (i.e. Scott Merkin) are the ones complaining. It seem like it is the "big wig" reporters that only show up for a few games are the ones complaining.

I totally agree.
Beat writers actually have a job to do at the game and the pressure of a deadline. They are in some cases, even too busy to take advantage of the free snacks, etc.

It's the other 80% of the "press corps" that goes at their convenience when it's the "thing to do" and the team in question is a "hot ticket".

Where are all these freeloaders in the dog days of August when a team is long out of the pennant race?

But in life it's always people who get free stuff who always seem to complain the most. Airline employees who fly free, as an example, expect to get on every flight they standby for and want upgrades to first class and bitch when they don't get them(not every airline employee, obviously, but a good portion).

Combine "reduced perks" with the cynical nature of a media person and you have the recipe for whining.

You think it's bad reading and hearing this media types, and hearing stories second hand, you should hang around with these guys day in and day out. It's not a real humanitarian group.

BTW, this is one of the best threads I've read here in a long time.

JB98
04-06-2007, 05:57 PM
I totally agree.
Beat writers actually have a job to do at the game and the pressure of a deadline. They are in some cases, even too busy to take advantage of the free snacks, etc.

It's the other 80% of the "press corps" that goes at their convenience when it's the "thing to do" and the team in question is a "hot ticket".

Where are all these freeloaders in the dog days of August when a team is long out of the pennant race?

But in life it's always people who get free stuff who always seem to complain the most. Airline employees who fly free, as an example, expect to get on every flight they standby for and want upgrades to first class and bitch when they don't get them(not every airline employee, obviously, but a good portion).

Combine "reduced perks" with the cynical nature of a media person and you have the recipe for whining.

You think it's bad reading and hearing this media types, and hearing stories second hand, you should hang around with these guys day in and day out. It's not a real humanitarian group.

BTW, this is one of the best threads I've read here in a long time.

As a member of the media, one thing I've vowed to never do is write a column about how difficult my job is. No one wants to hear it.

Sportswriting is a job just like any other job. It has its good points. It has its bad points. My personal reaction to the Cubune article today: Who cares?

SoxandtheCityTee
04-06-2007, 08:29 PM
As a member of the media, one thing I've vowed to never do is write a column about how difficult my job is. No one wants to hear it.

A wise decision, really, pretty much whatever one's job is.

Sports beat writers work hard, fans paying for the seats work hard, etc. What's the point? The business decided to sell prime seats to its prime customers instead of continuing to follow a park-usage model that originated many decades ago when the media covered the game, and fans used the media, very differently from the way we live now. Any sports journalist who thinks that being moved down the line ranks among the biggest challenges facing the media industry has already missed the real story.

I visited the old pressbox once with a friend who was a sports columnist. He also took me to the room where they had their buffet dinner. It all looked pretty sweet to me and we joked that most people thought he was "lucky" to have such an "easy" job -- but I knew how hard he worked, how little he made, how much he was away from his family. Still, he'd never whine about a thing like this.

And Tebman, I LOVE "You Know Me, Al." What a great, hilarious baseball book.

TomBradley72
04-06-2007, 08:44 PM
Maybe this is a bit of a hijack...but I see almost ZERO unique perspective being delivered by ANY of the Chicago beat writers...open up a Tribune, a Sun Times and a Daily Herald the day after a game. The game stories are almost identical. The "notes" are almost identical. You don't needs seats behind home plate to deliver generic coverage. The diehard posters on this web site bring more knowledge and insight into the White Sox (and most of us make our living completely separate from MLB and the media) than Mark Gonzalez, Joe Cowley, Dave Van Dyck, etc.

I gain more insight from reading the official press notes the ballclub releases before each game.

Brian26
04-06-2007, 08:49 PM
Second of all, it'd be nice if reporters could actually see what they're supposed to be reporting. It's too bad the team has so little regard for the role of the media in communicating information about what took place on the field to fans.

I saw the article in the paper this morning and thought it was a joke.

The reporters and beat writers don't need to be positioned directly behind home plate (in some of the best seats in the house) to do their jobs. None of the reporters are watching the outfield positioning, the break on Jenks' curveball or are tracking pitches. They can still do their jobs just as effectively as before while seated down the first baseline. The article in the paper this morning expressed complaints from reporters as if they were fans. The seats down the first baseline have no effect on how they write their stories on their laptops and isn't going to hamper them from getting quotes in the clubhouse after the game.

Good for the Sox for exploring other avenues of revenue, and good for the fans who will be able to sit in those new boxes.

As for the argument that the beat writers somehow promote the game, never forget the classic Ed Lynch line. Without the game, the beat writers wouldn't have jobs.

Viva Medias B's
04-06-2007, 08:49 PM
So the pompous media is upset over being relocated...:rolleyes:

JB98
04-06-2007, 08:51 PM
Maybe this is a bit of a hijack...but I see almost ZERO unique perspective being delivered by ANY of the Chicago beat writers...open up a Tribune, a Sun Times and a Daily Herald the day after a game. The game stories are almost identical. The "notes" are almost identical. You don't needs seats behind home plate to deliver generic coverage. The diehard posters on this web site bring more knowledge and insight into the White Sox (and most of us make our living completely separate from MLB and the media) than Mark Gonzalez, Joe Cowley, Dave Van Dyck, etc.

I gain more insight from reading the official press notes the ballclub releases before each game.

People are writing their stories off the same press conferences. That's why there is so much sameness. In the case of night games, the beat writers are under deadline pressure. They don't really have time to go off on their own and try to come up with a unique angle.

I'm neither defending nor indicting, just trying to inform that things are a certain way for a reason.

Brian26
04-06-2007, 08:55 PM
LOL....Who's bitter?????? Read the title of the thread!

I HIGHLY DOUBT anyone posting here who isnt a writer (and some who are) is bitter about this.

This might be the first thread in the history of WSI where basically everyone agrees with each other.

salty99
04-06-2007, 08:57 PM
This might be the first thread in the history of WSI where basically everyone agrees with each other.


Well I for one Disagree with the above statement!

Brian26
04-06-2007, 09:00 PM
Well I for one Disagree with the above statement!

You're a troublemaker, Salty.

salty99
04-06-2007, 09:02 PM
You're a troublemaker, Salty.

Shockingly I also disagree with this statement!

Jerry_Manuel
04-06-2007, 09:06 PM
If the White Sox pull this off I can see the Yankees and Red Sox doing the same thing making the press box high price seating

Where the hell would the Red Sox move them to?

IowaSox1971
04-07-2007, 02:32 AM
This type of thing has happened in Chicago before. About 15 or 20 years ago, the Cubs moved their press box much higher than it had been previously, so it was basically at or near the top of the upper deck behind home plate. At the time of the change, the Chicago writers and Harry Caray were critical of the move, but the media adjusted to it.

If the beat writers are given little TVs to help them judge pitches, I'm not sure why they or anybody else would have reason to complain. It's not like they are in the outfield, behind the foul pole.

I agree that the media's game stories and notes stories have become stale. Everybody seems to write the same thing, and the same players seem to be quoted in each paper. Do the beat writers have a secret no-scoop agreement with one another? It makes you wonder.

Steelrod
04-07-2007, 02:45 AM
Where the hell would the Red Sox move them to?
Yankee Stadium

TomBradley72
04-07-2007, 08:22 AM
People are writing their stories off the same press conferences. That's why there is so much sameness. In the case of night games, the beat writers are under deadline pressure. They don't really have time to go off on their own and try to come up with a unique angle.

I'm neither defending nor indicting, just trying to inform that things are a certain way for a reason.

I think that's a lame excuse. A writer's brain, experience, intelligence, creativity, etc...provides all the opportunity for unique angles, perspective, etc.

Regardless of deadline pressure...just about every good job on the planet involves some sort of "deadline pressure".

skobabe8
04-07-2007, 08:23 AM
The more I read this thread, the more I like this move by the Sox.

Steelrod
04-07-2007, 08:25 AM
Me Too!
Yesterday's Tribune had someone reporting the game from his cubicle at Tribune Tower. I guess he doesn't even need to come to the park,
I assume he doesn't need or have credentials!

Jurr
04-07-2007, 08:43 AM
Me Too!
Yesterday's Tribune had someone reporting the game from his cubicle at Tribune Tower. I guess he doesn't even need to come to the park,
I assume he doesn't need or have credentials!
Yeah, and he actually gives descriptions of the game instead of trying to spin what happened into a blanket statement about the entire year. Give that guy a promotion!!!!

itsnotrequired
04-07-2007, 08:45 AM
Yeah, and he actually gives descriptions of the game instead of trying to spin what happened into a blanket statement about the entire year. Give that guy a promotion!!!!

"From the Cubicle" is one of the best features on the Tribune website.

hose
04-07-2007, 08:56 AM
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:yM7eIB0TGPUQCM:http://www.adweek.com/adweek/photos/2006/09/12_CR_News_GEICO.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.adweek.com/adweek/photos/2006/09/12_CR_News_GEICO.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.adweek.com/aw/creative/article_display.jsp%3Fvnu_content_id%3D1003121415&h=140&w=180&sz=9&hl=en&start=2&tbnid=yM7eIB0TGPUQCM:&tbnh=79&tbnw=101&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dgeico%2Bcavemen%26gbv%3D2%26svnum%3D1 0%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG)

Here is the real reason for the "writers" being pissed off.

MUsoxfan
04-07-2007, 07:13 PM
Today I sat in the Diamond Suite that's immediately next to the new press box. They have nothing to complain about. It seems like they have more room and a fine view. Rick Morrissey was surfing the internet the whole time along with most of the others. It really sucks having to watch a game 10ft beyond 1st base and get paid to do it

JB98
04-07-2007, 07:14 PM
I think that's a lame excuse. A writer's brain, experience, intelligence, creativity, etc...provides all the opportunity for unique angles, perspective, etc.

Regardless of deadline pressure...just about every good job on the planet involves some sort of "deadline pressure".

There's 162 games in a baseball season. You can't be creative every day.

JB98
04-07-2007, 07:15 PM
Today I sat in the Diamond Suite that's immediately next to the new press box. They have nothing to complain about. It seems like they have more room and a fine view. Rick Morrissey was surfing the internet the whole time along with most of the others. It really sucks having to watch a game 10ft beyond 1st base and get paid to do it

You'd be surprised. Sportswriting sucks. If I ever have a son, I'll tell him not to follow in my footsteps.

Frontman
04-07-2007, 07:56 PM
Ok, let me get this straight.

Why should the press feel they should be able to see balls and strikes better than paying fans? (They still do, as the nosebleed corners of US Cellular you can't see the actual strike zone. Granted, for 15 buck tickets, they still can be fun seats to sit in and enjoy the game.)

This type of "How dare they diminish us," attitude is why many can't stand beat reporters. Some do a good job, others act as if they're above the team, players, fans, and oh yeah, human's in general.

Granted, the article didn't cover where Mariotti's press box is, but here's the exclusive:

5288

Now, the view of the field is what I would consider obstructed, but hey, he can't tell a ball from a strike anyway.

:wink:

JB98
04-07-2007, 07:58 PM
Ok, let me get this straight.

Why should the press feel they should be able to see balls and strikes better than paying fans? (They still do, as the nosebleed corners of US Cellular you can't see the actual strike zone. Granted, for 15 buck tickets, they still can be fun seats to sit in and enjoy the game.)

This type of "How dare they diminish us," attitude is why many can't stand beat reporters. Some do a good job, others act as if they're above the team, players, fans, and oh yeah, human's in general.

Granted, the article didn't cover where Mariotti's press box is, but here's the exclusive:

5288

Now, the view of the field is what I would consider obstructed, but hey, he can't tell a ball from a strike anyway.

:wink:

As someone else pointed out, the beat reporters are not a problem. Most of those guys are pretty cool about things. It's the big-shot columnists who have the sense of entitlement.

SoxandtheCityTee
04-07-2007, 07:59 PM
Today I sat in the Diamond Suite that's immediately next to the new press box. They have nothing to complain about. It seems like they have more room and a fine view. Rick Morrissey was surfing the internet the whole time along with most of the others. It really sucks having to watch a game 10ft beyond 1st base and get paid to do it

We were in the club level, last row, right below them. They were warm, at least! Looked very cosy in there, and their view was our view: great.

Frontman
04-07-2007, 08:02 PM
As someone else pointed out, the beat reporters are not a problem. Most of those guys are pretty cool about things. It's the big-shot columnists who have the sense of entitlement.

You know, I meant the hotshots, not the beat guys. My bad.

I still think Marriotti belongs in the can.....

JB98
04-07-2007, 08:03 PM
You know, I meant the hotshots, not the beat guys. My bad.

I still think Marriotti belongs in the can.....

From what I hear, Mariotti is what you think he is.

MUsoxfan
04-07-2007, 08:26 PM
We were in the club level, last row, right below them. They were warm, at least! Looked very cosy in there, and their view was our view: great.


Were you the dude with the green sign that said "Crede is my Sweetie"?:redneck

TomBradley72
04-07-2007, 08:48 PM
There's 162 games in a baseball season. You can't be creative every day.

If it's YOUR PROFESSION you should be.

Vernam
04-07-2007, 08:52 PM
"From the Cubicle" is one of the best features on the Tribune website.Although I still think it should be "Soxicle." :angry: :redneck

Vernam

JB98
04-07-2007, 09:15 PM
If it's YOUR PROFESSION you should be.

God knows you've never had a bad day at work. Look, if you want to lecture me, I'll just add you to my ignore list.

Frontman
04-07-2007, 10:35 PM
If it's YOUR PROFESSION you should be.

Whoa, easy there. No reason to be nasty. Everyone can have off days at their gig, sportswriters included.

JB, thanks for insight on the press boxes.

JB98
04-07-2007, 10:46 PM
Whoa, easy there. No reason to be nasty. Everyone can have off days at their gig, sportswriters included.

JB, thanks for insight on the press boxes.

Thanks for having my back.

The main thing I hope people understand is sportswriting is not a "dream job." It's a job, just like any other. A lot of days, I don't like my job AT ALL. Sometimes, it's cool, but it's not necessarily better than what any of you do for a living.

I live paycheck to paycheck, just like many others here do, I'm sure. I'm not rich. My bosses are *******s. I don't get the respect I deserve, and some days, I don't feel like doing anymore than what is required of me. So sue me if I don't bring the proper "creativity" to my profession every day. Sometimes, you just do what's routine and what's required, and at the end of the day, you go home to things you'd rather be doing.

That said, I agree with the original premise of the thread. The media members crying about the press box move are being ridiculous. It's not preventing them from doing their jobs effectively in any way, shape or fashion. Some of the big shots at the bigger papers are just like that.

champagne030
04-07-2007, 11:20 PM
Thanks for having my back.

The main thing I hope people understand is sportswriting is not a "dream job." It's a job, just like any other. A lot of days, I don't like my job AT ALL. Sometimes, it's cool, but it's not necessarily better than what any of you do for a living.

I live paycheck to paycheck, just like many others here do, I'm sure. I'm not rich. My bosses are *******s. I don't get the respect I deserve, and some days, I don't feel like doing anymore than what is required of me. So sue me if I don't bring the proper "creativity" to my profession every day. Sometimes, you just do what's routine and what's required, and at the end of the day, you go home to things you'd rather be doing.

That said, I agree with the original premise of the thread. The media members crying about the press box move are being ridiculous. It's not preventing them from doing their jobs effectively in any way, shape or fashion. Some of the big shots at the bigger papers are just like that.

:thumbsup:

Yep, it's the few that give a bad name to the majority.......

soxruleEP
04-07-2007, 11:31 PM
I think that's a lame excuse. A writer's brain, experience, intelligence, creativity, etc...provides all the opportunity for unique angles, perspective, etc.

Regardless of deadline pressure...just about every good job on the planet involves some sort of "deadline pressure".

While writing is not difficult in the same sense as physical labor or dangerous public service jobs, it is very hard work. And deadline pressure as a writer is very different from deadline pressure in other work.

I've no idea what TomB's job is, but I'm willing to bet it doesn't involve coming up with a set number of words every day that highlight a narrative, give a sense of the mood surrounding that narrative, and place that narrative in a larger context. That is difficult work that must often be completed in a short period of time.

That said, Teddy Greenstein is an idiot to have poked this hornet's nest. As we can see, nobody--including, for the most part, the other writers on this site--gives a rat's ass about the reporter's seats being moved.

JB98
04-07-2007, 11:42 PM
While writing is not difficult in the same sense as physical labor or dangerous public service jobs, it is very hard work. And deadline pressure as a writer is very different from deadline pressure in other work.

I've no idea what TomB's job is, but I'm willing to bet it doesn't involve coming up with a set number of words every day that highlight a narrative, give a sense of the mood surrounding that narrative, and place that narrative in a larger context. That is difficult work that must often be completed in a short period of time.

That said, Teddy Greenstein is an idiot to have poked this hornet's nest. As we can see, nobody--including, for the most part, the other writer's on this site--gives a rat's ass about the reporter's seats being moved.

I've covered high school baseball games standing out behind the ****ing outfield fence before. If you can see the action, you can cover the game.

Frontman
04-08-2007, 07:18 AM
Well, we all have workload pressures, from writers, to mail carriers, to just about any job. But I'm sure we all agree that frontline soldiers, ER doctors, cops, firemen, and others were way, way more pressure with life and death decisions on a daily basis over a writer's (or a mail carrier's) deadline.

How about raising a glass to our men and women who suit up everyday to protect and save lives; and agree on that?

:gulp:

TomBradley72
04-08-2007, 11:22 AM
God knows you've never had a bad day at work. Look, if you want to lecture me, I'll just add you to my ignore list.

Sorry..did not mean to lecture...and I hadn't picked up on the fact that you were a member of the media. Of course we all have our off days...my original post that started this was about how generic the coverage was across the main daily papers...I've lived here my whole life....and I used to read multiple sports sections when I had the chance because they each brought a difference perspective to the game...I don't see that anymore.

TomBradley72
04-08-2007, 01:11 PM
Interesting quote from P. Rogers in today's Tribune:

"When the White Sox say the new club seats behind home plate, located in the old press box, will generate $4 to 5 million per year, don't they overlook the fact that people sitting there already were coming to the ballpark and sitting in expensive seats?"

I'm pretty sure all of the really "high end" premium seating is sold out...I'm not aware of any other seats that go for a few hundred a game like the new Home Plate Club seats he's referring to (besides the Scout Seats..which are sold out for the next several years)....if you're trying to grow your revenue and a certain "product line" is at capacity...you try to build more capacity (ie. add high end/premium seats)...it's a pretty straight forward business move.

dickallen15
04-08-2007, 04:19 PM
Interesting quote from P. Rogers in today's Tribune:

"When the White Sox say the new club seats behind home plate, located in the old press box, will generate $4 to 5 million per year, don't they overlook the fact that people sitting there already were coming to the ballpark and sitting in expensive seats?"

I'm pretty sure all of the really "high end" premium seating is sold out...I'm not aware of any other seats that go for a few hundred a game like the new Home Plate Club seats he's referring to (besides the Scout Seats..which are sold out for the next several years)....if you're trying to grow your revenue and a certain "product line" is at capacity...you try to build more capacity (ie. add high end/premium seats)...it's a pretty straight forward business move.
I read the article and its getting pretty funny with these writers. They really seem to think the only reason the White Sox put this area in is to spite them. If its so important for them to be there to cover the game, maybe the Tribune Co. can purchase them some Jim Beam clubs seats.

Viva Medias B's
04-08-2007, 06:19 PM
I read the article and its getting pretty funny with these writers. They really seem to think the only reason the White Sox put this area in is to spite them. If its so important for them to be there to cover the game, maybe the Tribune Co. can purchase them some Jim Beam clubs seats.

Well, that may not necessarily be a bad thing considering how they have treated us over the years.

ilsox7
04-08-2007, 06:20 PM
I read the article and its getting pretty funny with these writers. They really seem to think the only reason the White Sox put this area in is to spite them. If its so important for them to be there to cover the game, maybe the Tribune Co. can purchase them some Jim Beam clubs seats.

The writers complaining about this sound as delusional as some Sox fans who think everyone is out to get us.

Steelrod
04-08-2007, 06:25 PM
Interesting quote from P. Rogers in today's Tribune:

"When the White Sox say the new club seats behind home plate, located in the old press box, will generate $4 to 5 million per year, don't they overlook the fact that people sitting there already were coming to the ballpark and sitting in expensive seats?"

I'm pretty sure all of the really "high end" premium seating is sold out...I'm not aware of any other seats that go for a few hundred a game like the new Home Plate Club seats he's referring to (besides the Scout Seats..which are sold out for the next several years)....if you're trying to grow your revenue and a certain "product line" is at capacity...you try to build more capacity (ie. add high end/premium seats)...it's a pretty straight forward business move.
Isn't this typical of reporters in this city!
Writing an article based totally upon opinion, without bothering to check the facts. The fact is that the Scout seats were sold on a five year committment, therefore precluding any of them from moving to Press Box seats. But if they were allowed to, it would still cost an additional $50-75 per ticket, per game. Sounds like revenue to me. And if I'm not mistaken, previous revenue derived from the press area was ZERO!!!!

bigfoot
04-08-2007, 07:34 PM
Isn't this typical of reporters in this city!
Writing an article based totally upon opinion, without bothering to check the facts. The fact is that the Scout seats were sold on a five year committment, therefore precluding any of them from moving to Press Box seats. But if they were allowed to, it would still cost an additional $50-75 per ticket, per game. Sounds like revenue to me. And if I'm not mistaken, previous revenue derived from the press area was ZERO!!!!


And there are times that it could be argued that the revenue derived was less than ZERO! :tongue: