Theo, Larry, Dan, Tony Mazz...Lions and Tigers and Bears! Oh My!
"Mark, where the hell ARE you on the Shaughnessy thing????"
That's the question that was posted on Media Log today with the soap opera "As the Sox Turns" in full swing. Boy, this is a doozy.
Red Sox Nation is in turmoil, looking for someone to blame. The Globe -- which appears to have gotten the big Theo signing story wrong in a manner reminiscent of the Herald's infamous "White Will Run" headline -- is under fire for its corporate connections to the Old Towne Team. If you check out the blogosphere, it looks like the posse has just about arrived at Dan Shaughnessy's house with the rope. (Now it's just looking for a tall tree nearby.) The Herald is now whacking the Globe/Times Co. around but good for its ownership stake in the Sox and the impact on its journalism and credibility. And meanwhile, the saga is dominating the front pages like it's 9/11 redux. The players are barking, the fans are howling and the TV trucks are lined up on Yawkey Way. All this over the fate of a baseball general manager.
Now, here's the answer to the post on Media Log. I am keeping my powder dry, watching, reporting and preparing to do a major piece on this in next week's (not this week's) dead tree version of the Phoenix. This drama raises a lot of meaty issues and has not played itself out yet. So despite the powerful temptation to weigh in online, I'm going to turn old media and defer to others for now. In fact, the reaction of the blogosphere is part of the story I will ultimately be writing.
For those trying to keep up with events, I would recommend Dan Kennedy's blog as a good clearinghouse.
P.S. -- Speaking of the Globe's sports section, did anyone notice today that in the box scores for the new NBA season, the paper is including both minutes and seconds under the minutes played stat line? So last night, Allen Iverson played 50 minutes and 26 seconds, according to the paper. Talk about too much information.
That's the question that was posted on Media Log today with the soap opera "As the Sox Turns" in full swing. Boy, this is a doozy.
Red Sox Nation is in turmoil, looking for someone to blame. The Globe -- which appears to have gotten the big Theo signing story wrong in a manner reminiscent of the Herald's infamous "White Will Run" headline -- is under fire for its corporate connections to the Old Towne Team. If you check out the blogosphere, it looks like the posse has just about arrived at Dan Shaughnessy's house with the rope. (Now it's just looking for a tall tree nearby.) The Herald is now whacking the Globe/Times Co. around but good for its ownership stake in the Sox and the impact on its journalism and credibility. And meanwhile, the saga is dominating the front pages like it's 9/11 redux. The players are barking, the fans are howling and the TV trucks are lined up on Yawkey Way. All this over the fate of a baseball general manager.
Now, here's the answer to the post on Media Log. I am keeping my powder dry, watching, reporting and preparing to do a major piece on this in next week's (not this week's) dead tree version of the Phoenix. This drama raises a lot of meaty issues and has not played itself out yet. So despite the powerful temptation to weigh in online, I'm going to turn old media and defer to others for now. In fact, the reaction of the blogosphere is part of the story I will ultimately be writing.
For those trying to keep up with events, I would recommend Dan Kennedy's blog as a good clearinghouse.
P.S. -- Speaking of the Globe's sports section, did anyone notice today that in the box scores for the new NBA season, the paper is including both minutes and seconds under the minutes played stat line? So last night, Allen Iverson played 50 minutes and 26 seconds, according to the paper. Talk about too much information.
6 Comments:
mark, mark, mark, mark, mark,
"The Globe -- which appears to have gotten the big Theo signing story wrong in a manner reminiscent of the Herald's infamous "White Will Run" headline..." If that doesn't belie bias and an unwillingness to single out the Globe when it screws up, I don't know what does. You clearly haven't regained your stomach for whacking your former colleagues yet.
You had to reach back a quarter century to find a comparable Herald faux pas when all you had to do was look at the banner hed on the Globe in Feb, 2001. "Love affair eyed in N.H. killing..." Can't remember a more recent story that required a page one correction like that. But then that would have required you to hold the fire to Marty Baron, et al's collective feet. Perhaps you should lay low until you have the stones required to be an even-keeled media critic. You ain't there yet.
Anon 6:46 : from my brain to your keyboard. Next we'll be hearing about the Herald's ownership of Channel 5. Why do I never see the kind of Journo 101 mistakes in the Herald that the Globe recounts daily on page 2? Wouldn't it be easier to just have editors with a rudimentary knowledge of local history, culture, politics and place names? Oh yes, I forgot, the Globe is now a "national" paper.
If you think including the seconds along with the minutes played in the Glob's NBA player stats is toom much information, you just don't know today's sports fan. For today's ever growing breed of sports stats junkies and their media suppliers, there is NEVER too much information.
"Why do I never see the kind of Journo 101 mistakes in the Herald that the Globe recounts daily on page 2?"
Probably because, like Fox News and the New York Post (among others), the Herald doesn't ever correct its mistakes. Guess they think if they don't acknowledge them they didn't really happen. And apparently that works with readers like you.
Think the Herald will tell us much about the libel suit it just lost to the Cape veterinarian?
Link Hah!
Anon: 12:16pm:
"Think the Herald will tell us much about the libel suit it just lost to the Cape veterinarian?"
Actually, the Herald did on Saturday. There goes that little theory.
Mark, I'm dissappointed in your "Theo Fiasco" piece.
I think you got it pretty much right, except for what I consider to be one glaring omission: You did not comment on or even mention the most controversial, and to me, the most objectionable, passage in Shaughnessy's Oct. 30 column, in which he passed on the anonymous smear against Epstein regarding the the nixed trade with Colorado.
That was a real Judy Miller moment in my opinion. I give Shaughnessy an F minus.
Post a Comment
<< Home