Jason Whitlock vs. Maria Taylor and Katie Nolan

Whitlock rips into Maria Taylor.

Maria Taylor Can Continue As 'The Unicorn' If She Avoids Nailing Herself To The Same Cross As Michelle Beadle And Jemele Hill

Along the way, he makes a throwaway observation about Katie Nolan.

Katie Nolan responds. Whitlock fires back.

Katie Nolan Represents The Elimination Of America’s Meritocracy And Exposes The Fraudulence Of Her Supporters

Inside baseball, but stuff like this fascinates me.

Apologies if this was a d_b, after reading Alma’s post I fear that it is.

 

I have no idea why I read that second story but it did leave me with a question: does he not know her name is Katie not Karen?

 

ESPN-->The Undefeated-->Fox Sports-->Keep Politics Out of Sports Coronabro

An oracle of career advice.

 

Sideline reporters are eye candy, everybody knows. It’s not a serious job, it’s entertainment. That’s what sport is, entertainment.
And It’s not just that nobody cares what Whitlock Says, it’s that the world is ducked up and he’s making an irrelevant point.
Oh, and Jemele Hill is the leader in club house in among a career out of being the victim. These women aren’t in the same league as Ms. Hill.

 

Dear Jason:

 

350-pound Uncle Ruckus is the wrongest person in the world to rage against "beauty privilege."

 

He could have used his considerable talent to put out interesting and insightful columns. Instead, he’s like a wrestler who has become his on-screen gimmick.

 

Whitlock, as I can testify from long ago personal experience, is one of the biggest attention whores/just plain whores, in sportswriting. He had some talent, back when GHW Bush and Clinton were battling, but that's long gone in the brain rot the cable hot take racket imposes on its participants.

 

he was good at the beginning but he just went too far

 

Reposting this here:

That column was cheap and mean and came dripping with thoughts Whitlock wanted an excuse to unleash for some time. That's why he dropped a line in the Maria Taylor column about it. He got what he was hoping for, too, in Nolan's reaction.

Full disclosure: I think Katie Nolan is funny, and I like her work. I think she'd probably do better in an Amy Schumer-esque universe than locked into ESPN, but I like her work. What she makes for it is her business.

Second full disclosure: I purposely don't follow her on Twitter because I don't even want to know. I do that with a few movie critics, too. My experience - and this is with friends who are FB and Twitter - is it completely convinces them to distort their leanings so as to gain traction in the audience. I have no idea whether Nolan does this. I don't want to know.

Whitlock will lose more people than he gains on that column because there's some nasty inside baseball there no one knows or cares about - who gives a shit about GQ profiles?, who gives a shit what some Fox executive thought when she was 26? - and because it's, just, mean, and it's going to seem like, on some level, somebody within ESPN is saying that.

The last two graphs are abjectly strange and wrong, too.

It’s laughable. Hill, Jones, Le Batard, Sharpe, Wright, Spain, Torre, Deitsch and all the rest fight to keep power in the hands of the white liberal executives who will sit in their glassed offices and determine outcomes that favor their puppets.

Hill, Jones, Le Batard and Co., are no different from Nolan. They don’t want to compete in a meritocracy.

Aside from perhaps one person in that group, all of those folks are winners in a meritocracy. Dan Le Batard? C'mon. He's a few things - but one of them is a great writer. Long has been. He's decent on the TV show, too. Don't agree with most of what he says, but he's pretty good. Jemele Hill...is in fact a journalist and does in fact know sports. Pablo Torre? I mean, he's excellent. Richard Deitsch strikes me as kind of a turd...but the guy gets good stuff from interviewees.

Whitlock does this/has always done this. Anybody who knows anything about journalism and reads the column will shake their head at the end of it.