Angels screening questions from reporters

As if their on-field performance wasn't bad enough, the Los Angeles Angels find new and exciting ways to express their ineptitude.

Their battle against reporters has escalated. Per The Athletic's Sam Blum, a noted Angels enemy for accurately noting the franchise sucks, questions are now being screened to see how negative they are in order to screen them to the proper representative.



This is also the same franchise that banned Sam from their radio show for being too critical or negative. The Angels are currently 17-14 and aiming to finish above .500 for the first time since 2015.

 

Cant any baseball writer go up to any uniformed personnel in the clubhouse and ask whatever they want?

 

It used to be that way, more or less.

Some teams have gone full NFL. No talking to staff members under any circumstances, not even pre-screened questions.

 

Good lord. I did a piece on costumed mascots. When I asked one club if they had someone who was the voice of their mascot, I got back a list of questions that were more thorough than the interview Qs I had with my managing editor when he was deciding whether or not to hire me. In my head, I kept hearing myself channeling Allen Iverson: "This is over a mascot. A mascot. A mascot..." I passed. Gnash, Stormy, and a handful of other PR interns posing as their mascots had a lot of fun with it. It taught me to avoid situations where it gets too transactional. Either they want to work with you or they don't whether it's their roster or their support people.

 

MLB GMs are carrying themselves like NFL GMs now, talking once or twice a year. Dudes. You're not that important.

 

Somewhere there is a video of a goalie being led off a charter by a media coordinator who was wearing dark sunglasses and a suit. The joke was he was clearing a path through (invisible) fans and protecting his guy. It was brought to my attention by a media wonk for another club. He said, "You laughed, but I think deep down he's not joking."