Posnanski and the Paterno book

No it isn't. And I mean that respectfully. People need catharsis. They need to be able to vent. Who hasn't thought about their own kids?-- I'm sorry, it may be a cliche, but that's what you think about when you hear a story like this.

Telling people to keep their mouths shut for fear of seeming overly outraged.... just doesn't seem natural.

God, if people are trying to outdo each other with adjectives of how horrible this is, for Heaven's sake, let 'em.

 

Can somebody point me to some of the columns that they believe represent columnist trying to out-outrage one another? This is something Joe Posnanski said, but to which pieces in particular does he refer? Otherwise, it's a bit of a strawman. I have read several columnists, and most of them did not flatly take that tack.

 

I'm interested in that as well. Lots of assertions of unfounded persecution here and elsewhere, but have yet to see an example of it myself.

 

Posnanski column makes him sound like the know-it-all in the back of the classroom. What makes him the authoritative source on media behavior? If he tried something else besides Paterno did so many good things, I might agree with him a bit more, but he pulled an amateurish trick. Right now, Posnanski is coming off as a guy who doesn't want to lose a big payday.

 

Stitch, I've been reading it more as a guy who has been on the ground in State College laying the foundation for the book he thought he was going to write, and he's pissed because the scandal has made that book all but irrelevant.

Unfortunately, it's pretty obvious Pos had become emotionally invested in the Paterno that existed just a couple weeks ago. Now, unless he wants to give back the cash, he has to write a book about Paterno's role in the cover-up and not about the millions of dollars the old man raised for that fucking library.

 

Posnanski better be careful. Whitlock is the self-anointed authoritative god of media behavior. I'm telling you, there was something in the water in Kansas City. Someone spilled the essence of know-it-all-ism into that city's water supply a few years back.

 

I saw a news report today that made me think of a jumping off point for the new book-- a way Pos could salvage many of the hundreds of interviews he's done and maybe even some of the writing. The problem is, it would not be Pos's style to write this way. It would have a certain thesis, and for a guy with the neutrality of a Swiss diplomat, it just wouldn't work.

 

Joe probably has a Season on the Brink level book in those notes.

Of course he should write it.

 

Does anyone think the fact the Posnanski and Forde went to the COMM 497G: Joe Paterno: Communications and the Media class and subsequently defend Paterno say anything about objectivity. Posnanski couldn't help himself when he got a chance to pontificate over those who are reporting a story he failed to break.

 

Put it this way: the inspirational, halo-setting tome is by the boards.

Play the ball as it lays, or move on.

 

Although Joe might be a "nice" guy, I actually find him to be one of the more critical journalists out there. He often mocks managers for boneheaded decisions and points out the weaknesses of players. He just does it using well thought out and reasoned arguments rather than over-the-top rip jobs or moralizing.

As for "Season on the Brink", it seems like a waste of Joe's talents for a just-the-facts recounting of this story with a few juicy anecdotes thrown in. A much more interesting--and challenging book--would be two examining two of the major and related themes in this story: 1.) How do sports--like religion and nationality--push people toward basic human instincts to tribalism and develop a cult-like devotion to a coach; 2.) How have we developed so many system where people justify their actions by just reporting up the chain of command rather than taking action (and how does the devotion to sports in this country amplify this devotion to organizations)?