My favorite female columnist brings the funk today....

Sweet Bass-Fishing Christ...

It's not every day you come across a post that A) veers so needlessly off topic, B) reinforces your negative stereotypes w/r/t football and some of those who play it and C) is almost diarrhea-inducing in its pointless crassness.

Sorry, had to throw it out there. And I so rarely speak negatively of others' posts. But lordy...

Anyhow, I enjoyed the column, felt it was very well written, and once again found myself wondering if Gary Barnett had the horns, pointed tail and goat hooves surgically removed shortly after birth (was he your coach, SWNAJ?).

And, clearly, I feel for Ms. Hill's trauma. And yet...

Only rarely...very rarely...does John Q. Reader care about the writer's own experiences and how they relate to the subject matter. Columnists, clearly, get more leeway, and some use it well.

But I think the impact here would have been greater had the focus either remained on Hnida OR had Hill not already erected a reputation built around "I". She's one of those columnists whom, when the first-person comes down the chute, you tend to glaze over. Why? We've heard a lot of "I" from her before, and sometimes that softens what could have been a very pointed message.

 

No, I'm not kidding you.

 

It's Not About You.

 

That's what I always say.

 

I have no interest in dissecting the work of Jemele Hill. There are enough Quincy’s on the board for that. I’ve met her on a number of occasions and she comes across like a decent person. I wish her well. I’m happy for her success.
What prompted this long-time reader to post is Jason Whitlock’s characterization of Katie Hnida and her story.
Last week I spent more than an hour interviewing Hnida. I work at the magazine that first reported her claim that she was raped by one of her Colorado teammates. Before I spoke with Hnida and before I read her book, I read everything I could on her time at Colorado and New Mexico. I spoke with colleagues who wrote about her and the CU scandal. I then interviewed her for more than an hour. There were no restrictions on questions, no publicist dictating terms or practicing dark arts. It is only my opinion:
I believe she is telling the truth.
Is Katie Hnida promoting a book? Absolutely. Does she have publicists and a big publishing company behind her? Yes. Did they call SI in the same manner they called Gingerbread and her paper? (I’m fairly certain I know who this is and greatly admire her work). No, I called them. Why? Because I thought readers would find her journey compelling, especially given our history with her. I was curious to see how candid and forthright she would be and I came away with the opinion that she was credible.
I have no interest in making this an anti-Whitlock rant. He’s very tight with one of my colleagues, a writer I respect greatly. And no matter what he writes in the future - including prose I will both agree and disagree with - I admire the chutzpah he showed in pulling the curtain behind his exit at ESPN. That was gutsy, even courageous.
But as he casts a disbelieving eye on Hnida and suggests she’s exaggerating her ordeal, I’d ask if he has interviewed her or read her book. I’d ask how familiar he is with her case and her background. This wasn’t date rape, at least not by Hnida’s claims. It was sexual assault. She went to watch a football game at a teammate’s home. She considered that teammate a trusted friend. She said there had never been a single hint of romance between them, nor was that something she would have been interested in with any of her teammates. She said she was a virgin when it happened. Knowing how underreported rape is on college campuses across this country, I admire that she came forward, and Hill for writing her column.
Katie Hnida’s story is old? Stale? If so, why did Jemele Hill see fit to write about it? Or the Associated Press? Or The Santa Fe New Mexican? Or People Magazine? Or CNN? Or NBC’s Today Show? Or Ronnie Turner of the Houston Chronicle? And the list goes on.
I’m not looking for a response from Jason here, nor am I looking to blast him. His posts add juice to this site, and I have fondness for provocateurs. But as someone who has interviewed Hnida and believes that she has not exaggerated her story, I did want to post. Thanks for the time.

 

Making a comment about the blog isn't jealousy. It's an opinion. I thought it was incredibly unprofessional and she should have known better. I've made a bad decision or two in my career, too, but even I know enough to hold myself to a professional standard any time I write for public consumption.

Same thing with using I so much in her columns. I don't mind it in the columns I've read, but I can see how some might think she overdoes it. I disagree with them, but it's a valid opinion.

And "this is a damn fine column" is not a fact. Facts are things that can be proven. It is an opinion. I like the column, too, but to say nobody could disagree with you on that is false.

Again, let's try actually reading what people have to say rather than assuming we know what's in their hearts and minds.

 

wow dude, do you do meth? the whole conspiracy thing <and the people making noise in your attic> is a little creepy.

 

If you say "it's what happens" infootball, you're defending it.

 

Hill has taken a lot of crap on the messageboard.
I find, I like her.
That's the third Page 2 column of hers I've read and its two more than any other Page 2 columnists I've read.

She finds intersting subjects.

 

I hereby propose a one-month moratorium on discussing Jemele Hill columns that only Moddy or Webby can break. This isn't a "Conscious of the Board" thing, it's just a idea. Let's stop breaking down every single one as though it were the Dead Sea Scrolls. Please. Just as an experiment. A month from now, we can pick it back up, and if people are so inclined, they can fire away again. But good lord, to do this every week just feels petty. Let's at least rotate our outrage and our praise. There are lots of writers to talk about out there. Just one man's opinion.

Richard Dietsch, nice post. Thanks for speaking up. Stick around, start some threads. Seriously. We need more quality writers speaking up around here. If you're already someone else, posting here under another name, then thank you for your contribution.

 

yes, instead of speaking freely, let's eliminate thoughts, posts and threads simply because that's what double down feels is best.

sometime thereafter, we will allow him to choose who lives or dies by a whim, let's say by eye and/or hair color.

 

DD: Made the same point earlier, and couldn't agree more. Let a body of work be established prior to
laying down any snap judgments . . . .