Chris Jones on Jason Whitlock

Read the column and wondered why did he pick the late great Ralph
Wiley? is it because Whitlock is black? Can't be any other reason.
Whitlock has his own style and there are those who like it. There are those who don't like a big black man telling people what he feels. They feel intimidated for whatever reason.
If reading a Whitlock commentary or blog sets you off, don't read it.
If reading a Whitlock commentary or block makes you feel good, read it.
Seems pretty simple to me.

 

And yet their point still rings true.

And Drip, sorry to see reading comprehension still eludes you.

 

One thing that disappointed me throughout the course of this thread is that someone fell back on the old SportsJournalists.com trope that people who write "9,000-word takeouts" somehow have less street cred than those who write gamers or city council meetings or, hell, A1 stories at the New York Times. I don't think that's an exact representation of what the person posted, but please indulge me for one moment, because I have some larger points to make here. If I have to move the goal post a tiny bit to do it, so be it. Because whether that trope was used in all its glory this time, it certainly is a recurring one here. I don't think anyone can argue that.

So I think what the post was kind of saying was that, Chris Jones may think there aren't enough pros, but he's just being myopic and thinking that there aren't "stars" because not everyone is becoming a 9,000-word takeout writer. See, even if Jones thought that, he's wrong.

Even in Jones' niche corner of print journalism, I think there are a lot of stars. Every time I get The New Yorker or Rolling Stone or The Atlantic or GQ or NYT Sunday Magazine or any number of publications, I find myself delighted by the storytelling, sometimes by someone I've never heard of. For example, I've heard of Ryan Lizza, but his New Yorker profile this week on Darrell Issa made me want to stand up and cheer. I've never heard of Kevin Roose. His GQ feature on Ted Haggard made me want to do the same.

I'm addicted to the written word. I am. And sometimes I feel like the kid from "American Beauty" - overwhelmed by how much beauty I'm surrounded by. It comes to my mailbox every single day. I can't even keep up with it. In fact, I get disappointed when the crowd here and at the other place seem to zero in on the same four or five writers all the time. I understand that part of it is that those guys have posted here and at The Sports Desk.org, but there are dozens - hundreds - of remarkable magazine and newspaper writers who wouldn't know this place from Momsbasement.blogspot.com.

P.S. I don't want this to trigger a round of bashing at The Sports Desk. It is no disrespect to Chris Jones to say that there are a lot of outstanding magazine writers.

 

OK - let me clarify. To a supposed master wordsmith like Jones words are his tools and the words he chooses have meaning.

Asian - let me ask you seriously - if this word was "black" instead of "Asian" I'm guessing many people would have been uncomfortable with that choice but Asian is OK? Me love you long time mentality?
Transvestite - Jones is saying that's a guy on Whitlock's lap and the inference is that Whitlock likes it - look at his smile! Whitlock like feminine dudes!
Hooker - not only does Whitlock like feminine dudes - he pays to have sex with them!

The words chosen are either sloppy or mean-spirited. Either way how does that make Jones a "pro"? Jones wasn't revealing any great truth about writing in that post - he was being an elitist jerkwad.

 

Can someone cut and paste the good stuff? I can't access that site at work?

 

Dude, you're seeing things nobody else is seeing, which - combined with the rest of your posts and the history some of us know around here - makes it hard not to conclude it's just a little too personal for you.

 

Let's get down to brass tacks. What was the post by Chris Jones about? Was it about Jeff Pearlman's recent antics? If so why drag Whitlock into it? Was it about advice to young writers? Then give advice don't go on a personal attack. No - the main point of the post was a personal attack on Jason Whitlock. Saying Ralph Wiley would be embarrassed by him, that Whitlock is soulless and that Whitlock likes Asian transvestite hookers. That's some mean-spirited shit right there. Why? For what?

I like to think that maybe it was some sort of revenge. Maybe Chris Jones passed out in Vegas and Whitlock drew a penis on his forehead. That would be fitting since Jones came off as a dickhead to me in that post.

Sorry if I'm reading this different from others but that's the way I read it.

 

Let me also say that I am biased. I don't always agree with Whitlock and sometimes his shtick gets old but I give him credit for getting his hands dirty. If there is an issue under discussion - Whitlock gives his opinion - and many times I find myself not only agreeing 100% with that opinion but coming away genuinely impressed by the way it was presented.

With Jones I often feel that I have to wade through the pretty ponies of Jones getting paid by the word to get to the meat of whatever he happens to be writing about.

Again - sorry if people disagree but that's how I see it.

 

Didn't care for the Jones piece. I feel it is shoddy to smear someone by saying the person "has no soul." Huh? That's such a broadside, dismissive yet undefinable, as to have no meaning. Other than to say something about the writer who hurls it.

As for Jones, I see the talent and all the hushed (or not) fawning. But this is a guy who goes around talking about punching, or wanting to punch, people in bars, right?

Spend serious time in a slammer for that thug behavior and then let us see him aggrandize that jaunty, rebel of the night swagger.

Punching people. Grow up.

 

Well said Dick. You have to go no farther than The New Yorker to find writers who knock it out of the park every time. Writers such as Atul Gawande, John Lee Anderson, Steve Coll and Lawrence Wright. While Anderson is putting his life on the line with every piece he does on real terrorists and drug dealers, Jones is celebrated by his minions for sitting in a tent with Ricky Williams smoking dope.

If Jones really wants to provide young writers good advise he should start by telling them to develop thick skin. In fact it really applies to any profession.

From what we've observed on SJ it's obviously a concept that was never taught to Jones.

 

From a cross-threading standpoint, it's funny you should mention Gawande.

I guess he is the perfect example of a journalist who is smarter than 99 percent of doctors.