Doyel-Conlin feud?

Really? I thought it was ink smudges on the hands.

 

those internets are going to die away here any day now

 

Nah, that's actually No. 3.

It also was the No. 12 factor in me quitting my paper route 30-some years ago.

 

Maybe not, but no one as of yet has figured out how to make any real money on Internet news sites. CBS itself was much bigger 10 years ago and cut way back. Meanwhile, at papers we continue to give away our product for free on the Internet and make a nominal sum on ads compared to in the print edition and management wonders why circulation is down.

 

I read Doyel's column when this thread reached the third page. I didn't think it was worth bothering with, but I took a look.

Plain and simple, Doyel is a punk. I've read previously how some people here think he is great at breaking news. My thought is that it is Peter Vescey style - you write enough stuff and some of it is bound to be true.

Should Conlin have responded? My first thought was yes, because it is kind of outrageous that Doyel would say something like if he didn't have any first-hand knowledge. It's not a question of being a Phillies homer - if somebody is being unfair, a journalist would have more obligation than anyone to point this out.

But after reading the column, I think Conlin shouldn't have e-mailed the response to him. If it wasn't worth mentioning in Conlin's own column, it wasn't worth striking the keyboard. It's like calling the maniac talk radio shows where the idiot host controls the callers and screams and insults people after they have already dumped the caller.

 

250 is hardly huge for his height.

 

I think that that is pretty close to how I see it.

 

Unless I'm missing something, Doyel didn't claim that Howard is a cheater. He said that anybody who gets to 60 ever again is going to face questions about whether he's a cheater, and now we have a real-live test case in this guy who indeed had gotten bigger and better and a relatively short amount of time and is now chasing the magical 61.

I don't think that's irresponsible or outrageous.

 

FWIW.

I haven't read the column or Conlin's letter or Doyel's response, and I don't plan to. Frankly, I don't care that much. Actually, I've read some of Doyel's stuff and stopped because I found it far more annoying than interesting or entertaining.

My question is this: When was it exactly that people started considering arrogance the equivalent of entertainment? Most of the overbearing buffoons out there that people seem to think are funny or entertaining, I find grating, and for the most part, I don't watch or read them (that includes pretty much anything having to do with ESPN).

I suppose I'll be ripped as an old hack complaining about the young whippersnappers, but geez, shouting LOOK AT ME as loud as you can, or taking a contrary position to logic just to get people pissed off doesn't strike me as entertaining.

I just don't get it.

I'll hang up and listen.

 

I guess asking if someone still beats his wife isn't irresponsible or outrageous either.

 

depends on the answer

 

As I watch my point zoom over your head, I'll move along. Ryan Howard is certainly young enough to get big quick on a workout regimen. With today's advanced workout techniques that don't involve drugs, someone in their lates 30s or early 40s could as well. But again, I'll move along.