It's official (now): Whitlock leaving the KC Star

First of all, I can't believe I am the only one standing up for Jason Whitlock who I don't even fucking know personally. Where are you people who know Jason? Willing to help Fredrick out here???

I got in this mess though and I will continue on.

Here is where I thoroughly disagree with you. You said: "You obviously never loved this business like some of us here have, because nobody could be the way you are if you did."
How dare you. From my posts you have read how I work 60 to 70 and get paid for 40. Look up the APSE awards under Fredrick and you will see I have won many just like the rest of you. Sorry, Fred. When I have received my awards I have laughed. Because I have been trained to be that pit bull who does not need praise or commendation to do my fucking job. This job is in my blood and in my family's blood.
Finally, you criticize me in a thread about Jason Whitlock. This is a thread about that issue, not me.

I am receiving no support in my belief that if what Jason says is true about Fannin, Jason deserves praise not scorn. People get upset at my disclaimers. As a good journalist I am trying to be fair. I know NOTHING of this case. IF what Jason said is true, then he should be commended for trying to out Fannin for a lousy culture at his former employer. Why you dislike me I have no idea.
Shit, I have caved to the system. I have given my 65 hours a week and received 40 hours payment in return. My kids have suffered (violin music). I have won my awards. What do you want from me?

And a final question: If the KC Star editor in fact did these things, why do you not consider Whitlock a hero? Just wondering?

 

Indeed. So how about we leave this thread's focus on Whitlock and take any Fredrick-centric discussion elsewhere?

 

Fair enough. And Fredrick, I'll even apologize for saying how you obviously don't love the business. Perhaps you do.

But your contrarian viewpoint about anything anybody is trying in an effort to save newspapers and jobs, or anything a current manager might be doing at any newspaper, is simply a bit much. You come off like a '60s hippie, and anybody who's part of The Establishment is wrong.

And this IS about this thread and Jason and the Star, and I'll tell you why: Jason is not a hero in this, and he doesn't deserve praise, at least not here; I'm not sure whether scorn is warranted. He bailed with a multimillion-dollar contract, then, with that in his pocket, trashed the place and people who supported him for years. To what end? Fix the culture of the place he left? You think that was his noble motive? Sorry. Even if he's right -- maybe there are no heroes here -- his motive was to get back at a few people.

Your pitbull mentality is a positive to a point, but when it manifests itself the way it does with you sometimes, it ceases to be one. It's basically an excuse to justify being rude.

And this takes it back to Jason as well: Toward the end of Friday's radio appearance, he basically said all of this was about media, freedom of the press and its importance to America's future.

No it wasn't. It was about hurtful internal specifics of a dysfunctional newspaper family that are no different than those of any other newspaper family, today, yesterday and 100 years ago. None of what he said is going to save the Kansas City Star, the American media or the world.

Again, people who say they are "pitbulls" or "brutally honest" or whatever are often doing so as an excuse to do or say things they shouldn't.

 

Hmmm, perhaps this should tell you something.

 

Yes, you make some good points.
However, I think we differ perhaps in that I think what Whitlock alleged is pretty important and perhaps different from most newspaper "families."
I also am not sure he received much support from that family. The way it sounds is he did his thing with limited interaction with anybody. Few emails of he telling people if he had a column and what it might be on.
Fair post by you, however.

 

The problem, Fredrick, with Whitlock's allegations is that there really is no way of proving it.

There are plenty of relationships that start or go on in newsrooms, and that, in itself is not necessarily wrong.

It would be almost impossible to prove such a thing were "the" reason, the only reason, that someone got promoted into a job or was believed to be able to do the job.

And, even if that is what happened, if the person was in the job for a while and doing OK in it, do you automatically remove them from it, anyway, because of how they got it?

People get jobs for bad/wrong/less-than-meritorious reasons all the time, so, unless the Star's whole sports staff is prepared to stand up and say, essentially, what Jason said or did, and present evidence of events or proof of a time line, AND the fact that it had a deleterious impact on the newsroom and reporters' work, then you/Jason probably have to find another reason to attack the ASE.

 

Thank you. Seriously.

 

Wow, what a thread. Didn't think I could agree with both parties, but I do. Whitlock speaks his mind about everything, sometimes to great results, and sometimes to not so great results. But given his history with other major employers, RE: ESPN, I'm not surprised he went out guns blazin. I am surprised he had that deal with Fox Sports lined up. Like others have said before, if I was his bosses, I would not join him for a beer now.

 

The real question is what his new bosses at Fox Sports think of his unprofessional on-air behavior ....

 

Yes, I'm sure the folks at News Corp are extremely stressed out about someone displaying egotistical, unprofessional on-air behavior. If only they had some kind of experience dealing, and then ignoring, that kind of thing.