Jay Mariotti resigns

He gives a pretty well-reasoned "explanation", however true it is, on the radio. He kind of explains his comment about Web sites in Beijing, framing it partly as independent sites and partly as newspapers' web sites doing more than the Sun-Times.

http://podcast.670thescore.com/wscr/1291490.mp3

note: i only listened to the first 7, 8 minutes. so if he says something off-the-wall afterward, forget about "well-reasoned."

 

The thing is, it's just one guy leaving our business.

I have the bigger issue with people keeping on dissing ATM. It is a great show. Zillion times better than PTI, even if Jay at times can sound like the human equivalent of fingernails slashing the chalkboard.

 

The strange part about that whole interview was that Mully and Hanley, who both work at the Sun-Times, just sat there as Mariotti shoveled pailful of dirt after pailful of dirt on the Sun-Times' grave. Then again, they now have the nice morning-time slot, so maybe they're just keeping their mouths shut until they can get a nice buyout.

 

I understand Telander is on the air with Charley Steiner (XM) having a really good time with this.

 

Telander didn't even get to talk baseball because he just kept going on and on (it was good stuff). Compared him to an enema, and now there is this free feeling.

 

Wait, he resigned and then thought he could still use the newsroom as a backdrop for his ATH appearance?

 

The comments section on SunTimes.com (uh, oh, cross thread) are laugh-out-loud beautiful running the gamut from "He wasn't a Chicago guy like Royko" to "hope he leaves the country."

 

I've read elsewhere on this board that ATM is spectacular.

 

Touche, senor.

Around The Mouth?!?! Who would star in that one?

Anyhoo, ATH is a great show.

 

All the negative laundry has obviously been aired. I really liked Ben_Hecht's take. FWIW, I don't like him much, either.

But think about this ... we, as a whole, have blasted many for mailing it in, for taking every talking head gig and just going for the money, no matter how silly the project.

He resigned on his own accord. Until we hear otherwise, he wasn't pushed, he wasn't pressured and wasn't presented some sort of ultimatum. That shouldn't be slammed.

Dislike his writing all you want - that's a separate issue in this case and his unwillingness to take verbal bullets in the clubhouse has probably earned some venom. For those who haven't had positive experiences during personal interaction, you're righted to feel the way you do. But for every Jay Mariotti, think of those whom you feel have been mailing it in and aim some of this venom at them.

Carry on.

 

1. Mariotti suddenly figured out that newspapers are dying? Wow. He doesn't go into locker rooms and apparently he lives in a cave.
2. Mariotti found out that most of his colleagues at the Olympics were writing for their papers' web site? Uh, time difference, Jay, time difference. And even if there wasn't a time difference, most newspaper writers at an event like the Olympics would be expected to crank out tons of copy for the web. Columnists are excluded from that kind of grunt work.
3. With a contract through 2011 and more security than 0.01 percent of the people in the biz, Mariotti respected his employer so much that he resigned by faxing a letter? WTF? Be a man, make an appointment, do it face to face. Oh, right, he doesn't do locker rooms and he doesn't do meetings.
4. Maybe Mariotti has the juice to go "national" with his columns. But he seems to be to be a one-trick pony who writes about Chicago ...
5. Unless, of course, he decides he needs to write about the Democratic candidate for president. WTF?
6. I am not jealous of Jay Mariotti. I think he's a self-serving, egotistic, Napoloen-complexed ass of a human being. I don't like him, his writing or his rants. When you become a "star" you subject yourself to these kinds of comments. If you're a star and that bothers you, then just calm yourself by gazing at your bank statement.

 

And that venom applies to anyone who decides to leave the business because of the state of the newspaper industry?

Or just "egotistical stars" with "Napoleonic complexes" that "I just don't like"?