Paging Lynn Hoppes ...

Lynn's job basically seems to be rewriting press releases (or not rewriting, as the case may be). Good work if you can get it.

 

I think we're all grown folks who can decide what weight to place on which posts on this thread.

Rather than shitting on one person's opinion, perhaps some folks who are aware of Hoppes journalistic credentials ought to weigh in.

We've had one, "People didn't hate him and I didn't see him plagiarize." So there's that.

I don't know the guy. But from what I have seen -- from well before Deadspin made a project of this (and good for them, BTW -- anything that pointed toward "total hack," "shameless self-promoter," or "Peter principle personified," would have a "ring of truth" to it, for me.

 

Zeke, you know how it's done here. Come on now.

 

If only truth were so straightforward.

It isn't, always. It often -- usually, in fact -- is a product of perception, point of view, thought, opinion and analysis of whatever information is at hand, and it all leads to a decision about what is true, at least as that person sees it.

You're picking nits if you need a definition of "a ring of truth."

Put it this way: If I were actually reporting and looking for a trail of sources because I was assigned to work on a profile about Hoppes, I would be doing my damnedest to reach carrie and talk to her about the subject matter. Why? Because she obviously knows/thinks something, and seems to have something of substance to contribute. Ring of truth, to use carrie's style. Journalists do this all the time.

This entire board would be nothing but innuendo if it consisted only of what was definitely, uncompromisingly true and known for certain. But that is not the case.

Ragu's biggest problem seemed to be what he saw as a character assassination undertaken with anonymity on carrie's part. He took issue with her description of him with the personally disparaging terms of "shady," "lazy" and "drama-motivated."

Well, when applied to the work of someone found to repeatedly lift from and/or not credit other sources, and to be not only involved in but directly responsible for some of the more questionable situations to arise in the business of late, all from a position of enviable status and authority for a media entity that is more powerful, far-reaching and prevalent than any other in the industry, I find those descriptions pretty apt and, well...true.

 

A few people mentioned Van McKenzie and it made me re-read the thread in his honor after he passed away. Reading a lot of the replies in this Hoppes thread has been depressing, but if you want a little pick me up, I urge you to read the McKenzie tribute thread and not feel a little bit better.

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/threads/36807/

 

That is a great thread. Thanks for digging it up.

 

The truth, in fact, is the truth. Perception, point of view, thought, opinion, and analysis are not truth. They are subjective interpretations.

What journalists do, I believe, is collect all those things and present them as perception, point of view, thought, opinion, and analysis. Not as truth.

 

Can't let this one bump off the front.

 

I've heard that Lynn is an excellent journalist -- and I've seen his work. And, yes, he has the reputation of being a self-promoter. But you have to do some self-promoting if you want to get ahead in this business.

I like his hair. One of the hirsute hall of famers. Good place to tuck a pencil.

 

I saw this on a humor site and thought it'd be fun to share. Y'all have a nice day.

http://www.cracked.com/article_17198_5-great-men-who-built-their-careers-plagiarism.html

 

Character assassination? Nope. Hoppes has and is committing character suicide.

 

OK, Lynn.