Royals revoke credentials - UPDATED AGAIN

Great point, dools, and the question is why. Is there too much media now? I'm seeing more and more overpoweringly great pieces of journalism have absolutely no impact.

Part of it also could be that 9/11 has dulled the public's senses to almost everything.

 

I think it's the media glut. Big events were becoming ethereal long before 9/11.

 

Jason, I'm nobody from nowhere so I know this doesn't make one bit of difference to you, but this is an undeserved cheap shot at someone whose input to this board has demonstrated over and over again that she is clearly a legitimate journalist. You can tell people you think they're wrong without belittling them. I have long respected your work even when I disagree with your opinions, but you have just lost a large measure of respect and credibility in my eyes. Not that it matters to you, but I felt I had to say it.

 

joe

i'm devastated. i insulted an anonymous message board poster and lost your respect.... i hope i recover.

have you read this board? have you read what people say about real people on this board?

and please someone show me where i suggested or stated that apse or nabj have the power to change what is happening in kansas city... i simply stated that it is my opinion that these alleged journalistic organizations should state an opinion on the matter. period. and in my opinion they should. i'm not comfortable with any organization indiscriminately picking and choosing who gets to ask questions. i don't pick my fights based on whether i'm going to win or based on whether the person looks like me, works with me or works in my particular field. if $h*t ain't right, i say $h*t ain't right. and this $h*t ain't right. and if "journalists" don't tell these cowardly organizations how they feel about this cowardly  crap, then it won't be two low-profile radio reporters the next time. 


and someone please explain to me how anonymous posts on a message board prove that someone is a legitimate "journalist." joe king, i hope that was a joke. or are you a print "journalist?"

 

So explain to me how what Luggie said contradicts that. She said those organizations don't have the power to change this ... and so do you. I don't think she's comfortable with the Royals picking and choosing who gets to ask the questions ... and neither are you. All she said that you didn't say is organizations like that generally don't respond to criticism unless somebody sues (or threatens to sue). So how does that deserve you taking a cheap shot at her journalistic credentials?

And by the way, I knew you'd be crushed. Try to make it through the day.

 

Me? I'm just a regular Joe trying to make a living. Then again, people are always telling me, ``You must be Joe King.'' So I must be.

 

Jason, when you've been on the board 2-3 years, like a lot of us have, many of us have exchanged information about ourselves. I think most of us have enough information about a lot of people on here that it's a safe assumption that this is a board largely made up of real journalists.

And the explanation of the benefits of anonymity has been made to you plenty of times, each time to deaf ears, so I'm not going down that path again. Hell, I can't trust that you're really Jason Whitlock.

 

I applaud Jason for ripping the Royals for this, but I also recognize that it is useless. The public doesn't care what happens to us. They want news. Period.

There's one way for something to get done. The BBWAA.

And, given their attitude toward electronic media, I'm not holding my breath.

 

I think this story has some traction in KC simply because the massively incompetent organization is too thin-skinned to handle questions about how massively incompetent it is and for fans it is the last straw.

I don't know how this story ends simply because there is no way out for the Royals. Had they backtracked in the first 72 hours, they could have simply passed it off as a misunderstanding and it would have disappeared after one news cycle. Now, how do they save face with any kind of explanation? If I'm advising the Royals, I tell them that the longer this goes on, the more they will get slammed by the media and the worse it makes them look in front of a dejected fan base -- so get it over with and hand back the credentials and let the story fade away.

 

This isn't over until....



WHITLOCK SAYS IT IS!

 

What a jerk.

When you're off not working the corners with Herm this year, ask your buddies in the Chiefs press corps how often the Pro Football Writers Assocation manages to get a coach to reveal more information or provide more access whenever they lodge a complaint. This just in: Never.

These folks want anything done, it's gonna take a lawsuit.

But you, the guy who has no trouble getting access thanks to your inexplicably high profile, continue to go ahead, pound your chest and call Lugnuts a coward for not doing enough to help out these Royals journos. Jerk.

 

Here I'll be, sorta agreeing with whitlock. Huh.

Here's why. I hate lawsuits. Hate lawyers. Hate what the threat of them does to who we are and how we live. I agree it'll probably take a lawsuit, but this "let the lawyers handle it" or "it's not real until it's a lawsuit" mindset is sickening. You think I'm kidding when I say you're gonna wake up in 30 years and live in a much shitter world because of lawsuits, but, then you already do. As a Christian, it's more or less my faith not - yes, not - to believe in courts of law (among believers for certain, though I tend to think it's instructive across the board) and not at all in a matter between a professional sports organization and journalists. This is about credentials, not federalism, and if you're with the two radio reporters, then, in the immortal words of Halle Berry in "X-Men: The Last Stand".... be with us.

If you believe in the cause - I'm not saying I do - write a letter. Call. Urge your columnists to opine about it. Send copies to the Royals. Fire up the local radio station affiliates that don't talk about a damn thing anyway half the time. Big reporters - do a story on it. Fly in to KC - you know you can. Get the scoop. Run the problem out into the light, expose it for whatever you think it is - which, to you, may be legitimate revocation - and bring it to the masses. It is.... it is it is it is....so blood-curdling to hear that word "lawsuit." No no no - do not let a court of law handle dispute you yourself can weigh in on. Don't cede power to faceless, mythical courtroom. If you believe in being a journalist, get to the bottom of matters that affect you and find out how you feel about it.

Whitlock, in my unaltered opinion, is a hypocrite's hypocrite who oughta be fighting this fight, considering he flipped some fan the bird while and called Drew Bledsoe gay while in a press box - a worse offense than anything that transpired here. His passion is properly placed, and while his apoplexy I deem another card in a deck of his fronts, it's an ace.

Follow it up with your jack, if your spirit moves you.