Turner fired Erin Andrews?

Just saw the photos. Gotta love her for letting the local paper shoot her in her sweats watching TV in the living room.

 

I don't understand the point of this. 'Erin Andrews is hot, so people think she's just fluff'....followed by nothing that actually refutes that?

 

It depends on the paper, but I don't think a male writer would get in hot water over saying Erin Andrews is hot. That's no different from saying Scarlett Johannson is hot. It's the truth, and everybody knows it.

What I found funny is the dumb blonde reference for someone who dyes her hair blonde.

Personally, I think EA is not very good at what she does, and I abhor the existence of sideline reporters in general, with the noted exception of Dr. Jerry Punch. That said, I also think it's unfair for the group on this particular board to be critiquing a story about a person generally panned here. We for the most part don't have much use for sideline reporters, but the viewing public clearly likes its eye candy, or the sideline reporters would be no more.

 

Why is it unfair to critique this story?

I think it was rather weak. Would have been better to present it as a Q&A or something.

 

"One of her on-the-job peeves is married athletes who ask her out."

Should it matter if they are married or not? Should a reporter - whether a female covering a male-played sport or a male covering a female-played sport - avoid dating those they cover?

 

It's annoying either way, but the married element heightens the weirdness...implies you'd go out with married guy.

 

Yup, you're being naive.

And it was married athletes asking her out, not just hockey players. That sentence came after the one mentioning that she dated an NHL player. Which leaves me wondering if it was before or after she covered the NHL.

If she dated somebody she was covering, that would be a fairly important piece of information. That and the fact that she's worried about being replaced by "the next young thing" makes me wonder a bit about Andrews. Not that the writer of the story bothers to adress any of that.

The lead points out that she is trying to overcome the perception that she got her job because she is hot. I'm not sure the story does a very good job disproving that perception. Maybe, oh, I don't know, something useful like a second source would have helped?

Not a particularly good story and no, a male writer definitely would not have gotten away with that lede.

And as far as the point about married athletes hitting on women, well, there's an absolute shock. Same thing with athletes hitting on attractive female reporters. I've met quite a few women who were reporters and I don't know one who hasn't been hit on.

 

Agreed, but you would think being hit on by any athlete she is covering should be a pet peeve. Then again, we're not sure if she was dating the NHL player while she was covering his team or not.

There is potential for some good stuff here, but the writer of this story never gets to it. The only thing worse than pure fluff is something like this, that barely touches on interesting issues, but glazes right over them in a sentence or two.

 

Not really disagreeing with you, but if that was actually a pet peeve, you'd have to get out of the business. Occupational hazard.

 

See, now that is the kind of comment I would have liked to see in the story. We all know it happens.

 

OK, that proves it: 21 is hot. Will I get in trouble for saying that?