Wright Thompson says "Zip it!"

I can't believe murciélago doesn't believe I am Johnny Dangerously.

 

Totally unnecessary remark and a slap in the face of hundreds of legit journalists who don't work at massive papers.

Thanks for basically saying that community newspaper journalists aren't real journalists.

 

OK, I deserved that...

 

the beauty of this board is that we're all created equal, mizzoo. when you start playing the circulation card, you lose major points. those of us blessed to have worked at the "major" papers realize that good fortune often led us there -- not necessarily greater skills than others less fortunate. we all do the same job. where we toil is beside the point.

 

At least he owned up to the misstep, though.

I doubt he really feels that way deep down. Just a defense mechanism. Pushing buttons.

 

I apologize for the circulation comment, I stand by that the criticism of the story in question is coming out of nowhere...

 

I think the title of the thread may be somewhat misleading, but I disagree that the discussion of the story's merits is coming out of nowhere. Isn't this the journalism board? Aren't writers, with the simple act of having their stories published, offering them to the world for discussion and debate?

If you know Wright like you claim, Mizzou, then you'll know that he's obsessive when it comes to discussing whether certain pieces of writing work or not. I don't think he would be offended by 95 percent of the comments here, and I don't think you should be either.

 

I just get tired of the same group of young guys getting ripped for no reason...

 

No shit. Breaking stuff with a story like this can be a challenge for the hometown papers. The fact Wright came in, got the assistant coach turning Chatman in and watched Apollo 13 with the interim coach is a job well done. And I thought the driveway details were good and helped the story. Isn't that a good thing? Who cares if he's done it before?

 

M_W, I get that you aren't hating on Wright, you just think the scene of him actually sitting in Chatman's driveway is just funny. To hell with all the other pot-stirrers want to say. Either that or straighten them out "the Western District Way." LOL

PS - You have any idea when Season 4 of The Wire hits the DVD shelves?

 

Some people are just hot-button topics here Mizzou, and WT is one. But guess what? Jemele is another. I agree that there are far too many people obsessing about certain writers, and many of them are young and talented, and maybe some people feel they have to balance out the praise with criticism, even if they couldn't hold that writer's jock. I just don't think Wingman is one of those people, and I don't know a thing about him.

Let me ask you this: Don't you think the guys in Jacksonville get tired of you lobbing grenades their way? I don't know them either, but I've seen you rip them often.

I've had it out with people taking digs at Wright before on this board countless times because I have an enormous amount of respect for his work, and a lot of times the criticisms lobbed his way are petty. But I still think we need to be able to at least try to constructively discuss people's work here on the journalism board, or this place will deteriorate into one big inside joke. Some people clearly aren't mature enough to have those discussions. But here is what you can do: Say what you liked about the story. Take someone's argument apart using logic, not name-calling or circulation dick-measuring. You're an accomplished journalist. How do you think you would have handled this story? What did you like or what would you have done differently?

If we're all on the same team here, share some of that wisdom you've gained over the years. That would be just as valuable, and probably more beneficial, than sharing buzz on who is the next up-and-coming star in the business.

 

Part of the problem is that posters tend to fixate on a couple young writers. And, yeah, I think it's mostly out of veiled jealousy. I think many young reporters read these works, figure they could do just about the same thing if they had gotten the same breaks. Whether or not that's true, I dunno. But it's time some posters spend a little more time reading and dissecting the work of people they're not so envious of. Take apart a Joe Posnanski column, if you're really serious about being a critical reader. Not that Posnanski isn't terrific - he is - but try being "subjective" where your own self-esteem isn't involved.

Because here's the thing: Thompson's strengths (lyricism, poignancy, nice little details) and weaknesses (analysis paralysis, odd reporting decisions) have been clearly identified on this site quite a few times. His style is his style.