Doyel looks up hate-mail authors and posts personal facts in reply column

[ballscribe]

What amazes me sometimes (and this isn't a specific commentary on this situation) is that sometimes people write as if only their family and close friends are going to read it. As if there are never any consequences for anything. As if life is one big, obscure blog.

It's the electronic age. Everything anybody writes will eventually get back to the person who is written about. Most athletes just slough it off, to their credit. I don't know if I could. But all it takes it one.

Just like the comment Milton Bradley made over the weekend about Bill Plashke writing the A's could never win if he was on the team. Now, I don't know when that column was written. But I do know that Bradley (even though he's from the L.A. area), was probably either in Oakland or on the road at the time, not in L.A. On a bigger or smaller scale, this happens all the time.

In our gun-toting, increasingly litigious society, it's no longer enough to hide behind the mantle of "fair comment." I hope we all keep this in mind every time we're of a mind to rip somebody – anybody. It only takes one nut job. Is the cheap shot really worth the momentary small laugh, the slight shiver of, "Oh, wasn't I just really clever there?" It probably isn't.

That said, Commissioner Selig is fair game.

 

[ogre]

I agree that this type of thing is potentially dangerous.

I also agree that this example isn't funny. The way Simers does it with "the last word" is much better. He responds to actual criticism with actual witicism.

Going down the path of looking up people and attacking them, not what they said, is dumb.

 

[shotglass]

Seems to me Loopy did the same thing for a while, if he doesn't still do it.

 

[Tom Petty]

The fact that every market has a website dedicated to sports-media criticism these days -- and that's to say nothing of Deadspin's work -- and several have websites dedicated to a "watch" on specific writers leads me to believe that there's something missing in the "Nobody cares about what we do" syllogism.

We like to think that, FB, and it's understandable. But the people you're talking about are the radical media-watchers. Look at the average guy in the street, and he really doesn't care about how we do our job. He just knows he doesn't like us or trust us much, and that lends itself to a disinterest in how we do what we do.

wow, and just how many groups of extremists actually got a shot in at kennedy in dallas?

you sure are important man. all we have to do is ask to figure out just how much. maybe you and j-dub can split a beer and a great dane after work tonight.

 

[shotglass]

(Just by means of explanation, that came from Tom's pants getting pulled down on another thread. Carry on. ;D)

 

[Chi City 81]

Between you and blondebomber, I have to say, I wish other trolls were as entertaining as you two, tom.

 

[Flying Headbutt]

All I'll say on it is this. Shot, I think you're wrong about how much the public cares. They may not be interested in the minutae of it all. But I think people care about the media more now than they ever have before. To think otherwise is just old fashioned.

 

[Columbo]

All I'll say on it is this. Shot, I think you're wrong about how much the public cares. They may not be interested in the minutae of it all. But I think people care about the media more now than they ever have before. To think otherwise is just old fashioned.

Of course they care.

To argue otherwise is antiquated.