Oklahoma State coach Gundy blasts Oklahoman columnist

[wickedwritah]

However, if we are going to go that route, we must make sure all of our "I's" are dotted and our "T's" are crossed so to speak so it is very clear that we are (a) not talking out of our ash, (b) not attacking athletes for the sake of trying to make a big splash and (c) not lazy ashes who are taking half-baked theories and running with them.

And many have said that she COULD have done a better job of working the corners this time.

But we keep having folks such as chilidog saying it's not our job to Pish people off.

It really makes me wonder if he's spent one day in a newsroom in his life.

 

[Joel_Goodsen]

Once again the point is being missed completely by many of the so-called defenders of Carlson/journalism.....

This kid may very well be a whimp, he may very well be a momma's boy and it is clearly our job as columnists and even beat reporters to point this out -- that this is the reason he was benched.....

However, if we are going to go that route, we must make sure all of our "I's" are dotted and our "T's" are crossed so to speak so it is very clear that we are (a) not talking out of our ash, (b) not attacking athletes for the sake of trying to make a big splash and (c) not lazy ashes who are taking half-baked theories and running with them.

And unfortunately, Carlson did absolutely none of that, her column was horseship crap that barely rose above the level of writing in a college newspaper and because she relied so heavily on "rumblings, rumors and speculation" it came off as a lazy effort and it deserved the "two-cannons blazing" treatment it received from both the coach and people like Whitlock.

The facts MAY have been correct, but you'd never know by reading that crap because none of the "facts" were in the column, just a poorly crafted bunch of drivel that came off more like a personal vendetta than a well-crafted column.

And then credibility comes into play after the fact when we come to find out Carlson didn't even "observe" -- another word she used several times -- the chicken incident which she builds her premise on (yet in reading the lede, you sure get the impression she was there and saw it all.)

The written word is very powerful, it means something and when it is poorly used, it can cause far more harm than good. The issue isn't whether we should rip athletes or coaches -- we should -- the issue is how it is done and in this case it was a horse ship effort and the kind of crap that undermines all of our credibility.

joel - who gives a flying fork what the idiot coach or whitlock think about this issue? serious question; not poking you in the ribs.

Obviously, 41 pages later and the fact that this incident became a national story, a lot of people give a flying fork what the coach had to say and Whitlock, like him or not, is one of the most-read columnists in the country, so a lot of people give a flying fork what he has to say on given subjects as well.

 

[Chi City 81]

... Whitlock, like him or not, is one of the most-read columnists in the country, so a lot of people give a flying fork what he has to say on given subjects as well.

Source? Link?

 

[wickedwritah]

Check back about 20 pages...someone posted the link a couple weeks ago.

 

[Tom Petty]

Once again the point is being missed completely by many of the so-called defenders of Carlson/journalism.....

This kid may very well be a whimp, he may very well be a momma's boy and it is clearly our job as columnists and even beat reporters to point this out -- that this is the reason he was benched.....

However, if we are going to go that route, we must make sure all of our "I's" are dotted and our "T's" are crossed so to speak so it is very clear that we are (a) not talking out of our ash, (b) not attacking athletes for the sake of trying to make a big splash and (c) not lazy ashes who are taking half-baked theories and running with them.

And unfortunately, Carlson did absolutely none of that, her column was horseship crap that barely rose above the level of writing in a college newspaper and because she relied so heavily on "rumblings, rumors and speculation" it came off as a lazy effort and it deserved the "two-cannons blazing" treatment it received from both the coach and people like Whitlock.

The facts MAY have been correct, but you'd never know by reading that crap because none of the "facts" were in the column, just a poorly crafted bunch of drivel that came off more like a personal vendetta than a well-crafted column.

And then credibility comes into play after the fact when we come to find out Carlson didn't even "observe" -- another word she used several times -- the chicken incident which she builds her premise on (yet in reading the lede, you sure get the impression she was there and saw it all.)

The written word is very powerful, it means something and when it is poorly used, it can cause far more harm than good. The issue isn't whether we should rip athletes or coaches -- we should -- the issue is how it is done and in this case it was a horse ship effort and the kind of crap that undermines all of our credibility.

joel - who gives a flying fork what the idiot coach or whitlock think about this issue? serious question; not poking you in the ribs.

Obviously, 41 pages later and the fact that this incident became a national story, a lot of people give a flying fork what the coach had to say and Whitlock, like him or not, is one of the most-read columnists in the country, so a lot of people give a flying fork what he has to say on given subjects as well.

i don't think anyone here gives two shits what the coach thinks, just the way he chose to deliver his message.

and whitlock? puh-lease. the guy's a forking ashclown. he writes for jason whitlock, and nobody else and i think every person who posts here knows as much. he's the geo. bush of journalism.

 

[Chi City 81]

Check back about 20 pages...someone posted the link a couple weeks ago.

I remember. I was looking for a source that said he's one of the most-read columnists in the country.

 

[Tom Petty]

Check back about 20 pages...someone posted the link a couple weeks ago.

I remember. I was looking for a source that said he's one of the most-read columnists in the country.

check whitlock's ash ... that's what's speaking that little "fact."

 

[wickedwritah]

I was looking for a source that said he's one of the most-read columnists in the country.

Anecdotally, I'd say that's spot-on.

 

[hondo]

Mark Whicker with his usual excellent take on things... and too many others with their less-than-intelligent take.

http://www.ocregister.com/sports/bonds-strong-steroids-1131860-whicker-media

I hope you're not saying that people who disagree with you are unintelligent. I can't think of a more unintelligent thing to say.

Christ, Ira ... got to the Sports and News and Anything Goes areas of this board and see how many people believe that anyone who doesn't agree with them is less intelligent. Fenian and JR are especially shrill about this argument.

 

[hondo]

So it was Jenni Carlson's job to tell Oklahomans that Bobby Reid was a pussy? Must have missed that clash in journalism school. My point was, just because something is so, does NOT MEAN YOU HAVE TO WRITE IT. Every college writer on this beat knows ship about the program they cover that they would never put in print. Ever. That's the nature of this game.
There has to be a balance. ashuming YOU are in the business, I would think you would understand that.
Pishing people off just for the sake of Pishing people off serves no one. We all have to write unflattering things from time to time, thats the nature of this gig, but to go out of your way to call a college player a mama's boy --- even if it might be a somewhat accurate description --- is not the job of a journalist, in my opinion. Apparently, you disagree. Oh well.
[/quote]
Since Gundy was doing the usual bullship, rope-a-dope about benching the kid, giving no reasons to the media (and to the fans), Carlson did what a lot of us have to do: work around the edges and find out what you can, and do some speculation and tea-reading. As it turns out, she was right, since the premises of her column have gone unchallenged. If coaches would stop pretending that the game plan and starting lineup for the next game should be as protected as the war plan for the invasion of Normandy, we wouldn't have this debate.

 

[chilidog75]

However, if we are going to go that route, we must make sure all of our "I's" are dotted and our "T's" are crossed so to speak so it is very clear that we are (a) not talking out of our ash, (b) not attacking athletes for the sake of trying to make a big splash and (c) not lazy ashes who are taking half-baked theories and running with them.

And many have said that she COULD have done a better job of working the corners this time.

But we keep having folks such as chilidog saying it's not our job to Pish people off.

It really makes me wonder if he's spent one day in a newsroom in his life.

NOT ONCE HAVE I SAID that we should never Pish people off. Not once have those words appeared in this thread by me, or anyone else, as far as I can remember. If we have to break news, break it. If we have to take a coach to task for a boneheaded call or a team that has more misdemeanors than touchdowns, then that's what we do. It's part of the job for fork's sake. Even if we have to question why quarterback A is playing instead of quarterback B, that's our right as journalists to do so. But to make a flat-out attack on a kid's character, to humiliate him and call him a pussy and a mama's boy? I just thought it was out of line and mean-spirited. That's all. I guess you didn't, so by all means start hacking out columns like Carlson's. Good luck with that.

Either way, time to move on from this topic and this thread. 41 pages is probably enough.

 

[ADifferentOkie]

Chili, you said, "Unless of course you want to Pish off the program, fan base, the readership and the entire state, then by all means have at it and write columns like this one."
My point is simply that sometimes you will Pish people off. You have to be willing to do that.
If you are, then good for you, because it is part of the job.
And I don't know why people keep pointing out how long this thread is. Really, there has been a lot of good discussion over an issue that generally has the public on one side and journalists on the other.
I think it has been a discussion worth having.