the anti-Whitlock

[henryhenry]

Shaun Powell plays it down the middle - no agendas. No self-promotion. Just sharp insightful writing.

http://www.sportsmediaguide.com/10262006-ShaunPowell.html

 

[Columbo]

Shaun Powell plays it down the middle - no agendas. No self-promotion. Just sharp insightful writing.

http://www.sportsmediaguide.com/10262006-ShaunPowell.html

And no shtick, as Jason called his being critical on LeBaRe's show today.

I don't THINK that shtick is the word there... at least I hope not.

I infer from that that you don't mean what you are writing.

 

[henryhenry]

Powell covers sports. Whitlock covers media - and himself.

 

[BYH]

Yeah but what good are you if you're not a former football player who writes about the Gold Room and the pimp hand you administer as you work the corners?

Whitlock = clown

 

[shockey]

shaun's one of the best, as a person and a sports columnist. 8) 8) 8)

 

[jason_whitlock]

what does shaun powell's blog interview have to do with me? i mean, this is freaking ridiculous.

 

[Columbo]

what does shaun powell's blog interview have to do with me? i mean, this is freaking ridiculous.

Shtick?

So... you really aren't ripping The Dwarf, Scoop et al?

 

[SF_Express]

I'm still waiting for the thread that says there are all sorts of voices in this business, there are readerships (both those who like and those who hate) for every one of them -- running the gamut from Dave Anderson to Scoop Jackson -- and that I have yet to hear of a person who was permanently disfigured by an opinion or the style in which it is expressed.

It would say that editors need to be open to providing forums to new ideas and styles and people of all ethnic and social and gender backgrounds, and that somebody who refuses to allow somebody to speak to this demographic or that because he or she doesn't talk or think that way is simply limiting his or her readership in the most competitive time in media history.

It would say that a lot of crap on here lately criticizing people who are getting or already have great opportunities is jealousy, no matter how hard they try to deny it.

It would conclude that columnists you like and those who don't is a personal thing, and why people get so bent out of shape over the ones they don't like is a complete mystery.

Not that I'm expecting to see that thread anytime soon.

(This isn't about Powell, a class act. This is that there's also room for Whitlock, who goes about things a different way. Why do people have such a hard time with that?)

 

[PeteyPirate]

Based on the complaints of the Whitlock haters here, I would think the anti-Whitlock would be a white supremacist.

 

[jason_whitlock]

shtick: one's special interest, talent, etc.

 

[jason_whitlock]

Powell covers sports. Whitlock covers media - and himself.

good that you bring this up when powell spends a great deal of time in the blog interview covering the media....

are you really this freaking stupid? or are you just here to humor me?

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

I've worked with Shaun, edited him. Long before he became a columnist, he was a terrific beat guy. Clean, fast, professional, competitive, hard-working, great to deal with, probably the only writer I regularly edited that I never caught in a factual error. One of my all-time favorites, although he probably wouldn't know it.

I don't think it's fair to put him and Whitlock as polar opposites, though. They have vastly different styles, but I would guess Whitlock works pretty hard, too.