1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Bill Conlin update

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by somewriter, Nov 26, 2007.

  1. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    Anyone who doesn't think their emails could be used against them is an idiot.
     
  2. jgmacg

    jgmacg Guest

    I suspect Conlin's of an age that thinks private correspondence - no matter the medium - is just that.
     
  3. Dangerous_K

    Dangerous_K Active Member

    I'm with Ace. Having read the original email sent to Conlin, it's baffling he responded the way he did. I shudder to think how he would pop off on some of the venom prep parents email many of us 'round here. I respond to emails knowing full well they represent me professionally and personally and can be used against me, either as message board fodder or as a complaint to my superiors. Then again, I struggle to make ends meet and don't have condos in the Dominican, so what do I know.
     
  4. Bill Conlin is truly an embarrassment to our profession.

    Even beyond his awful writing and this bizarre e-mail exchange, he represents the quintessential stodgy, head-in-sand baseball writer. The value of statistical analysis is no longer even a matter of debate among baseball people (and now a majority of baseball executives), and yet Conlin acts as if any statistic invented after 1950 threatens his entire value system.
     
  5. jgmacg

    jgmacg Guest

    I'm not saying Conlin's not an ass. But at what point did we lose the right to keep our correspondence private? Just because technology allows the instantaneous and global dissemination of an email doesn't make it right.

    I think part of my problem with whole thing is this, from the interview with Baer:

    BB: I still don’t think I ever “fought” Conlin. I disagreed with his article, kindly stated my reasons why, and asked him to change my mind. I didn’t publicize the e-mails because he’s “old media” and I’m “new media.” I simply publicized them for a laugh. You know, a “Ha ha, look at this guy” kind of thing. I’m still ambivalent on whether or not he should be reprimanded for what he said.

    There's something profoundly mean-spirited in that.
     
  6. Herbert Anchovy

    Herbert Anchovy Active Member

    The e-mail belongs to the receiver and not the sender.

    There was a recent kerfuffle over this in Washington:
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/12/AR2007071202088.html
     
  7. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    Yeah, well, I get mean-spirited calls from readers 10 times a day. If I gave them the business they deserved, I'd be out of work in a week.
     
  8. Gold

    Gold Active Member

    Grow up, OK. Grow out, not so good :)
     
  9. I'd say the analogy used in the interview is accurate. If you e-mail your bank with a question, and the respondent replies with something inappropriate, a) that is unprofessional behavior, and b) you have a right to publicize it.

    Among college sports writers, there's a good chance your response to fan emails will be posted on a message board, so it's wise to use discretion when replying.
     
  10. Screwball

    Screwball Active Member

    By now, don't we all assume any e-mail to a reader might be posted on the Internet and choose our words accordingly?

    Bill Conlin apparently not included.
     
  11. jgmacg

    jgmacg Guest

    So Conlin's paper doesn't have one of these on the bottom of its business email accounts?

    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This E-Mail is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this communication in error, please do not distribute and delete the original message. Please notify the sender by E-Mail at the address shown. Thank you for your compliance.

    Which - to me at least - raises the question of the rightful use to which the addressee can put such a thing. Legal stipulations on making an email public aside, there's still the ethical question of baiting the guy while not telling him you're posting the emails in public.

    And again, while the recent phenomenon of 'all things are now public all the time' is familiar to me, it perhaps isn't to a dinosaur like Mr. Conlin.
     
  12. poindexter

    poindexter Well-Known Member

    Conlin's Hitler comments were good at the beginning but then went too far.

    And Conlin's email address is an aol account. I'm betting against the confidentiality legal jargon.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page