ESPN's Black Power & SigR Idiocy

Re: ESPN's Black Power Idiocy

Sirs, Madames,

The worst thing I can say about Goldberg is also the most telling indictment: He is his mother's son.

And if you get down to it, I'm sure that ESPN (like many today) is more progressive on race than other organizations were back in '68, so maybe Smith and Carlos were entitled to take a victory lap. Dropping Black Power into this conversation is either cynical or ignorant. Or both.

YD&OHS, etc

 

Re: ESPN's Black Power Idiocy

I am not sure Ragu . It just seemed strange to me to see those 2 guys up there accepting a fake award from an establishment organization.

I've always had great admiration for Tommy Smith for not only the stance he took in 1968 but the fact that he seemed to stay true to those beliefs later in life as a teacher.

This whole event had a bit of a sell out feel to it in my mind. I feel the same way when I see the Rolling Stones do commercials

 

Re: ESPN's Black Power Idiocy

Sirs, Madames,

ESPY's to sports are far from what Oscars are to movies ... not that the Oscars are definitive measures of excellence.

Safe to say that more people saw Smith and Carlos on the ESPY's than those who were tuned in to watch the medal ceremony on ABC's Olympic broadcasts back in '68. You could make a case that the history lesson was the most meaningful component of the ESPY's and I wouldn't disagree. Were Smith and Carlos dragged down by sharing a stage with Justin Timberlake or did they elevate the proceedings however briefly? To my mind they're bullet-proof and that fat tub of goo Goldberg has to assail commentators rather than Smith and Carlos themselves. Goldberg has never done a thing in his life other than loosen his grip on his mother's apron strings and find a soft landing spot among the neo-know-nothings.

YD&OHS, etc

 

Re: ESPN's Black Power Idiocy

Really? In a television landscape with, what, seven or eight channels, fewer people watched the Olympics than watched the ESPYs in a TV landscape with hundreds of channels? That's hard to believe.

 

Re: ESPN's Black Power Idiocy

If you're going to get this bent out of shape everytime someone calls you out on something, maybe this isn't the best message board for you.

 

Re: ESPN's Black Power Idiocy

Could be way off here, but any chance there was an appearance fee involved?

No matter, dollars or no dollars, you can't blame the athletes for coming to the thing. At worst, they're grabbing a moment in the spotlight and a check. At best they're still fighting for, and want to bring attention to, what they believe. I tend to give ESPN the benefit of the doubt and assume that they were trying to do some good here, bringing this to a new generation. Problem is, their best intentions are pretty easy to mock because of all the other shit they do and then the asinine Stooey, whose credibility crater somehow keeps getting deeper. My 3-year-old (same age as Stooey was back then) will watch the Olympics with me this year, but only long enough to realize it's not Scooby-Doo, at which time he'll ask me to change it to Scooby-Doo.

On those who want to equate what those guys did with some sort of act of violence or in support of similar, please. You cannot judge the actions of 1968 based on the mores of 2008. It's hilarious to me that a white guy in 2008 would bash the actions of a couple of black guys in 1968. Yeah, because we really have a window into what they were feeling at that moment in time, right?

 

Re: ESPN's Black Power Idiocy

(this post is off-topic)

Calling me a moron or telling me to read a book is not calling me out. It's childish and only substitutes for an argument when those using it are too dim or lazy to confront the issue. Providing an argument that refutes the points I'm trying to make is calling me out and is welcomed. I'm well aware that I'm not perfect, neither do I have things all figured out. I make my argument and appreciate the discourse that ensues when that discourse actually addresses the issues I'm raising. And for the most part, I don't rely on facts. I rely on concepts and eagerly seek those who are able to argue at the conceptual level.

I'm a bit fascinated by this board actually. I think it may be one of the single most lopsided, intolerant boards I've come across. Besides the dozen or so individuals who have 20,000 posts and feel it is their duty to litter threads with their meaningless one-liners, there are a lot of individuals here who just don't have the capacity to reason or make an argument. It's disheartening in a way. And I've been thinking that perhaps it is a reflection of the career. As a sports journalist, you've chosen a rather shallow profession. It doesn't mean that your work is shallow or that your life is shallow, but it seems to attract those who buy into the superficial world and who never really think about its complexities. Sometimes I think I see that here, but I'm not sure.

 

Re: ESPN's Black Power Idiocy

And the moment those acts were passed, racism was thusly eradicated.

I'm paraphrasing, but I've seen Goldberg's style described as:

"He bases his arguments on comparisons full of hot air, and when the arguments are filled with enough hot air, he knocks them over with some rhetorical stupidity."

 

Re: ESPN's Black Power Idiocy

Oh boy.

 

Re: ESPN's Black Power Idiocy

I believe that dogs should be legally required to wear pants. I wish to have a level-headed, adult debate on this issue.

Anyone who disagrees with my belief that dogs should wear pants is lazy and not confronting the issue.