New ESPN ombudsman

Previous shop had one, and his routine consisted of defending strange news decisions and printing readers' e-mails.

 

I don't think it's a knock on George Solomon to say that his tenure as ESPN's ombudsman was pretty disappointing. That's not to say he didn't do great things at the Washington Post.

But most people aren't superstuds forever.

 

Did you or anyone think an ombuds was going to affect change? The only reason anyone cared was because it was George Solomon. It's largely a figurehead position.
Disclosure: George's son is an exec at ESPN and George and Vince Doria go back decades.

 

if solomon is a failure - compared to what?

compared to ombudsmen at newspapers? have you done a survey? is there research that rates ombudsmen or measures their performance?

he was espn's first ombudsman - you can't even compare him against a predecessor.

there's no basis for calling him a failure or success.

but personally, i thought he was a must read. a guy inside the mouse with license to criticize - i read every word he wrote.

they should have hired whitlock or feinstein as his replacement.

 

I made a point of looking for Solomon's column every month. I may be the only one on here who doesn't go to ESPN.com often, and I really don't watch ESPN much either, even though I'm in the business. I guess I get enough sports at work and via watching my hometown teams on TV. Still, I liked what Solomon had to say. and appreciate that ESPN at least went this far with some sort of neutral analysis.

I don't think the point of ESPN's ombudsman is to change anything. I look at it as almost inside pool. Maybe those in the business are the only ones reading it, but so what? I get something out of it because I enjoy media criticism.

 

That was Goerge's roll.
And, I am with you. I don't watch much ESPN, either.

 

NYT has had guys (see: D. Okrent) get under Bill Keller' skin.

Works, occasionally . . . but not often!

 

For those not old enough to remember, Schreiber was the sports editor when the Times attempted to censure RED SMITH!!! because his opinions on the 1980 Olympic boycott were at odds with the editorial page.
I don't remember her role in that fiasco. She may have fought it vigorously. She wasn't popular with her department, but of course that doesn't necessarily mean she was a bad editor.
Solomon's columns were OK. An ombudsman is window-dressing anywhere anyhow.

 

ESPN did get rid of Michael Irvin, so it's not entirely immune to being embarrassed into doing something (not to say that was because of George Solomon).

 

She -- no one else -- killed one Red column. Her thinking: he had moved beyond a sports-page boundary. Red had written that the U.S. should boycott the Moscow Games. The column had moved on the NYT wire, then was followed by a must-kill. A short controversy later, she relented and the column ran, I believe, with a nu lede, quintessential Red, something like, "Perhaps I should stick to the infield-fly rule...."

 

Thank you for refreshing my faulty memory, Dave. I'd say a person who killed a Red Smith column should make a fine ESPN ombudsperson. Wait'll she tells 'em to fire Berman.

 

I admit it. I laughed out loud at that.