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!

The Pac 12 and the L.A. Times

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Cosmo, Jul 30, 2020.

  1. HanSenSE

    HanSenSE Well-Known Member

    Meanwhile, this happened today too.

     
  2. MeanGreenATO

    MeanGreenATO Active Member

    Not really sure how some of the people in this piece are still employed. Not shocked to see this about the LAT.

    Buddy of mine recently had a feature plagiarized for an LAT story. Editor was given proof and couldn't have cared less.
     
  3. Screwball

    Screwball Active Member

    What does it mean to say "had a feature plagiarized?" Is this someone like Markazi lifting words, or is this writing a story on the same topic?
     
  4. MeanGreenATO

    MeanGreenATO Active Member

    Like one feature was written and then another popped up at the LAT with nearly identical anecdotes and phrasing that was obviously lifted from the original piece. LAT editor just shoulder shrugged over email.
     
  5. Screwball

    Screwball Active Member

    Would you be kind enough to post the links?
     
  6. DanOregon

    DanOregon Well-Known Member

  7. tapintoamerica

    tapintoamerica Well-Known Member

    So here are their demands, which they apparently want to be met in a month or so:
    1) Enforced health and safety standards.
    Excellent. Reasonable. Make every school declare an independent enforcement official. Sounds good to me.
    2) Reliable coverage for sports-related medical expenses.
    This is the underreported shame of college sports. If you sacrifice your health to play a game, getting hurt shouldn't cost you a dime. Ever.
    3) Opt-out provision ensuring no loss of scholarship or eligibility.
    Also seems fair.
    4) Name, Image and Likeness compensation.
    Fair point of debate. But absolutely absurd to include it in this document. This one ain't getting solved in three weeks or three months. Maybe three years.
    5) Revenue-sharing.
    No specs in the manifesto. How much should the revenue be shared? How should it be shared? And then there's the time issue.
    6) "Eliminate lavish salaries and facility expenditures to preserve all sports."
    Agreed that athletics coaching and administrator salaries are out of control. But any legal professionals behind this movement need to remember something: Years ago, the NCAA tried to address this problem with the "restricted-earnings" position in basketball. They wound up getting sued and losing in a massive class action over restraint of trade. The NCAA and the Pac 12 can't legislate salaries, and the schools can't meddle with contracts that have already been signed. The only way this one gets solved is with a commitment (collusion?) by governing boards to stop handing out massive raises and extensions, to let existing contracts expire and to replace those deals with smaller deals. Good luck. Again, years in the making and requiring people to suppress their competitive urges. Not happening.
    I misread this the first time. It refers to facility expenditures, not faculty expenditures. So no more lavish player palaces for football and basketball, right? They're got theirs and now they don't want anybody else to have them. OK.

    The only stuff that can be addressed immediately is health and safety regarding the Trumpandemic.
     
    Last edited: Aug 2, 2020
    Batman likes this.
  8. SportsGuyBCK

    SportsGuyBCK Active Member

    I read the Vice article, and I don't recall any mention of the Pac-12 arrangement.

    However, after reading it and The Oregonian piece, IMO, Pearlstine has to go ...
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page