ESPN at it again

[didntdoit19]

The ESPNews Bottom Line says Buster Olney reports Terry Ryan is out as Twins GM. Meanwhile, ESPN.com is running this story:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3017356

"The 52-year-old Ryan will step down after 12 seasons. The Minneapolis Star Tribune, citing three unnamed sources with the team, first reported the story on its Web site. The Twins have called a news conference for Thursday afternoon to announce a 'major' reorganization of their baseball operations."

I used to want to work for the WWL, but stuff like this pisses me off.

 

[Ben_Hecht]

The ESPNews Bottom Line says Buster Olney reports Terry Ryan is out as Twins GM. Meanwhile, ESPN.com is running this story.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3017356

"The 52-year-old Ryan will step down after 12 seasons. The Minneapolis Star Tribune, citing three unnamed sources with the team, first reported the story on its Web site. The Twins have called a news conference for Thursday afternoon to announce a 'major' reorganization of their baseball operations."

I used to want to work for the WWL, but stuff like this pisses me off.

Web-site: honest.

Visual electronic media: self-abuse.

It never ends.

 

[JC]

The ESPNews Bottom Line says Buster Olney reports Terry Ryan is out as Twins GM. Meanwhile, ESPN.com is running this story.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3017356


I used to want to work for the WWL, but stuff like this pisses me off.

I'm sure they're disappointed

 

[silentbob]

Well, technically they're not wrong. Buster Olney is reporting it just like dozens of others.

He just wasn't first.

It's misleading, unethical and unprofessional but that's the way this business works these days. Everyone wants to put their stamp on news.

 

[spnited]

Sorry Bob, but "misleading, unethical and unprofessional" is not "the way this business works these days."
It's the way ESPN works and I am not in the same "business" as ESPN.

 

[Joe Williams]

Sorry Bob, but "misleading, unethical and unprofessional" is not "the way this business works these days."
It's the way ESPN works and I am not in the same "business" as ESPN.

Constantly lifting their legs on stories like Irish setters, putting the singer's name ahead of the song, what really does that accomplish? Does it make more people inclined to watch ESPN than already do so? Or make those who do watch want to watch more often? Does it make any difference if the average sports fan knows who Buster Olney or Ric Bucher is?

 

[MileHigh]

Sorry Bob, but "misleading, unethical and unprofessional" is not "the way this business works these days."
It's the way ESPN works and I am not in the same "business" as ESPN.

Constantly lifting their legs on stories like Irish setters, putting the singer's name ahead of the song, what really does that accomplish? Does it make more people inclined to watch ESPN than already do so? Or make those who do watch want to watch more often? Does it make any difference if the average sports fan knows who Buster Olney or Ric Bucher is?

Definitely the latter. It's blanket coverage. They're putting their name on it. So if anything breaks, people just gravitate to ESPN because they have these (perceived) resources breaking stories left and right.

 

[Claws for Concern]

Just once I'd like to see when an ESPN writer gets fired that he/she reports of their own demise. Talk about the ultimate third person reference.

 

[rgd]

I'd post a photo of someone beating a dead horse if I had one.

 

[BigDog]

OK then...

 

[ondeadline]

I used to want to work for the WWL, but stuff like this pisses me off.

You can still work for WWL (it's a AM station, an FM station and a TV station in Louisiana) and not put up with this crap.

Or, to put another way: Why if we're ripping on ESPN, do we call it the WWL?

 

[didntdoit19]

I used to want to work for the WWL, but stuff like this pisses me off.

You can still work for WWL (it's a AM station, an FM station and a TV station in Louisiana) and not put up with this crap.

Or, to put another way: Why if we're ripping on ESPN, do we call it the WWL?

Maybe I should have put WWL in blue...

 

[enigami]

Or, to put another way: Why if we're ripping on ESPN, do we call it the WWL?

I've always wondered that myself.

It's Business 101: Brand-name recognition. They're getting their brand name out there by putting it in the nut graf of every story, whether it deserves it or not. Enigami reports that it's the new "business of journalism."

They're marketing themselves as the "World Wide Leader" and we're buying the slogan. Sounds kinda cult-ish if you ask me.

<img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/aa/The_Joy_Of_Sect.PNG">

 

[Joe Williams]

Me, I'll be going with WWL from now on.

 

[slappy4428]

Or, to put another way: Why if we're ripping on ESPN, do we call it the WWL?

I've always wondered that myself.

It's Business 101: Brand-name recognition. They're getting their brand name out there by putting it in the nut graf of every story, whether it deserves it or not. Enigami reports that it's the new "business of journalism."

They're marketing themselves as the "World Wide Leader" and we're buying the slogan. Sounds kinda cult-ish if you ask me.

<img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/aa/The_Joy_Of_Sect.PNG">

Or, our decision to use it is derisive and mocking....

 

[ondeadline]

Never mind that they should call themselves the WL since worldwide is one word, not two.

 

[spnited]

never mind that people with even half a brain never seriously refer to ESPN as the WWL.

 

[ondeadline]

An excellent point by spnited.

 

[Chi City 81]

Yep. Proof that even a blind, crotchety, decrepit squirrel can find a nut.

 

[spnited]

Yep. Proof that even a blind, crotchety, decrepit squirrel can find a nut.

which, of course, is more than can be said for dumbass cubsfanboyloosers. ;D