ESPN ombud tees off ... again

[SixToe]

Doesn't anyone at the WWL understand what she is saying?

The heads appear to be nodding in agreement. The actions continue to bring questions.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=schreiber_leanne&id=3485712

 

[slappy4428]

Havent read this yeat, but my favorit posts on this thread lately begin with ESPN Ombud... Gotta love Leanne, even if the suits dont give a ****.

 

[Colton]

If the heads aren't reading, they probably can't... someone should read it to them.

 

[Dickens Cider]

"The worst offense was that no senior editor read the piece, and lesser editors let the phrasing go," said Rob King, editor-in-chief of ESPN.com. "We are treating the systemic breakdown of the editing process as seriously as the offensive reference itself."

Posting a column without its being read by a senior editor was a rare violation of ESPN.com's standard editing procedure that is easily remedied by a strongly worded reminder. Much harder to remedy is the failure of three junior editors, as well as Hill, to recognize that comparing Celtic fans in Detroit to Nazi sympathizers, even as a form of comic exaggeration, was outside the bounds of acceptable commentary on ESPN.com.

1. Bull****. The worst offense was writing the line in the first place.

2. ****ing bull****. If it's rare for any column to be posted without being read by a senior editor, then ESPN.com needs some new senior editors. Because a lot of them, seemingly, can't edit, judging by the myriad mistakes that often appear in ESPN.com columns.

 

[slappy4428]

She is correct, even though she alluded to it instead of just sayingit. While Hill drew copious amounts of deserved **** for her stupid remark, Bonnie Bernstein drew a relative free pass for something as dumb or dumber.

 

[slappy4428]

Is it just me or does Vince Doria spend a lot of time saying "you're right. We should have done it this way" and little if any time making sure that any change in policy or procedure actually happens?

 

[SixToe]

Ding. Ding.

It's not just you.

 

[2muchcoffeeman]

Doesn't anyone at the WWL understand what she is saying?

No.

Just a guess.

But it's the odds-on favorite.

 

[slappy4428]

Ding. Ding.

It's not just you.

Good, because I'd hate to think I'm dense enough to be a suit at ESPN...

 

[zebracoy]

Is it just me or does Vince Doria spend a lot of time saying "you're right. We should have done it this way" and little if any time making sure that any change in policy or procedure actually happens?

It's hard to say so without knowing what's really going on, but ... yes. Looks like the guy's only there to say "Whoops ... my fault" every month, just so she can place the blame on someone.

 

[SixToe]

Maybe they're too busy blogging and Twittering.

 

[Colton]

I know Vince a bit and he's a solid guy.

I'm sure blunders like this eat at him, but his position forces him to issue lame statements like that.

 

[Ben_Hecht]

Of course, the Stuey Scott/"journalist" reference was restating the obvious.

He's still aces on Stump the Schwab, though.

 

[ink-stained wretch]

ESPN, for the most part, is peopled with personalities, with entertainers.

Those are not the same as reporters.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

She's tremendous, but nobody there gives a ****.

 

[slappy4428]

Several stunned viewers wrote me after seeing anchor Stuart Scott selling Celtic T-shirts during an NBA Finals Recap that was re-aired on SportsCenter the morning of June 18. As one viewer forcefully put it, "A 'news anchor' holding up a T-shirt and proclaiming, 'Check out all the Celtics championship gear exclusively at NBAShop.com' while sitting in the anchor chair not only blurs the line of journalistic ethics ... it obliterates it."

When I asked Doria about an anchor pitching NBA merchandise, he said, "It should not have been in the show."

However, it will remain in the show as long as ESPN is a shill for the sports it carries.

 

[nafselon]

She is correct, even though she alluded to it instead of just sayingit. While Hill drew copious amounts of deserved **** for her stupid remark, Bonnie Bernstein drew a relative free pass for something as dumb or dumber.

Yeah...are you really surprised though?

 

[Cousin Jeffrey]

"The worst offense was that no senior editor read the piece, and lesser editors let the phrasing go," said Rob King, editor-in-chief of ESPN.com. "We are treating the systemic breakdown of the editing process as seriously as the offensive reference itself."

Posting a column without its being read by a senior editor was a rare violation of ESPN.com's standard editing procedure that is easily remedied by a strongly worded reminder. Much harder to remedy is the failure of three junior editors, as well as Hill, to recognize that comparing Celtic fans in Detroit to Nazi sympathizers, even as a form of comic exaggeration, was outside the bounds of acceptable commentary on ESPN.com.

1. Bull****. The worst offense was writing the line in the first place.

2. ****ing bull****. If it's rare for any column to be posted without being read by a senior editor, then ESPN.com needs some new senior editors. Because a lot of them, seemingly, can't edit, judging by the myriad mistakes that often appear in ESPN.com columns.

While it's her fault for writing that, there should've been an editor who actually spent more than 10 minutes fixing commas reading that column, and all columns for that matter. Her job is to write, and in some cases to provoke. Sometimes the writing process takes over the common sense process. The problem is, of course, the rush to get stories out online, and the pure volume they do now, cripples the editing process. Of course, most stories (aside from e-tickets) are edited poorly, if at all, there.

 

[slappy4428]

She is correct, even though she alluded to it instead of just sayingit. While Hill drew copious amounts of deserved **** for her stupid remark, Bonnie Bernstein drew a relative free pass for something as dumb or dumber.

Yeah...are you really surprised though?

No, but disappointed on several levels.

 

[dixiehack]

"The worst offense was that no senior editor read the piece, and lesser editors let the phrasing go," said Rob King, editor-in-chief of ESPN.com. "We are treating the systemic breakdown of the editing process as seriously as the offensive reference itself."

Posting a column without its being read by a senior editor was a rare violation of ESPN.com's standard editing procedure that is easily remedied by a strongly worded reminder. Much harder to remedy is the failure of three junior editors, as well as Hill, to recognize that comparing Celtic fans in Detroit to Nazi sympathizers, even as a form of comic exaggeration, was outside the bounds of acceptable commentary on ESPN.com.

1. Bull****. The worst offense was writing the line in the first place.

2. ****ing bull****. If it's rare for any column to be posted without being read by a senior editor, then ESPN.com needs some new senior editors. Because a lot of them, seemingly, can't edit, judging by the myriad mistakes that often appear in ESPN.com columns.

While it's her fault for writing that, there should've been an editor who actually spent more than 10 minutes fixing commas reading that column, and all columns for that matter. Her job is to write, and in some cases to provoke. Sometimes the writing process takes over the common sense process. The problem is, of course, the rush to get stories out online, and the pure volume they do now, cripples the editing process. Of course, most stories (aside from e-tickets) are edited poorly, if at all, there.

Are the junior editors empowered to spike column content, or are they expected to serve as grammar polishers for the "star" columnists?