Ripping other scribes...

[shotglass]

I think it's perfectly OK for one beat guy to call out another for what he deems to be a stupid question, although I don't think this one was that stupid.

SF, I don't even get that. What is OK about a beat writer sniping at someone from another paper in print ... about anything? It all seems rather cheap to me.

 

[Floyd]

This sort of goes back to the Calhoun thread -- but do readers really give a **** about what the reporters are doing in press conferences? Do they care how the coaches interact with the media? Do they care what questions the other beat guy asks? My guess would be no. In fact, most don't even read the name at the top of the article they read, so they sure as hell don't care who writes for a paper they aren't reading.

 

[RokSki]

But, Rokski, I don't get why McGwire would rip you for wearing workout gear to the locker room. I've seen reporters cover baseball games in Hawaiian shirts, shorts and flip-flops and no one has said a word. Was it team workout gear? If you just wore sweats, what was his problem with it?

I don't know, da man. There was a lot of testosterone flowing in that locker room (as we all know), and maybe Mark just felt like taking a shot at me, asserting his 'alpha dogness' or something. It was all good, he was smiliing when he said it, but he still said it good and loud. To tell you the truth, I kind of took it as a backhanded compliment, that he said anything to me at all. I didn't care that the other guys were laughing at me. No biggy.

 

[buckweaver]

This sort of goes back to the Calhoun thread -- but do readers really give a **** about what the reporters are doing in press conferences? Do they care how the coaches interact with the media? Do they care what questions the other beat guy asks? My guess would be no. In fact, most don't even read the name at the top of the article they read, so they sure as hell don't care who writes for a paper they aren't reading.

That's where I fall on the fence, too. I just don't think readers give a **** about US, unless it somehow affects them. Most times, it doesn't.

Leave the media (yourself or other reporters) out of articles, out of photos, out of columns, out of questions. Except in very-rare circumstances: keep your feuds out of the paper, keep your personal life out of the paper, keep your own doings out of the paper.

The story's the thing -- not us.

 

[tyler durden 71351]

This sort of goes back to the Calhoun thread -- but do readers really give a **** about what the reporters are doing in press conferences? Do they care how the coaches interact with the media? Do they care what questions the other beat guy asks? My guess would be no. In fact, most don't even read the name at the top of the article they read, so they sure as hell don't care who writes for a paper they aren't reading.

That's where I fall on the fence, too. I just don't think readers give a **** about US, unless it somehow affects them. Most times, it doesn't.

Leave the media (yourself or other reporters) out of articles, out of photos, out of columns, out of questions. Except in very-rare circumstances: keep your feuds out of the paper, keep your personal life out of the paper, keep your own doings out of the paper.

The story's the thing -- not us.

WFW.
There are too many egomaniacs in this business.