This made me angry

[SheaSeals]

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=adelson/070524&sportCat=mlb

 

[andykent]

Shea,

Just curious. Why does this make you angry? He made some salient points. Probably unpopular ones, but salient nonetheless.

 

[SF_Express]

My opinion on this is simple: If the column made him angry, great. Columnist mission accomplished. Be interesting and provocative and lead to discussions -- like this one.

 

[andykent]

I totally agree SF. Mission accomplished for Mr. Adelson. Just wanted to see Shea expound a little more.

BTW. Congrats on your career milestone (yeah, I know there's another thread for that, but I figured I'd kill two birds with one stone.)

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

My opinion on this is simple: If the column made him angry, great. Columnist mission accomplished. Be interesting and provocative and lead to discussions -- like this one.

I expect more than that. Look, I worked at a couple places where shock value was the strategy and I have no moral objection to that, or to columnists writing stuff for the sole intent of getting a gut reaction from readers rather than having that gut reaction be merely the by-product of a well-written, logical column. But experience tells me that this is an ineffective business plan for newspapers, although not for TV.
For several reasons.

First, readers attracted by this kind of thing are pretty fickle; I think we saw this recently when the New York Post tried to raise its price and then relented. People who buy us to be informed are more willing to pay a premium than people who seek only entertainment.

Second, readers can tell the difference between sincere outrage and contrived outrage. I worked at a couple places where we kept track of what kinds of lead headlines sold the most papers, and the deal was that readers seemed to be able to tell when we were faking orgasm. They could tell at a glance on the newsstand when we were trying to jerk them off like a stripper in the VIP room instead of engaging them in something real and spontaneous and meaningful. And they weren't buying as much when we were trying to manufacture it as when our shock, horror or outrage was genuine. When I read a columnist, I have to have a gut feeling that he isn't putting on an act, that he isn't trying to be provocative -- that he's being provocative because he can't help being provocative.

Third, I believe that because of the Internet people are inundated with so much stuff that it is becoming increasingly harder to shock anyone. That stuff is in huge supply for free just about anywhere you look. What isn't in huge supply is logic and reason, and it is our best strategy to provide that.

 

[andykent]

So with that being said Frank, what's your take on this piece by Edelson -- contrived or genuine?

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

Totally contrived.

 

[andykent]

SF, care to weigh in? Contrived or genuine?

 

[SF_Express]

Yeah, Frank -- geez, two in one day -- I have to come down with genuine. I thought he wrote a good, provocative column, making some good points, whether you agree with all of them or not.

I wasn't saying this was a good column simply because he provoked a reaction, and I hadn't really thought of it was a "shock value" piece. I thought he simply made a stand that's unpopular with a lot of the mainstream media, and did a decent job of it.

 

[andykent]

My vote was genuine as well. Haven't seen this point of view taken anywhere else, and I certainly don't expect to see it dripping from the back page of SI under Rick Reilly's mug. ;D

 

[Double Down]

I was willing to mull over the column's many points until I got to this trite nonsense:

I want Bonds to break the record so that kids will ask their parents, "If the commissioner is reluctant to come to the park for the celebration, why is he also reluctant to insist on testing for HGH?"

Frankly, I think kids are more likely to say: "Dad, can I have another ice cream? And how come the Bernie Brewer's mustache looks like two bananas?"

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

By his line of logic, though, an op-ed columnist should write that he'd like to see this sleazy politician reelected because so many other politicians are sleazy; in fact, politics is such a great big oozing pile of sleaze that we ought to elect the biggest sleaze of all as president, just to end our denial about how sleazy politics is.

 

[spnited]

I want Bonds to break the record so that kids will ask their parents, "If the commissioner is reluctant to come to the park for the celebration, why is he also reluctant to insist on testing for HGH?"

I did not read the column, donl;t care, don't get the idea that an internet (or newspaper) column can actual make sme so angry as Shea seems to be.

However, this "kid asking daddy" BS is total crap. How can the commissioner "insist" on testing for HGH when no reliabe test exists?

Even the blood tests for HGH are not yet reliable and if anybody thinks the MLBPA is going to allow every player to be blood tested, they are more stupid than I could ever imagine.

If this kind of "logic" flows through Adelson's column, then it is useless.

 

[zeke12]

The incredibly muddled thinking and lack of engagement with the world contained in this paragraph alone:

I want Bonds to break the record because as a member of the media, if I want to ask him a question, I know where to find him. He will probably not answer my question, but at least I can ask. Mark McGwire, Rafael Palmeiro and Jason Grimsley aren't exactly making themselves available to the media these days. Barry Bonds comes out every day and goes to the ballpark, where millions can see him. When the world thinks of steroids, they think of "Barroid," even though he is only one of many suspected of using them.

assured that I didn't finish the column.

 

[reformedhack]

They could tell at a glance on the newsstand when we were trying to jerk them off like a stripper in the VIP room instead of engaging them in something real and spontaneous and meaningful.

I'm still thinking about what a great line this is.

 

[andykent]

I didn't say it was written well, but I thought most of the points he made were valid. I too had a problem with the whole "kid asking daddy" line because it did not make much sense, but I still don't see the anger-inducing commentary here.

 

[Your Huckleberry]

I didn't care for the column until the last line. Must say, that was a knockout punch of a finish. Maybe baseball does deserve a villian home run king. I think the writer hit on something.

 

[novelist_wannabe]

You mean the trip to the VIP room isn't real and spontaneous and meaningful? Boy, are there going to be some disillusioned hacks on this board ...

The most thought-provoking line for me was, "If Bonds weren't so good, baseball wouldn't be forced to deal with its steroids problem."

 

[Your Huckleberry]

You mean the trip to the VIP room isn't real and spontaneous and meaningful? Boy, are there going to be some disillusioned hacks on this board ...

The most thought-provoking line for me was, "If Bonds weren't so good, baseball wouldn't be forced to deal with its steroids problem."

I read the line. I just didn't buy it.

 

[zagoshe]

I actually agreed with the column, though I don't think it was exactly all that exciting to read.