Whitlock follows through

[Alma]

I've ripped Whitlock's character mercilessly, but this little snafu where he filed a column the same day Thompson filed his profile provides an interesting contrast in their styles.

And Whitlock wins. In a day's worth of work. The strengths and weaknesses of Glass are actually more apparent in Sweeney's and Silverio's quotes than they are in Thompson's piece, where, again, he enjoys writing long stretches about the owner watching the game in the seats, blah, blah, blah, without ever getting to the nuts and bolts of what Glass does as an owner.

Thompson's stories routinely suffer from a lack of sheer reporting. They talk around a subject, but not to the subject, or even really about the subject. If you wanted to expose David Glass, you dive into the revenues, the books, the works and you really do it. How long did have on the story? You'd have to think a couple months.

If Thompson's piece had been a knockout, you probably wouldn't have seen Whitlock's column. Truth is, the column illuminates the profile with better reporting.

 

[DyePack]

Maybe the Star needs to get its ****ing head out of its ass, stop blathering about the redesign, and start planning a little bit better. Then "snafus" like this might not happen.

 

[Alma]

DyePack,

I think the Star, in its own way, will benefit from Thompson's depature. It'll prevent things like this.

 

[FreddiePatek]

It's amazing how much **** Whitlock catches on this board. Moreso than any other columnist I reckon. What an irony, considering he's one of the few columnists to deal directly with the folks on this board.

Do I like everything Whitlock writes? No. That can be said about any columnist, though. Whitlock has been disseminated enough on this board for him to be a subject of a college class (Alma as the professor, perhaps ... I do enjoy your posts, Alma).

I can't hold the budgeting snafu against Whitlock. He has editors who knew he was going to be out at the ballpark all week. Blame lies with them. Wait a minute ... I guess they were all in Las Vegas.

Can we move on, now? All this Royals talk is giving me a tummy ache.

If you really want a good discussion, how about Kansas City allowing Posnanski to file a World Cup soccer column from Jerusalem ... on a country that's not even in the Cup. I assume he's there on vacation instead of ... heaven forbid ... on assignment.

 

[jason_whitlock]

there was no snafu....

wright's been working on a glass piece for about 10 days. i saw him out at the park. i didn't know when his piece was giong to run. i knew he was working on it.... everybody at the star knew i was going to be spending the week out at the park covering the royals and ripping (gl)ass...i said it on this board, i said it in a column from the nba finals and i certainly made my editors aware of it a week before.

i just didn't know what day wright's piece was going to run. we often run profiles and columns together. we run news stories and opinion pieces together....

the only thing i figured from wright's piece was that david glass was uncooperative and wouldn't talk about the real issues.

justsayno, the criticism of my work speaks to the importance of what i have to say. arrogant? yes. factual? absolutely.

 

[FreddiePatek]

there was no snafu....

wright's been working on a glass piece for about 10 days. i saw him out at the park. i didn't know when his piece was giong to run. i knew he was working on it.... everybody at the star knew i was going to be spending the week out at the park covering the royals and ripping (gl)ass...i said it on this board, i said it in a column from the nba finals and i certainly made my editors aware of it a week before.

i just didn't know what day wright's piece was going to run. we often run profiles and columns together. we run news stories and opinion pieces together....

the only thing i figured from wright's piece was that david glass was uncooperative and wouldn't talk about the real issues.

Fair enough. It's just I see this kind of thing happen all the time at many different papers these days. Two stories are on roughly the same subject, so they must be packaged! No matter how contradictory they might be! Yippee! What a pretty design!

 

[WSKY]

The Royals should move to Portland.

 

[da man]

Jason, I think the amount you crap you take on this board has less to do with what you say and more with how you say it -- preening, chest-thumping, insulting and unnecessarily nasty. Factual? Sometimes. Arrogant? Always.

 

[FreddiePatek]

The Royals should move to Portland.

Actually, I would like to click and drag them to my recycle bin. ;D

 

[WSKY]

The Royals should move to Portland.

Actually, I would like to click and drag them to my recycle bin. ;D

Or Vegas, you could move its Triple A team to KC.

 

[FreddiePatek]

Jason, I think the amount you crap you take on this board has less to do with what you say and more with how you say it -- preening, chest-thumping, insulting and unnecessarily nasty. Factual? Sometimes. Arrogant? Always.

Here's a thought ... Whitlock and Posnanski both have been in place for quite some time. Does JW come across as arrogant? Absolutely yes, on occasion. But, does his voice not come from a place of authority, earned by putting in his time in a town? He knows what Royals fans have been through. He's not saying anything in any tone that any other Royals fan hasn't used to describe what's going on in KC.

Wow ... I apologize for that convoluted last sentence.

On a completely unrelated topic, curse you, Jason for almost talking the Chiefs into signing Jeff George all those years ago!

 

[da man]

Jason, I think the amount you crap you take on this board has less to do with what you say and more with how you say it -- preening, chest-thumping, insulting and unnecessarily nasty. Factual? Sometimes. Arrogant? Always.

Here's a thought ... Whitlock and Posnanski both have been in place for quite some time. Does JW come across as arrogant? Absolutely yes, on occasion. But, does his voice not come from a place of authority, earned by putting in his time in a town? He knows what Royals fans have been through. He's not saying anything in any tone that any other Royals fan hasn't used to describe what's going on in KC.

Wow ... I apologize for that convoluted last sentence.

On a completely unrelated topic, curse you, Jason for almost talking the Chiefs into signing Jeff George all those years ago!

I was talking about his often nasty, always condescending attitude toward people on this boards trying to discuss issues. Any good point he makes is usually accompanied by an unnecessary putdown. Therefore, people on this board are more likely to fire back.

 

[FreddiePatek]

Jason, I think the amount you crap you take on this board has less to do with what you say and more with how you say it -- preening, chest-thumping, insulting and unnecessarily nasty. Factual? Sometimes. Arrogant? Always.

Here's a thought ... Whitlock and Posnanski both have been in place for quite some time. Does JW come across as arrogant? Absolutely yes, on occasion. But, does his voice not come from a place of authority, earned by putting in his time in a town? He knows what Royals fans have been through. He's not saying anything in any tone that any other Royals fan hasn't used to describe what's going on in KC.

Wow ... I apologize for that convoluted last sentence.

On a completely unrelated topic, curse you, Jason for almost talking the Chiefs into signing Jeff George all those years ago!

I was talking about his often nasty, always condescending attitude toward people on this boards trying to discuss issues. Any good point he makes is usually accompanied by an unnecessary putdown. Therefore, people on this board are more likely to fire back.

Fair point.

 

[jason_whitlock]

very fair point.... but it's an anonymous message board.... but still a fair point.

 

[hypocritealert]

Da Man: I almost lost my head and my gonads almost exploded after I read your post. This board is filled with some of the ugliest, nastiest, racist (and I'm a white boy) and disgraceful venom there is on a message board and you are going to single out Jason?

 

[Tom Petty]

Before I share a couple of the stories, I want to clear up a couple of things. When I went out to the K on Saturday, I had no idea that my colleague Wright Thompson was filing a long profile on David Glass for today’s paper.



Nothing like being totally disconnected from what's going at at the paper where you supposedly work. Too busy being a media star, huh, JW.

even moreso, if you look at the lead art for sunday, you'd know some damned designer had been working it for at least a day and that the package had probably been in the works for serveral days. imagine not only being so disconnected from what your paper is doing for the sunday section, but also imagine being too smug to be at a park, any park, see your boy from the office there and not even bother waling up and asking, 'so what you working on today?'

and then, the idiot is so self centered, he doesn't even notice how disengaged he really is and mentions how ignorant he is in his own column.

very gump-like there dane eater, very gump-like.

 

[Tom Petty]

I've ripped Whitlock's character mercilessly, but this little snafu where he filed a column the same day Thompson filed his profile provides an interesting contrast in their styles.

And Whitlock wins. In a day's worth of work. The strengths and weaknesses of Glass are actually more apparent in Sweeney's and Silverio's quotes than they are in Thompson's piece, where, again, he enjoys writing long stretches about the owner watching the game in the seats, blah, blah, blah, without ever getting to the nuts and bolts of what Glass does as an owner.

Thompson's stories routinely suffer from a lack of sheer reporting. They talk around a subject, but not to the subject, or even really about the subject. If you wanted to expose David Glass, you dive into the revenues, the books, the works and you really do it. How long did have on the story? You'd have to think a couple months.

If Thompson's piece had been a knockout, you probably wouldn't have seen Whitlock's column. Truth is, the column illuminates the profile with better reporting.

get off all fours please there alma. the piece was juvenile at best and the fat one only thought he was saving a **** column by capitalizing the g in glass to make his own point at the end. he mailed it in and you know it.

 

[Tom Petty]

DyePack,

I think the Star, in its own way, will benefit from Thompson's depature. It'll prevent things like this.

hey dip****. how long do you think thompson's piece was in the works? as far as lead art goes, think the features editor asked to have glass imposed behind the door and the field and faded out so you could see through him, too?

clue up.

 

[LemMan]

I'm not the biggest Whitlock fan, but I think he gets an unfair shake here. Lots of people write stuff we don't like, yet time and time again, Whitlock takes a pounding. The guy comes on here, uses his real name and fights back. I give him credit for that.

My two cents...

 

[Tom Petty]

there was no snafu....

wright's been working on a glass piece for about 10 days. i saw him out at the park. i didn't know when his piece was giong to run. i knew he was working on it.... everybody at the star knew i was going to be spending the week out at the park covering the royals and ripping (gl)ass...i said it on this board, i said it in a column from the nba finals and i certainly made my editors aware of it a week before.

i just didn't know what day wright's piece was going to run. we often run profiles and columns together. we run news stories and opinion pieces together....

the only thing i figured from wright's piece was that david glass was uncooperative and wouldn't talk about the real issues.

justsayno, the criticism of my work speaks to the importance of what i have to say. arrogant? yes. factual? absolutely.

and you're a lying ******* or the kc star has the ****tiest sports editors on the face of the earth.

you say: 'i saw him out at the park. i didn't know when his piece was giong to run.' are you mentally challenged?

and then you follow that up with: 'i just didn't know what day wright's piece was going to run.' brilliant. really. the kc star, a major metro has no idea what's leading it's sunday section from one day to the next. maybe, just maybe dane boy is correct and his SE didn't give the nod to place that stunning pic on the page until dip**** already was on his way to the ball park at 6:15 p.m. ... but i'm going to guess not. in fact, i'm going to guess the SE knew this was going to be the lead story at least by monday and shared it with his entire staff ... at least the ones who were in missouri and gave two ****s about something more than their own fat egos.

i'm guessing you're the idiot here chubbo, not your SE.