Southern California Media On A Mission Against Ben Howland/UCLA Basketball
by Nestor on Feb 2, 2009 5:00 AM PST
in Media Watch
55 comments
First let's start with Marcia Smith, the OC Register hack columnist who have made a name for herself by writing one clueless and ignorant columns after another. Her latest came last week following the Washington game which came with gems like this in a column dated January 28 (no link for Marcia's garbage):
The Bruins (15-4, 5-2) began the season ranked No. 4, which, Howland conceded, had more to do with UCLA's potential to repeat its recent past of three consecutive Pac-10 titles and Final Four appearances than the Bruins actually being the fourth-best team in the country.
After slipping another four spots in the latest Associated Press poll to No. 17, the Bruins would be lucky to finish fourth in their conference. At 5-2, the Bruins are in a three-way tie for second place, a position about which Howland said, "We were hoping we'd be at least one game above that (conference record) right now."
Hope and recent history are apparently what a lot of Bruins fans have. There is no widespread panic at Westwood about making a fifth consecutive NCAA tournament. Nobody has expressed great anxiety over having non-refundable airline tickets to Detroit for the 2009 Final Four.
No body knows how Marcia came up with the idea that us - Bruin alums/students/fans - took for granted that we were going to just waltz into the Final-4 this season, yet there she is making stuff up without providing any facts or numbers to back up re. the pulse of the Bruin Nation.
At least even a moron like Marcia admitted in her column that there was "no panic" in Westwood before last week. Still that didn't stop Bill Dwyre - the former EIC of the LAT sports section - to just make up a fake crisis in Westwood. According to Dwyre Howland would have been on the hot seat if things didn't go well this past week against Cal and Stanford. Dwyre writes in a classic concern trolling column entitled "UCLA answers its basketball fans' angst" (again no link for ignorant garbage from the traditional media):
This wasn't business as usual. There had been whispers. The Bruins were struggling, the swagger was gone. Howland was too strict. The school that has 11 national titles and scoffs at anything less suddenly didn't look as if it could be a contender. In recent games, the Bruins were taking more punches than they were landing.
One local columnist crowed that "nobody outside of Westwood is predicting a Final Four run for UCLA this year." Another simmered that Howland was boring, and so was his team.
All that made Thursday night much bigger than your normal game near the midpoint of the Pacific 10 Conference season.
The Bruins were tied for second place in a conference they have won the last three years. They entered with a 5-2 league record, same as their opponents, who were coached by Mike Montgomery, who made Stanford a perennial contender before trying the NBA and then returning to coach across the Bay this season.
Montgomery had his Golden Bears at 16-4, half a game better than UCLA's 15-4. They weren't ranked in the top 25, but UCLA, always getting at least some votes based on tradition, was at an uncomfortable No. 17. In Westwood, that's like being seen driving a Hyundai.
There were problems in River City. Problems with a capital P.
Get that? Dwyere is actually insinuating with a straight face that Howland would been on some kind of "hot seat" if Cal had pulled the upset last Thursday night in Pauley. To bolster this narrative LA Times highlighted three shameful and disgusting letters from purported "UCLA basketball fans" morons hurling insults at Coach Howland. I wonder if the LAT actually would run letters from UCLA fans showering Howland praise and admiration.
You can add this all up. This is nothing short of a ploy by the reporters and columnists in Southern California's mostly worthless traditional media to drive their time tested, boiler plate, lazy narrative of UCLA fans never being happy with a basketball coach unless he brings home a banner. Of course all of this is nonsense. We only hear garbage like this from someone like the Blagojevich of college basketball, who time and time again attacked UCLA alums, students, and fans for being unreasonable by cherrypicking the worst of the Souther California sports fan who tends to root for Trojan football and Bruin basketball at the same time.
What these people will never acknowledge and realize is how the makeup of Bruin Naiton has changed. The UCLA community is no longer dominated by certain segement of the fanbase who perhaps did get spoiled during the glorious run of Coach John R. Wooden. What these guys don't get and perhaps don't want to admit (because it would screw up their cute little narrative of "spoiled UCLA basketball fans") is how the overwhelming majority of UCLA basketball fans not only appreciate the incredible job the best UCLA basketball head coach since John R. Wooden has done in Westwood. They will not bother writing columns on how the overwhelming majority of Bruin basketball fans worship and adore the Caretaker of Westwood who has turned this place in college basketball's chamelot where once again the best of the west come in to become ball players under the best coach this game has to offer.
Instead these guys in Southern California's traditional media are intent on driving their stale narrative on a UCLA basketball coach being in the "hot seat" because he is not satisfying the so called unreasonable Bruin basketball fans. They will keep cherry picking rants and messages from certain bandwagoning losers who probably bought their first UCLA hoops paraphinilia following the miracle against Gonzaga. It is just lazy, ignorant behavior on the part of the media resulting in same old baseless and stale story lines. It's pathetic and probably just one more reason these guys are gradually going out of business.
GO BRUINS.
1 recs |
55 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
To Fox (and others) about Dohn
I know a lot of you guys aren’t fans of Dohn, but I think he’s been one of the most solid writers in the LA area this year. Honestly, he’s called out UCLA fans on his blog for being too demanding, and he basically said that Howland was the best coach in the Pac 10 by a good margin. His stories have been seemingly accurate and not speculation, and most importantly, he hasn’t bashed the program or written about our “panic” without due cause just for a couple of losses.
The majority of the LA media is garbage. I feel as though Dohn’s blog is one of the few places I can go to read.
Unfortunately, a lot of his readers are similar to the morons submitting to the LAT….
by bucknellbruin on Feb 2, 2009 5:45 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I agree somewhat
I have a lot of problem with Dohn’s personal takes re. the potential of UCLA football but I think he does a decent job of reporting with the sources he has. Yes, he does have a history of being off when he gets too reliant on his sources, however, he does provide useful datapoints in his reports from the UCLA beat.
I am sure there will be instances where I will disagree with him and take him to task for it but he is still doing much better job than the other lazy hacks in LA’s pathetic media.
by Nestor on Feb 2, 2009 5:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Doh !
My problem with Doh! is that he tends to phrase things so that his items are about him, not the purported subject of his story- for example, “I was told that…”, “Sources have told me that…”. This leads to him taking absurd positions to try to put his sources in favored positions going forward. The most obvious instance was when he was boosting Walker before CRN was hired. By boosting his sources, he loses objectivity.
I agree that he may be better than some other shills, but that is a very low bar.
by islandbruin on Feb 2, 2009 6:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re Doh!
What did Doh! say before we hired a Defensive Coordinator? As I recall, he said that he KNEW who was going to be hired. The only way he would know is if Coach Neuheisel told him. After Coach Bullough was hired, I didn’t hear anything more about that from Doh!
No one will ever really know whether Doh! actually knew anything about that. But we can draw some inferences. First, is it likely that Coach Neuheisel would have called Doh! and told him exactly who he was going to hire? I don’t recall seeing Doh! sitting next to Coach Neuheisel at press conferences or anything else. Knowing what we know about Coach Neuheisel, it seems unlikely in the extreme that he would tell his plans to a reporter. Another inference we can draw is from Doh!’s “reporting” of how Coach Walker was going to take over the job in Seattle.
I have no problem with Doh! as a human being. I don’t think his writing style is going to make anyone forget about Jim Murray, but it’s better than that of some others. The problem that I have with him is that he simply invents sources. Then he says his sources must be confidential. Then he claims his sources have given him the exact inside scoop. This is hack journalism at its finest. It is what I confess I read at the grocery check out line (“Obama was born on Mars, and intends to enslave humanity.”)
It appears that I am alone in my boycott of Doh! The sad part is that my both my confidential, albeit highly placed, source in the UCLA athletic department and my three close friends who are wealthy and influential alumni (sorry, I can’t name them) tell me that Doh! is actually a sleeper agent from justsc. And that last sentence, Bruin Brothers and Sisters, a vintage Doh! journalism. The difference is that I confess I just made it all up, and Doh! doesn’t.
by Fox 71 on Feb 2, 2009 7:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Rest Assured Brother Geezer, You Are Not Alone
I stopped reading Doh! long ago — the moment he started censoring comments on his blog. I had been critical before that and he decided it was easier to shut me up than prove me wrong.
Actually, I stopped reading the fishwrap (except for rare stories I hear about here) long ago, too.
I actually get most of my Bruin info here, at BN. I find the reports and analysis more grounded in fact. For example, I don’t think anyone can match the statistical analysis in Blinkshot and Hoo’s recemt posts.
Or your humor.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Feb 2, 2009 10:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I Don't Read Him, Fox.
I don’t even link to his stuff from here any more. It’s just not worth it.
Love My Bruins
by Bruingirl83 on Feb 2, 2009 10:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
DC
I don’t remember Dohn ever claiming he knew who was going to be hired. He’s always held the position that Bullough was the leading candidate though.
by pxcasey on Feb 2, 2009 10:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Nope. He absolutely positively said he knew and couldn't tell anyone.
If I cared enough (or if I were a good enough researcher) I would search here and find it. I suspect that it would no longer be in Doh!’s own archives.
by Fox 71 on Feb 2, 2009 11:05 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I can find 5-10 posts going back as far as 3 weeks ago where he wrote that Bullough is the leading candidate. I can’t find a single post where he claims he knows who’s going to get hired. I can even find references to the Walker going to UW story, and yes, he was wrong on that, but again, no claim on knowing who’s going to get hired for the DC position. You claim to boycott Dohn, yet you’re sure he claimed that he positively knew and couldn’t tell? No source to back this up, of course? This makes you no better than Dohn.
by pxcasey on Feb 2, 2009 8:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I looked at a few posts, and here's what I found
Anyone see this from B. Dohn?
It was in his "Answers, Part VI" blog post today at the Daily News. If you’re not familiar with this, it’s a weekly feature where he answers questions from readers.
Do you know anything of UCLA hiring a "mind blowing" coach? I read UCLA could possibly be hiring a great coach who no one thought of.
Yes, I know who that person is, but I’m not sure if it will happen. Again, sources ask me to keep it quiet, so for now I will.
Any ideas who this person could be?
Insert witty signature of your own choosing here.
by Flapjacks McGurty on Jan 9, 2009 1:17 PM PST reply actions 0 recs (Emphasis added.)
I haven’t bothered chasing the link Flapjacks cited. Assuming Flapjacks quoted correctly (and I have no reason to doubt his accuracy), it sure sounds to me like Doh! claimed to have absolute knowledge of who was absolutely going to be hired roughly two weeks before the announcement, but he just couldn’t tell us. Or to put it another way, I absolutely stand by my assertion that Doh! makes things up.
OK, px, your turn. You can trace the Doh! cite referenced by flapjacks and see what it says. I’m not going to bother any more.
by Fox 71 on Feb 3, 2009 5:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I have to disagree with you on this one, Fox
Taking this Q&A as quoted, I read it as Dohn knowing that a particular “mind blowing” coach was being considered by Morgan Center, but that this mystery coach may not become the new DC.
Whether one considers Dohn (and his ’sources’) a trustworthy source of information, or whether his statement that his sources claim that a coach is under discussion, but can’t say who or for what (EXTRA: Woodward and Bernstein claim that something of interest has occurred involving the Nixon administration, but won’t say who is involved, or what happened!) is at all newsworthy is certainly up for debate, but the bold in your post (assuming that is Dohn’s answer) leaves some doubt as to whether this person would be hired.
by bruinhoo on Feb 3, 2009 1:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I stand on my interpretation
Doh! could have chosen any of a zillion ways to respond to the question. The way he chose to respond was to leave the impression that he knew exactly who was going to be hired.
To add a little context to things, I write for a living. When I want to make a point, I do my best to make it crystal clear. I re-write things more than once to achieve that clarity. Doh! gets paid to write also. It’s his job to convey CLEARLY the facts and opinions in his articles and blogs. To me, this is a pretty clear statement: “Yes, I know who that person is, but I’m not sure if it will happen. Again, sources ask me to keep it quiet, so for now I will.” I interpret the first sentence as saying that he KNOWS who is going to be offered the job and he doesn’t know if the job will be accepted. And he knows this from “sources.” I defy anyone to find someone at UCLA with inside information who would share it with Doh!. Would Coach Neuheisel say, “Hey, Doh! I’m about to hire Rocky Long or Buddy Ryan or Pete Carroll to run the defense, but don’t tell anyone.” That is such a far-fetched concept that I just can’t believe it.
That concept which I believe to be devoid of credibility must be accepted to give any credence to Doh!‘s statement, no matter how you might interpret it. He said flat out that he KNEW who the coach was going to be. Not that he suspected who might be offered the job, or that he had a good idea or that he thought the list of candidates might include so and so. He said he flat out KNEW. That means he has an impeccable inside source, and I don’t believe that. His statements sound like the headlines in the National Whavever, which always blather on about the Clintons getting a divorce or the Bushs getting a divorce or Oprah is getting a divorce. It may be true, but it’s a guess at best.
There is one way that I change my opinion about Doh!. When Doh!‘s source steps up and identifies himself or herself, and says I got the info straight from Coach Neuheisel and I told Doh!, then I will ask for a double-helping of crow. Until that happens (and I don’t see it happening in my lifetime, I willI remain of the belief that Doh! makes up those sources. In my opinion, that disqualifies Doh! from having the privilege or writing a column. I can’t stop him from writing, but I can sure stop myself from reading, which I have done.
by Fox 71 on Feb 3, 2009 4:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Fox You Are Being Unfair!
When you write, you have the comfort of a Code of Professional Responsibility that prevents you from fabricating or outright lying — at great risk to your career. Poor Doh! does not.
When you write, it is a part of an adversarial system in which if you overstate or mis-state you will be destroyed by the other side — thereby losing your credibility and probably your client’s case. Poor Doh! does not have those protections.
When you write, their is a neutral, detached truth seeker who will decide whether or not you have done both an ethical and effective job — and make a decision that will have an impact on your career and your client’s well being. Poor Doh! does not.
And finally, when you write, you write with honor because you have an internal compass and a sense of balance that prevents you from using words to create a false sense of importance. Poor Doh! does not.
It is unfair to criticize a man who is not bound by a code of ethics, whose words are not tested in an adversarial process, or judged by a neutral person who can hold him and his employer accountable, and whose internal compass does points him toward self-aggrandizement and self-importance. Give Doh! a break.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Feb 3, 2009 7:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I do not believe that our interpretations are too far apart, Fox
I am in perfect agreement that Dohn’s answer implies that he knew the identity of a specific coach under consideration by Neuheisel, while the last sentence, by cautioning silence, implies that discussion with this mystery coach had reached a critical level.
The way that the first sentence is written, to me at least, does leave open other interpretations of Dohn’s statement. I read: “Yes, I know who that person is, but I’m not sure if it will happen.” as confirming the “mystery coach” and the alleged seriousness which his candidacy was taken, but leaving open that he would not come to Westwood. You may be correct that Dohn made this statement without any basis in fact; the “not sure” line serving as a “CYA” move by Dohn to protect any perception of credibility that he has remaining. My view of this statement leaves open the possibility that this candidate was under serious consideration, but that an offer and/or acceptance of a coaching position was not a given, and that eventually, negotiations broke down – whether the “mystery coach” demanded terms to which Neuheisel/DG refused to yield, or any variety of other issues arising in an employment negotiation. Also, I may be giving Dohn too much credit.
The quality of Dohn’s ‘sources’ is certainly up for debate; past discussion on this site certainly leaves the accuracy and credibility of these ‘sources’ in doubt. I figure that the probability that Dohn is getting the scoop directly from coach Neu roughly = the probability that his source is the homeless guy on Westwood Blvd that tried to sell me drugs a few years ago.
I do give Dohn some benefit of the doubt, whether it is deserved or not. I suppose that my indulgence of Dohn is based as much on the comparative state of MSM journalism today, sports or otherwise, than in a faith in his accuracy, an outlook which I admit is likely not fair to his profession, nor to him.
by bruinhoo on Feb 3, 2009 10:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Good enough for me, Hoo.
Actually, I think you have identified one of Doh’!’s sources. It is the homeless guy on Westwood Blvd.
by Fox 71 on Feb 4, 2009 4:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I remember that
and it’s far from him claiming he knows who’s going to be hired. A reader heard talks of a ‘mind blowing’ candidate (the reader’s words, not Dohn’s), and he asked if Dohn heard about it, and Dohn replied that yes, he knows who it is, but can’t reveal anything. And that’s that. The way I read that he made no claim on who’s going to be hired, just that he knows who’s being talked about. You seem to read more into it than what’s actually there. Yes, there are times where he’s been wrong before, but this isn’t one of them. He does do this thing quite a few times with his sources, where he claims to know something but can’t reveal it, but eh, I’ve learned to just ignore it when he does that.
by pxcasey on Feb 4, 2009 11:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Doh! hardly one of a kind
One of the nice things about not living in LA is not being distracted by the local rags (though I do check in with the LAT, from time to time) or local radio. Mostly I get my fix from BN, knowing that I’ll be getting that fix through a different, hopefully less subjective filter.
Most writers have no connection to UCLA. They have no idea what that community is like, how it transcends basketball or football (oops, there go the Condoms) and what our experience there continues to mean to us (and having attended UCB and the U of H, I can state that the experience is/was – for me – entirely more intimate and communal). All these clowns are doing is selling ad space and, let’s face it, most of these rags won’t exist in another 10 years. So, creating controversy where there is none is SOP, no matter how misleading or inaccurate their reporting might be.
Fox mentions Jim Murray, who was as much The Standard to ‘sportswriting’ as Coach Wooden is to ‘coaching.’ I don’t recall Murray ever lowering himself to write the kind of crap that the new generation of writers often produce. Class acts never need to draw attention to themselves, their work does that for them.
CBH is a class act. His work speaks for itself and I’m dismayed that Dwyre, whose writing I’ve often enjoyed, allows himself to be reduced to innuendo or half-truths about an outstanding coach and an outstanding athletic program.
UCLA - the finest public university in the world!
by SecondGenBruin on Feb 2, 2009 10:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Dohn is good for the facts
He and the blog are usually the first place to hear things. First place to get facts. Which means he is passing on what he is hearing, which may or may not be what ends up happening. So what.
by Bruin Dad and Grad on Feb 2, 2009 10:44 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Haven't you noticed that his "facts" come from "sources" who he never mentions?
Even a broken clock is accurate twice a day. I have no confession from Doh! to offer as evidence, but I am confident that he just makes up his sources and their stories when a deadline is looming. I refer to two stories: His abolutely positively for sure story that Coach Walker was going to UW and his absolutely positively true statement that he knew who Coach Neuheisel was going to hire in advance. Those are simply nonsense, but they illustrate that he is not a reporter but a fiction writer (and not a particularly good fiction writer.)
by Fox 71 on Feb 2, 2009 11:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Journalists rarely reveal their sources though. Some would go to jail before revealing them.
by chenalex on Feb 2, 2009 8:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Not Quite Right
Journalists reveal sources every day when they write stories that say things like "According to … " or they name and quote sources directly.
In some stories that require intense security, journalists do not name their sources BUT most good reporters require multiple sources to say the same thing before using information.
Most news outlets require attribution of some sort.
And will only use “anonymous” sources where security demands it. The sports page rarely demands that type of security.
There is a clear difference between “reporting” and “pontificating”. Doh! does not report, he pontificates.
Nothing personal, chenalex, but as a documentary film journalist, I find it very distressing that in the current state of the media someone would both say and accept "Journalists rarely reveal their sources … ". I am sure you are not alone in accepting the concept and it bothers me. If we don’t demand accuracy and legitimacy we are easily lead around by the whim and fancy of anyone who buys ink by the barrel.
I can think of no better story to prove this point than the totally unsubstantiated claims that the Bruin world was unhappy with CBH and that he was on the hot seat.
Anyone willing to accept that story as truth, without any attributed sources or facts, is in far more danger when the press “reports” on the state of the world in general. If we let them get away with it on the sports page, just think of what they can do on the front page.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Feb 3, 2009 5:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I am enjoying last week
Big games this week, but I just feel good reflecting on last week. It all starts on D. Nough said.
Go Bruins
by rfirpo on Feb 2, 2009 7:23 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Morons
One would think that being the local media they’d have a better pulse of the UCLA fanbase. Instead they choose to fall in line with the national media and label us “spoiled” and “never satisfied” unless we win NC’s. The worse part is my belief that they intentionally puff up their pieces to sell an extra paper or two. Also doesn’t help when the Lizard is on TV talking about his days in Westwood. His con job is working quite well. He poses as a HC for the greatest program and then acts as if he is a bona fide college basketball expert. Just like Matt Millen deserves to analyze the playoffs and SuperBowl. There is a reason that lil’ Oompa Loompa will never coach again. Please…you think those other programs were really interested in him. Sure…..
The true Bruin fans appreciate CBH for restoring the UCLA program and for all that he has accomplished. True Bruin fans cherish our coach who is all class and molds not only great basketball players but young men of the highest quality. Do we want to win a NC? Duh! We don’t view the Final Fours as failures. We revel in them and will continue to do so. BN is where the true pulse exists about CBH and the UCLA program. And we are quite happy.
by BlueReign on Feb 2, 2009 8:42 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Its amazing how ignorant columnists are
this team’s fortunes will be determined by the folks who didn’t get much playing time last year: Aboya, Roll, ND, and the freshmen.
They are developing. Its amazing how columnists expect a team to lose two top 5 draft picks, a phenomenal second rounder, and your starting center, and yet going 17-4 after that is disappointing. What idiots…
"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"
by silverlakebruin on Feb 2, 2009 9:12 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
One Of The Worst Things...
…about the very existence of this drivel is that it is very likely that some perfectly talented, intelligent, motivated, educated and morally grounded people don’t have jobs writing, and these ignorant, blathering noncompoops do.
Love My Bruins
by Bruingirl83 on Feb 2, 2009 9:57 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Bingo
With all of the layoffs at newspapers across the country, you would think these people would be the first that were let go.
But no, it’s the columnists who don’t really do any research or reporting that are kept.
by gilbert on Feb 2, 2009 12:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And look at where much of the MSM anti-blog furor comes from...
In these times of hardship for traditional media outlets – between our current economic climate and the emergence of electronic and other non-traditional media as a force in the dissemination of news and opinion – it is inevitable that the MSM looks at ways to trim operating budgets.
Columnists (to this observer, at least) seem to be the most easily supplemented function of the MSM; very rarely are such works based off original reporting by that writer, while continuing employment appears to rely on the ability and reputation of the writer and the media outlet which employs him/her, aided in some respects by any contacts which the writer may have with relevant subject figures.
The barrier to entry for one to publically opine on subjects of interest, may they be involving sports, politics, science or what have you has significantly lowered in recent years. In the emerging era of electronic media, it is much easier for persons outside of the mainstream club to have their opinions heard, and judged by the public. While much of what exists online is little more than the random utternces one might hear at a sports bar or cocktail party, there is a certain amount of skilled, insightful writing to be found, that can compete with the best that the MSM can offer up (and ofter significantly better than what passes for the MSM’s "elite").
In an era where opinion-centric writing and analysis of very high quality exists and can be easily found outside of the traditional media, it would seem logical for such institutions to shift at least some resources toward actual journalism and investigative reporting, areas where only a tiny number of ‘new media’ outlets can compete with the MSM and established advocacy (National Review, The Nation, Science, etc) publications. Alas, as gilbert notes, the columnists seem to be the last to feel the pinch.
by bruinhoo on Feb 2, 2009 2:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, the inverse is really true
Especially is the newspaper is offering buyouts (as most will for established writers). Those who are in demand and have talent will often take the buyout and head out to either pick up another job on television or write a book, because they have the talent to fall back on those endeavors. The people who end up being left are often those who are worried about losing their job because they know they’re not any good and don’t have many other options. Essentially, you’re left with the dead-enders.
This is why the world of newspaper reporting presently gives us the likes or Marcia Smith and good people like Tony Barnhart (AJC) end up leaving the newspapers for greener pastures; Barnhart accepted a buyout from the AJC in 2008.
by CAJason80 on Feb 2, 2009 4:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It takes time and money to research and report ...
Newspapers, in general, and “the Fshwrap” in-particular, are fresh out of both.
by snorkeldorf on Feb 2, 2009 5:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ooops.
(I meant “nincompoops,” anyway, but…you get the idea.)
Love My Bruins
by Bruingirl83 on Feb 2, 2009 1:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know
“Noncompoops” connotes a nincompoop who’s incompetent at nincompoopery. A nincompoop squared.
by Bruinut on Feb 2, 2009 8:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
problem with columnists
is that they’re no different than radio shock jocks. they get paid to rile people up not provide insight. they make their names with schtick not substance, add a usc bias and you get what you get at the la times and so on.
Across The Face
by rb bruin on Feb 2, 2009 10:13 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I find it funny...
Dwyre can’t even quote The Music Man correctly. But I bet the irony of (mis)quoting Harold Hill escaped him as well.
In The Music Man he is trying to stir up TROUBLE with a capital T purely so that he may profit from scamming the hapless locals. Sounds familiar to me.
by isodore on Feb 2, 2009 10:54 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
marcia smith
Wow – reading that makes my blood boil! I mean, I try not to let these $c bandwagon idiots get to me but what is she TALKING about? In a tie for 2nd so we’d be LUCKY to finish 4th in conference? On what planet is that a reasonable statement? And I have never heard anyone talk about even buying a plane ticket to Detroit in advance. If you are a half-way knowledgable Bruin fan, you would know that after losing 3 NBA players, we would have a lot of work to do. Plus, UCLA charters planes for the Final Four and a lot of fans just wait and do that. I am disappointed this stupid woman got me so riled up! Time to calm down,,,
GO BRUINS!!!
by uclafan11 on Feb 2, 2009 11:00 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
i know what you mean
Marcia Smith just proves herself to be a typical writer who is just digging for a story. Since she can’t find one, she tries to create something out of nothing. In the process she makes stupid statements like the ones you just pointed out.
Hey Marcia: why don’t you write about on of the many SCandals at SC. That’s a story that needs more analysis and review. Who am I kidding? SC is probably in her pockets too.
by UCLAbruin920 on Feb 2, 2009 11:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Honestly,
She is just so stupid, she doesn’t know basketball at all, and she lacks basic writing skills…SC can have her, if they want her.
Love My Bruins
by Bruingirl83 on Feb 2, 2009 1:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That is bizarre
Howland has proved himself to be one of, if not the best, coach in the Pac10 over the last few years. His recruiting classes are unrivaled, and his teams, albeit may not play the most exciting basketball, play basketball the way it was meant to be played. There’s a reason UCLA has been to the Final 4 (2 or 3, I can’t recall) years in a row, while teams like Memphis, Kansas, Tennessee, etc, routinely choke somewhere along the line: you can’t win games merely by outscoring the other team. You have to create stops. You have to get pressure on the ball. YOU HAVE TO PLAY DEFENSE. And I don’t think anybody would seriously bet against UCLA winning another regular season Pac10 championship at this point. You’d have big balls if you were going to.
It’s interesting how different the media treats different schools based on perceptions that they themselves create. UCLA is 7-2 and tied for 1st in the Pac10 lead and there is a “crisis.” Washington is 7-2 and tied for 1st in the Pac10 lead and there is discussion that UW is playing some of the best basketball around.
The point is, the media needs to make waves. Writers know this. Nobody would read their columns if they wrote what was true all the time. It’s why guys like Skip Bayless make millions from ESPN, even though he calls LeBron “Prince James.” True story: After LeBron had a triple double, including 40 points, in the playoffs, and Skip Bayless called it one of the “overrated playoff performances of all time.” People like him are controlling the perception of sports in this country.
I support Takimoto in his effort to support Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
by The VD Special on Feb 2, 2009 12:21 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Bayless is a tool
There’s just no other way to say it. No reasonable person could believe the things he says, not even him (if we are to assume that Mr. Bayless is a reasonable person).
At this point I’d also like to mention how impressed I am with what Craig Robinson has done already in his first year. 4-5 in conference already after going 0-18 last year? I don’t care if the Pac 10 is down this year, that’s a huge turnaround. There’s no more free lunch when OSU comes to a Pac 10 arena, including for our Bruins at Pauley. Our guys better be ready.
by Tydides on Feb 2, 2009 12:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yesssss.
Thank you, Ty. Craig Robinson is a coach—the real thing.
Love My Bruins
by Bruingirl83 on Feb 2, 2009 1:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Bayless
imo THE WORST writer/reporter in sports. And that’s saying something. He’s that bad.
by bucknellbruin on Feb 2, 2009 1:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
skip bayless
is among the ultimate retards I have ever seen
and that’s being kind
by blinkshot on Feb 2, 2009 1:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
skip is the prototype
moron columnist. if he believes half the garbage he says and writes he must be walking around with an extra chromosome. by saying silly things like kobe and lebron aren’t that good and giving every athlete a derogatory nickname he hopes to pique interest in himself. being the devil’s advocate and contrarian is fine, but he ends up making no sense most of the time. the only redeeming quality in bayless is his brother is an awesome chef.
Across The Face
by rb bruin on Feb 2, 2009 3:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
CBH is a God
Even though I sometimes disagree with his strategy, he’s turned us from an inconsistent mess into a top program. No one expects a national championship, final four every year, but we love his consistent recruiting of tough minded, hard nosed, quality athletes. The program is back and we owe it all to him. That is true regardless of whether we go far in the tournament or win the Pac-10. I love this coach, his players, our team and our University. Go Bruins!!!!!!!!!!!!!
by 75NatChamps on Feb 2, 2009 1:44 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
We should replace CBH with...
Whoever else has gone to the Final Four the last three years. Oh yeah, there isn’t any one else who has accomplished that. Maybe we really ought to keep him!
Seriously, I hope that the BN poll results get forwarded to him and to the Athletic Dept., so they understand how pleased we are with him. Tied for the conference lead without a center is pretty impressive to me.
by ucla7477 on Feb 2, 2009 4:08 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Our role in this?
Fact: the world is filled with morons like Marcia, ignorance like Dwyre, and ultimate retards like Bayless – not to even bring up others like Doh! and “our” Trojan…errr….Bruin blogger Wolf.
Issue: Do we care what they say? On the surface, we’d say, “Of course not – they’re idiots who are just trying to get attention”. But they do have a voice and someone may hear it…
Do we care that the uneducated reader may accept their trash as reality and that it may affect their perception of our team and its true supporters? (we probably shouldn’t). What if the parent of a recruit who is on the fence about coming to UCLA reads this – do we care more then? (maybe we should). What if CBH gets frustrated and actually thinks that the 3 disgusting letters really represents the majority of fans? (I don’t think he would, and we know it doesn’t).
Do we, as the intelligent, rational, understanding, and true supporters of UCLA basketball, have any obligation to try to offset the MSM message? I would generally say no, but I’m also willing to bet that there were very few letters to the editor after the Washington game reaffirming our faith in CBH and his program, thus allowing Dwyre and his fellow small minded colleagues the opportunity to make news from the tiny spoiled minority who have no understanding of how UCLA basketball works.
I don’t know the right answer, but I think it is something that we should consider as a group here. I think that we have an obligation to UCLA and CBH to provide a voice to what we know is the true and fair sentiment of educated Bruin fans (the same way DD.com and BN had an obligation to push a change in the football program). Sure, readers here know better. But should we make any effort to educate those outside BN (and BRO, etc)? Would letters to the LAT make a difference? If we don’t respond to these articles, do we email the Morgan Center with support of CBH, so he knows how appreciated he is and that we are on board with a young and developing basketball team?
I don’t know if Nestor and his crew are ready to assume a platform, but if we are tired of reading this crap from the MSM, maybe we should do something to correct it.
greg in denver - UCLA guy for life
by gbruin on Feb 2, 2009 6:49 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
An easy solution
Is write posts like 66. The way Bruins Nation (and SBN affiliated blogs) are configured our frontpage posts show up on all google news alerts with keys words such as “UCLA,” “UCLA basketball,” “Ben Howland” etc.
So you can be rest assured this post and 66’s post (now at the top of this blog) will show up on all UCLA basketball related google news alerts. This community has now been around long enough that thoughts expressed here are getting around.
The key I think for now is to make sure when we see articles/letters that pop up we use the platform available here (via fanposts or fanshots) to push back. We (the frontpagers) of course cannot do this by ourself. We need everyone in this community and we need everyone to chip in just like Classof66. As we have shown over the years we will not think twice about highlighting (bumping up) the best posts on the frontpage around.
Also, folks can use the tools below (such as digg, facebook icon etc) to get the word out through all social networking tools available to us. We certainly have options in terms of being able to push back. Let’s use the tools.
by Nestor on Feb 2, 2009 6:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
So that's how it works
I never understood that our front page posts are more easily Googled.
Does that mean I should pay more attention to my headlines? Make them more “searchable”.
What happens when we “Buzz Up”?
sjh
by Class of 66 on Feb 3, 2009 5:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Keep pushing...on!
Great points, N. Not that I am confident that the MSM is as diligent in researching its stories as the writers here at BN though. But, certainly, BN has never let any of these cretins slide by unchalleneged. I hope that message is getting out there.
Is there a way to attach BN to a Facebook profile?
greg in denver - UCLA guy for life
by gbruin on Feb 3, 2009 7:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Writers are Clueless
Dwyre’s column once again shows the cluelessness of print media columnists. Look at the quote:
One local columnistcrowed that “nobody outside of Westwood is predicting a Final Four run for UCLA this year.” Another [columnist] simmered that Howland was boring, and so was his team.
To Dwyre, a statement by a columnist should be treated as the pulse of a fan base. He treats these statements as factual because they are recited by someone in the print media. It’s sort of like saying “It must be true because I read it on the Internet.”
The fact that a local columnist says Howland is boring or that we aren’t going to the Final 4 this year doesn’t make it so. Moreover, even if Howland is boring and even if we aren’t going to the Final 4, that hardly means that there are problems with a capital P. (Side note, what the heck is “River City”? Surely that’s not a nickname for LA.) Howland easily has UCLA in the top 5 of all basketball programs as of today. The future includes a #1 freshman class and a #2 (if we believe the moderators of BRO) incoming freshmen class next year, with a deep recruiting pipeline behind that. There is no problem. There is only the brightest of futures for UCLA basketball as long as Ben Howland is in charge of the program.
These drive-by columnists do themselves and the dying dinosaur called print media a disservice when they cite other writers’ opinions as fact and drop opinions that have no attachment to reality.
by BruinsRule on Feb 3, 2009 12:07 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
In fact
the columnist who called Howland boring was TJ Simers of Dwyre’s own paper, the Trojan Times!
I have seen this phenomenon many times at the LAT. Simers writes something inflammatory and one of the other sports hacks comments on it in their own column. More often it is the other way around. Plaschke or Dwyre will write a column and Simers will then trash it the next day.
Pardon my French, but who the hell is interested in reading one columnist bash the opinion of another columnist (employed by the same paper, no less)? Is this what passes for journalism at the LAT? Apparently so.
by Barnes2JJ on Feb 3, 2009 12:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Journalistic incest
“If your source-tree doesn’t fork, then you might be a literary inbred.”
(Apologies to Jeff Foxworthy)
by Bruinut on Feb 3, 2009 6:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
