08-31-2010, 02:39 PM
|
#7
|
|
PatsFans.com Supporter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 25,370
|
Re: Why the Washington Post >>>>>>>>>> Boston Herald
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joker
no...let's not be fair to Tomase
he ran with it...because HE wanted to further HIS ambitions and career as a "reporter" ....he could have cared less about the effect that story could have on the Patriots...and he certainly didn't give a crap about the effect that piece of fairy tale pie had on the Patriot fan base, who watched from their seats and homes as the focus of the Patriots team was diverted to defending itself against this libel in the week leading up to the Super Bowl.
A car careens wildly down Beacon St...strikes the waddling "journalist"...he lands at my feet in a crumpled heap...I walk across the street, into a deli,order a roast beef on rye with a side of potato salad.
|
He deserves to be piled on because he didn't get independent confirmation for his source, but he was no worse than Gregg Bishop of the NY Times who introduced the world to Matt Walsh and set the whole ball in motion with a strategically timed piece about how Arlene Specter was going to have Congress look into whole Spygate matter. And he was certainly no worse then Mike Fish at ESPN who in response to the NY Times article rushed a Matt Walsh story that he was sitting on for over a month where Walsh claimed that he had damaging evidence on the Pats although he refused to say what it was or even proof that he possessed such evidence unless ESPN paid his legal bills.
Personally, I feel that Tomase gets far too much of the blame and Bishop and Fish get far too much of a free pass. Even without Tomase, the story was already rolling and growing. It would have been a big distraction with or without Tomase. All Tomase did was tie the ambigious allegations thrown at the Pats in the Times and ESPN article with the Rams' walkthrough. Don't get me wrong, that is significant, but Tomase never runs that piece without the Times or ESPN articles. |
|
|
Linear Mode
