Easterbrook Slapped Down by ESPN's OWN Ombudsperson

[FlyingElvis75]

This is EXACTLY what I have said on this board whenever the sports media start throwing crap around. Especially the thread re: Cris Collinsworth and the idea that he "believes in the truth."

The idea of "research" in the vast majority of sports media is worthy of ridicule. Glad this guy has the cojones to own up to it.

 

[unoriginal]

It's a shame the Ombudsman only writes her column once every month or so. That was a damn good read.

 

[Krugman]

That was a great article,it makes some excellent points regardng sports reporting in general.As someone else noted ,I wasnt' aware ESPN had an ombudsman.Thanks Shmessy....

 

[njpatsfan]

It's a shame the Ombudsman only writes her column once every month or so. That was a damn good read.

An Ombudsman is merely a fig leaf so that organizations can claim to have a journalistic system of checks and balances. They almost without exception have no teeth. They are relegated to the back pages and where their muted criticisms of the reporting go unread, and certainly unheeded.

Ms. Schreiber is obviously from a previous generation of journalists who prized ethics over the bias and self-aggrandizement that today characterizes modern mainstream media. She has thoughtfully put her finger right at the heart of this issue. But why so late and so short ? Check out here own description of herself:

The first thing you should know is that I am a highly unrepresentative representative. I do not fit the actual or desired profile of an ESPN viewer, listener, reader or ESPN.com-interactor. For starters, I do not wear a mighty mansuit. I am a female, age 61; I live and will write this column from my home on a little lake on the outskirts of a rural hamlet (pop. 3,358) in upstate New York, outside the reach of any major media markets or reliable cell phone service; I am an avid reader of books and stroller (also paddler) in nature.

The possible reasons for ESPN selecting somebody as Ombudsman that doesn't even watch or use their product, I leave as an exercise to the reader.

The biggest joke of an Ombudsman is in the organization in which she used to work - the NY Times. Had an ombudsman actually had an ounce of power in that now sad and discredited institution, people like Jayson Blair never would have been able to write 600 stories for the Times, and people like Maureen Dowd and Paul Krugman wouldn't be working there now.


R

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

Thank you for the link. The Easterbrook crap obviously had bothered me, but so had the Eli Manning stuff. I'm glad to see someone else noticed.

As for Easterbrook, are you guys still reading his stuff? I haven't read TMQ the past couple weeks and am not really missing it. It'd be nice (but I know it won't happen) if he were to experience a noticeable loss of clicks.

 

[bresna]

I have forwarded this link all over the place. What an excellent article and I really like the fact that the Patriots tape scandal was second fiddle to the Oklahoma State fiasco. Reporter Jenni Carlson should be fired for what she wrote about quarterback Bobby Reid, not put on Good Morning America!

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

Great article, I wish that more people were concerned with the state of media opinions vs reporting. There seems to be a nationwide brainwashing going on that has reduced the collective intelligence of our population.

You can say that again.

In all forms of media now, whether sports, news or even just entertainment, the truth has completely vanished.

In sports, people are plainly biased one way or the other. No major effort to hide that bias.

In news, they pretend they are being objective, but most every item somehow falls along 'party' lines. This obscures all truth in our society since all politicans lie constantly. We need an objective source for news, but the news channels are along the lines of pick your poison, liberal or conservative. No truth or integrity.

In entertainment, the media sits around and acts holier than thou, even though they know damn well that Britney Spears or whoever is paying their bills.

We currently have a society and media based on a complete lack of sincerity.

Rant over.

 

[LoveDemPats]

Am I a complete fool to think that there would be value in a site that actually told the truth?

How bout this, a site that really gave the viewers various sides to the stories.

I would imagine that there would be some value. It could look similar to Eddy Munster's site (Florio), and could simply have a story written, then links right after the story for opposition viewpoint. They could be updated, and info could be added on to further clarify stories.

There could even be breakdowns on the amount of time writers have been correct about things that they claim are true. It seems that so much of the time, Clayton and dweebs like him get away with saying things that are way wrong, and then they act as if they have always been right.


I just wonder if it would generate hits.

 

[shmessy]

Am I a complete fool to think that there would be value in a site that actually told the truth?

How bout this, a site that really gave the viewers various sides to the stories.

I would imagine that there would be some value. It could look similar to Eddy Munster's site (Florio), and could simply have a story written, then links right after the story for opposition viewpoint. They could be updated, and info could be added on to further clarify stories.

There could even be breakdowns on the amount of time writers have been correct about things that they claim are true. It seems that so much of the time, Clayton and dweebs like him get away with saying things that are way wrong, and then they act as if they have always been right.


I just wonder if it would generate hits.

You are on that site right now.

 

[LoveDemPats]

You are on that site right now.

I thought that this was BIO2045. Sorry bout that folks. (exits with book bag, face all red.)

Right you are by the way.

I just wish that there was accountablility that was like on the level of JUDGEMENT DAY!!! (kidding)

Yea, perhaps a little over the top, but wouldn't it be nice if there was some kinda truth out there. It seems that people can get away with anything. The Ombudsperson seemed to be reasonable and cool. We need a lot more of her kind around.

 

[shmessy]

http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2007...-on-patriotgate-injuries-manning-mcnabb-mort/

Good to see the MSM now picking up on the Schreiber Smack Down of Easterbrook.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Definitely good to see--hopefully it will help put things into perspective for all but the most rabid Pats-haters.

They will never see it and even if they did, it would never change their opinion.

They're not about to let the facts get in the way of their delusions and for our part, we shouldn't be concerned with the delusions of others... just sit back and enjoy watching the Patriots take out their anger over the ignroance and lies others have been spreading about them!

Ironically I agree with Easterbrook that this could be trouble for the NFL - especially once Joe Six Pack realizes that Roger Goodell and the entire NFL actually CONDONE cheating... most people couldn't care less about a videocamera - its the stealing of calls that they think is cheating, and the NFL is going to find the general public questioning the integrity of the game once they realize that.

 

[upstater1]

Those with patience get rewarded:

See the middle portion of the piece:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=schreiber_leanne&id=3050882

I have three reactions to this:

1. The reason why Gundy's tirade was big news but that Jenni Carlson's ridiculous hitjob (I read it, it was bad) was ignored is already explained by Schreiber herself: ie crap writing like Carlson's are par for the course in the media, we see them regularly, no surprise. As for Gundy, it's never smart to attack a professional woman by asking her if she has kids. That's a no-no, and only a neanderthal caveman would think that was a proper means of defending a player who (I agree) had been improperly maligned.

2. Reading the first section made me feel sad that our society is being completely warped by a corporate owned and sensational media with very little substance. It's a sick society.

3. Why in the world is this woman Schreiber bothering with this job as ombudsman? Clearly, no one gives a damn what she thinks over at Disney-Bristol. I imagine her in a little office in the basement next to the boiler.

 

[upstater1]

The biggest joke of an Ombudsman is in the organization in which she used to work - the NY Times. Had an ombudsman actually had an ounce of power in that now sad and discredited institution, people like Jayson Blair never would have been able to write 600 stories for the Times, and people like Maureen Dowd and Paul Krugman wouldn't be working there now.
R

Right, because anyone who disagrees with you should be muzzled. Well, I agree with you abou Dowd, but she is what she is. You know she's not a reporter, don't you? As for Krugman, he's a stellar reporter who deals in facts. Just because you don't like him doesn't mean he's not doing his job, unlike Judy Miller who was exposed for the fraud she was.

 

[Patriot Missile]

Nice piece of writing. If we were cheating during SB 38 I think the camera man should be fired. That was an all out slug fest in the second half.

 

[Brady'sButtBoy]

Anyone training writers, or training to be a writer would find a fine example of taut, concise expression of the discipline in Schreiber's work.

Easterbrook was out of line, I'll agree, despite being a fan of his column. He should have been more tight lipped until he had (has?) the evidence he alluded to, absolutely. I am inclined to believe it is Easterbrook's inflamed love of football that led him to advance an unproven theory, but I'm not sure about that. I want evidence from him that he wasn't just writing for 'clicks', a shallow endeavor meant for personal enhancement, not for preservation of the sanctity of the NFL. Multi-billion dollar exploits like the NFL have plenty of reason to hide the skeletons in the closet, TMQ is right about that, he may have become a bit overzealous in his pursuit of hidden secrets. But, like many here wondered at the time, why did the NFL, convinced the Pats infraction warranted the most severe penalty ever imposed, see fit to destroy the 'evidence' so quickly when demonstration of the extent of the Pat's behavior could have clarified both the concerns of those who felt the Pats were treated lightly and those, like myself, who feel the Pat's were unfairly hosed by a heavy handed commissioner.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Anyone training writers, or training to be a writer would find a fine example of taut, concise expression of the discipline in Schreiber's work.

Easterbrook was out of line, I'll agree, despite being a fan of his column. He should have been more tight lipped until he had (has?) the evidence he alluded to, absolutely. I am inclined to believe it is Easterbrook's inflamed love of football that led him to advance an unproven theory, but I'm not sure about that. I want evidence from him that he wasn't just writing for 'clicks', a shallow endeavor meant for personal enhancement, not for preservation of the sanctity of the NFL. Multi-billion dollar exploits like the NFL have plenty of reason to hide the skeletons in the closet, TMQ is right about that, he may have become a bit overzealous in his pursuit of hidden secrets. But, like many here wondered at the time, why did the NFL, convinced the Pats infraction warranted the most severe penalty ever imposed, see fit to destroy the 'evidence' so quickly when demonstration of the extent of the Pat's behavior could have clarified both the concerns of those who felt the Pats were treated lightly and those, like myself, who feel the Pat's were unfairly hosed by a heavy handed commissioner.

Since it takes very little intelligence to determine that the Patriots advantage by cheating (videotaping signals) is minimal over legal ways of stealing signals (simply watching coaches, using lipreaders, using the "legal" cameras to record signals, etc.), I am forced to the conclusion that Easterbrook is either
1) dumb
2) too lazy to figure this out
3) on a vendetta

Really, this is paranoia! To give credence to his garbage (garbage because it is all based on a false, easily disproven assumption that the videotaping gives someone some truly significant advantage) is to undermine truth, justice and the American way.

Sorry, got a little carried away there. It does undermine common sense; it's really bizarre.

 

[jaytyme]

let's be clear here:

1.) stealing signals is NOT cheating... its gamesmanship
2.) using a videocamera on the sideline during the game violates nfl rules

belichik and the patriots were punished for 2.) breaking nfl rules.

if the nfl could prove that 1.)above occured as a direct result of 2.) the penalty would have been far more severe.

on the contrary, the nfl officially stated that 1.) did not occur because of 2.)

this is not just being found "not guilty"......it being declared "innocent" of the charges that were swirling in the court of public opinion.

 

[PatriotsReign]

Most regular fans of other teams wont read it. IMO

IMO, opposing fans have decided to believe what they "want" to believe based upon their disdain for the Patriots and Bill Belichick. They are comfortable with what they believe and their minds are made up.

Talk about purposeful ignorance!

 

[DarrylS]

Although it is well written and makes a lot of sense, it is too little too late buried deep inside of ESPN. This is a faux checks and balances system that makes some people feel good, but she has little impact on ESPN and how they and the sports news machine does business.

I like this quote:

"My concern, though, is less for Gundy or Belichick than for viewers and readers who grow fat on the fast food of opinion while starving for reported fact. "ESPN used to be a place where sports news was reported," wrote one of the many readers who complained about the two Easterbrook articles on Belichick. "Now it's just a factory for controversy. I guess in that way it's just a microcosm of America media in general, but that does not make it any less distasteful."