- Joined
- Jul 11, 2005
- Messages
- 15,523
- Reaction score
- 27,524
...JMHO
All the talk about the Borges case has got me thinking about the rise of the multimedia sports guy. You know the guy who writes in the paper, goes on the TV and radio talk shows, plies the internet. Borges, Felger, Callahan, etc, etc, etc.
It USED to be that information was given to us in 2 forms. The reporter, who told us who, what, where, when, and how; and then there was the editorialist/columnist who told us the WHY or the story behind the story, or his/her opinion of events. Those lines have been crossed over and over again. All too often now its the REPORTERS who can't resist the temptation to tell WHY....continually.
In this respect I fear for Mike Reis. Right now he is the best out there at doing us, the fans, a service and telling us who, what, where, when, and how about the Patriots. NOW because Reiss is doing such a good job reporting on the Pats, he is starting to show up more and more on these OTHER media shows telling us his OPINION on the WHY of the things he reports on.... AND quite frankly, I'm not interested in what Reis might think about WHY something happened. MY opinion is just as good as his. Actually, now that I think about it, probably better since I happen to know the game better than he does, so once he has provided me with the facts, I can make MY OWN opinions, thank you.
Mike Felger USED to be a decent reporter. He was a guy who could get a story and find out useful info for fans. NOW that its become "all about Felger", his contacts within the Pats lockerroom have dried up and his is better now at being a talking head than a sport journalist. In other words he's just a nother guy with an opinion, no better or worse than our own. In other words he's USELESS to me as an information source. In fact he oculd be Ron Borges II in the making. I would hate to see Reiss fall into that trap.
Sometime in the last 2 decades the news has become "infotainment" . And during that time the line between reporting and editorializing have been blurred to the point of non-existence. It used to be that a Reporter told us "the facts"...ONLY. Then in a SEPARATE section of the paper or newscast the owner of the meda had the opportunity to give his opinion and tell us HIS opinion of WHY a particular event took place. Now, especially in the radio and TV, fact and opinion are one. AND as Pogo (a comic strip from MY generation
) used to say, "I have seen the enemy... and it is US."
IT IS WE who have allowed to some extent, the talking heads to essentually tell us what just occurred. The proliferation the talking head, like Limbaugh, OReilly, etc of the world are just examples (and this isn't about left or right BTW) of people WANTING others to form their opinions of events FOR THEM.
In other words, after listening to a presidential debate, I DON'T want to hear from 2 spin doctors TELLING me what I just heard. After the candidates have spoken I just want them to say good night....and LET ME decide on the impact of what was said. Instead too many of us (including myself sometimes) wait for the papers or the spin doctors to tell US what happened. In other words because of laziness, we have abrogated our responsibilities as citizens.
Sorry about the last 2 paragraphs, probably the wrong forum for this. But then again this is AN EDITORIAL, so its JMHO
All the talk about the Borges case has got me thinking about the rise of the multimedia sports guy. You know the guy who writes in the paper, goes on the TV and radio talk shows, plies the internet. Borges, Felger, Callahan, etc, etc, etc.
It USED to be that information was given to us in 2 forms. The reporter, who told us who, what, where, when, and how; and then there was the editorialist/columnist who told us the WHY or the story behind the story, or his/her opinion of events. Those lines have been crossed over and over again. All too often now its the REPORTERS who can't resist the temptation to tell WHY....continually.
In this respect I fear for Mike Reis. Right now he is the best out there at doing us, the fans, a service and telling us who, what, where, when, and how about the Patriots. NOW because Reiss is doing such a good job reporting on the Pats, he is starting to show up more and more on these OTHER media shows telling us his OPINION on the WHY of the things he reports on.... AND quite frankly, I'm not interested in what Reis might think about WHY something happened. MY opinion is just as good as his. Actually, now that I think about it, probably better since I happen to know the game better than he does, so once he has provided me with the facts, I can make MY OWN opinions, thank you.
Mike Felger USED to be a decent reporter. He was a guy who could get a story and find out useful info for fans. NOW that its become "all about Felger", his contacts within the Pats lockerroom have dried up and his is better now at being a talking head than a sport journalist. In other words he's just a nother guy with an opinion, no better or worse than our own. In other words he's USELESS to me as an information source. In fact he oculd be Ron Borges II in the making. I would hate to see Reiss fall into that trap.
Sometime in the last 2 decades the news has become "infotainment" . And during that time the line between reporting and editorializing have been blurred to the point of non-existence. It used to be that a Reporter told us "the facts"...ONLY. Then in a SEPARATE section of the paper or newscast the owner of the meda had the opportunity to give his opinion and tell us HIS opinion of WHY a particular event took place. Now, especially in the radio and TV, fact and opinion are one. AND as Pogo (a comic strip from MY generation
) used to say, "I have seen the enemy... and it is US."IT IS WE who have allowed to some extent, the talking heads to essentually tell us what just occurred. The proliferation the talking head, like Limbaugh, OReilly, etc of the world are just examples (and this isn't about left or right BTW) of people WANTING others to form their opinions of events FOR THEM.
In other words, after listening to a presidential debate, I DON'T want to hear from 2 spin doctors TELLING me what I just heard. After the candidates have spoken I just want them to say good night....and LET ME decide on the impact of what was said. Instead too many of us (including myself sometimes) wait for the papers or the spin doctors to tell US what happened. In other words because of laziness, we have abrogated our responsibilities as citizens.
Sorry about the last 2 paragraphs, probably the wrong forum for this. But then again this is AN EDITORIAL, so its JMHO
Last edited:
