Sports fans are saps. At least most of them are. I'm not being snooty about it, I'm just pointing out an unmitigated fact that the sports media depends on. An equally obvious and related fact is that the sports media is as unreliable a source for facts as Pravda. Does the sports media give a damn? Of course not. The New York Post, the original poster parchment for making up headlines to sell a fishwrap, has been doing it for decades. Now, everyone in the sports media does it and the fans soak it all up like sponges.
I'd like to think that at least some of you don't like being lied to. Blatant sensationalism is the sports media's modus operandi. That the radio talking heads will say literally anything to get you to call in is bad enough, but when it comes to rumors - well, let's just call it extreme irresponsibility.You know the drill: Every day somebody reports about a rumor from "unnamed sources" (a term that has long since eroded into nothing more than a licence to lie). More than 90% of the time the rumor doesn't pan out, the person (or people) who originally reported the rumor never refer to it again, and the fan is left to get angry, call the local sports radio station and yell and scream along with the host(s) who, instead of being accountable for making up the story, is now prodding the listeners to whine the same tired, old, "this guy's gotta go!" "fire that guy" "trade this guy" "get rid of him!" "this guy sucks" "that guy's a joke" garbage as if any of us really know exactly what's transpiring behind the scenes.
Lesson One: None of us know. None of us! Not you, not me, not the sofa, and not the sports media.
Lesson Two: Yes, many reporters have inside connections and occasionally something good comes out of it, but considering how many rumors are stillborn, if somebody claims to have an inside track on some juicy information without an official party of some sort available to corroborate the info at hand, and if the story doesn't appear in any other market, refer to Lesson One.
Instead of lighting into everyone in sight after a another stupid rumor, fans should start sending the message to the right party: Call in and blister the sports media for manipulating you in the first place. They know that as long as there are so many weak-minded fans ready to eat up everything they say, they'll happily keep shoveling the manure in the fans' direction. And those fans will always accept it as gospel in the same method as those lazy-thinking followers of reality TV, televangelists, the National Enquirer, Entertainment Tonight, Jerry Springer, Jesse Jackson and Rush Limbaugh.
"The rumors are flying that Brett Favre can write the Lord's Prayer on the head of a pin!"
"Oh my God, it must be TRUE!!"
I remember two things the sports media did that offended me enough to take the only action I could: Drop them right in the grease.
1) Whenever a local team made it to the World Series the New York Post had a gimmick of having celebrity guest write a column during the Series. The Yankees were playing in 1977 and the Post had Joe DiMaggio reporting, which was fantastic. Who wouldn't want to know what one of the greatest players of all time had to say? It was a great coup for the Post, which, other than Dick Young, had an excellent sports section back then because it was packed with all kinds of information. But by 1986 the Post's sports section had been pared of most of it's statistical appeal, and when the Mets made it to the Series, the Post had the audacity to bring in George Steinbrenner, of all people, as their celebrity guest-writer. Why the hell would they believe that even the most casual Met fan would want to read what the owner of the Yankees has to say? If he was a respected individual, that would be one thing. But Steinbrenner is every single thing the media lives for, and he knows squat about the game on the field. It was a major-league slap in the face to every Met fan. In a bit of car-accident curiosity, I read a little of his first article, and it was more nauseating than I expected. I threw the paper in the garbage and swore off the Post forever.
2) In the middle of the 1996 NHL season, the Los Angeles Kings were trying to trade Wayne Gretzky and the scuttlebut was that the New York Rangers were interested. After a while the Rangers backed out, stating several reasons at the time. After their announcement, WFAN's Mike Francesa, in his typically arrogant, sing-song "I know something you don't know" tone of voice, suggested to his sidekick Chris " The Spayed Poodle" Russo that the Rangers were going to acquire Gretzky the next day. "I have a feeling something's gonna happen tomorrow."
Russo asked, "What do you mean, Mikey?"
Mikey said smugly, "Oh, I just have a feeling. You'll see." Russo went along with it because other than being the Jerry Lewis of sports radio, that's what he does best. Of course, the next day nothing happened. Gretzky was eventually traded to St. Louis and Francesa never said another word about it. What little respect I even thought I had for him vaporized right then and there.
I've taught myself how to get through at least some of these murky waters. First of all, I don't read the local media reports of how my teams do. Even in the best of times they always put a negative spin on everything. The local team can win a game by a huge margin, but the radio and the press is always, "Well, they did this wrong, and this player didn't do that right and somebody screwed this up and the coach made some bad decisions..." Shoulda, shoulda, shoulda. And if the team is going really well, count on somebody to stir up trouble to keep things "interesting." The problem is that's it's too easy for them to sit their fat butts behind the microphone or the keyboard and sound off as if they're some kind of Einsteins of sports. Sadly, a lot of the fans are just as bad, and many times far worse. It's abominable what they'll let on the airwaves. I'm far less offended by any profanity then I am of complete incompetence. If the sports media and their loyal subjects are really as knowledgeable as they want everyone to believe, then why don't they quit their jobs and apply for a general manager's position? A case can be made that if one of those know-it-all sports media hounds like GM-wannabe Adam Rubin were to actually take over a team, you'd instantly have a new Steinbrenner in town (without the billion$), and again, we all know about the Boss's total lack of baseball knowledge (The game. Not the money the Yankees use to buy everything they need). The media would have a field day with the new GM on the block, especially if he's a know-nothing loudmouth - be it a fan or a ex-scribe - and the fans would be screaming left and right about how great or bad he is... ...oh man, this is making me dizzy...
Anyway, my method of following my teams is simple: If I can't watch the game, I get my info from the box scores and the recaps. The rest I pick off the wire reports because they report the facts without a personal opinion. As for rumors, even in a national venue like Yahoo or USA Today, 99.9% of the time it's local. A rumor about the Mets or Yankees will be New York-based. Same for teams in every other city. However, if the rumor from one market is being reported in other markets, especially a market that has nothing to do with the story, then it could have some substance. Rumors are fun, but not if it's an abject, sleazy way to sell papers and get ratings at my expense. I don't like being lied to at any time, let alone day after week after month after year. That's why I stopped letting the media do my thinking for me. Sports fans think it's fun to bitch and moan about every single thing no matter what, but what they don't realize is that it's an insult to their own intelligence. Too many sports fans are not even intelligent enough to recognize it or they're just lazy. Or both. Those are the ones who are permanently ensnared in the sports media's web.
Just because the sports media is in print or on your TV and radio doesn't automatically mean that they know what they're talking about and, for the most part, they don't. Most of them are a bunch of pathetic, phony cartoon characters with no credibility. For whatever reasons, the stuffed suits in the network offices are obsessed with this type of loudmouthed style and as a result the airwaves are jammed with ex-athletes and amateurish excuses for talent all trying to make a name for themselves by seeing who can yell the loudest, be the most "outrageous," and gain the most notoriety and publicity no matter how stupid or dishonest they are. I recently came across one overnight radio host who obnoxiously claimed that anything in sports that took place before 1950 doesn't count. The "click" my radio made when I shut it off had more integrity than that load. There are a few exceptions who are really good at what they do - Jim Rome is one example - but otherwise all these newbies keep popping up like weeds and they all sound the same (which doesn't rhyme with "lame" for no reason here). They all have to have their unique "edge." Compounding the hysteria overload is the fact that many sports franchises around the country put their announcers under strict guidelines to openly root root root for the home team which makes any game virtually unlistenable. Right Mr. Sterling?
Olde School Solution: Winning (or at least making a sincere effort on and off the field) solves everything...unless your the Atlanta Braves playing in front of 15,000 empty seats in a playoff game, but that's another story for another time.
There's nothing wrong with emotion in sports media and fans. It's basically the name of the game. However, it's gotten way out of hand and it projects to get worse because integrity is going the way of the dodo because of all the yelling. I could never get a job as a TV/radio host or columnist because I prefer to use integrity, common sense, and (hang on to your jockstraps) the facts, instead of fiction, emotional outbursts and juvenile name-calling in a dopey attempt to prove how "tough" I am. In the sports media's eyes (and ears) the truth is boring and as they say, "Never let the facts get in the way of a good story." Why the hell not? That concept would be really controversial! Go ahead, sports media! Show some guts!
Yeah, right.
Russo asked, "What do you mean, Mikey?"
Mikey said smugly, "Oh, I just have a feeling. You'll see." Russo went along with it because other than being the Jerry Lewis of sports radio, that's what he does best. Of course, the next day nothing happened. Gretzky was eventually traded to St. Louis and Francesa never said another word about it. What little respect I even thought I had for him vaporized right then and there.
I've taught myself how to get through at least some of these murky waters. First of all, I don't read the local media reports of how my teams do. Even in the best of times they always put a negative spin on everything. The local team can win a game by a huge margin, but the radio and the press is always, "Well, they did this wrong, and this player didn't do that right and somebody screwed this up and the coach made some bad decisions..." Shoulda, shoulda, shoulda. And if the team is going really well, count on somebody to stir up trouble to keep things "interesting." The problem is that's it's too easy for them to sit their fat butts behind the microphone or the keyboard and sound off as if they're some kind of Einsteins of sports. Sadly, a lot of the fans are just as bad, and many times far worse. It's abominable what they'll let on the airwaves. I'm far less offended by any profanity then I am of complete incompetence. If the sports media and their loyal subjects are really as knowledgeable as they want everyone to believe, then why don't they quit their jobs and apply for a general manager's position? A case can be made that if one of those know-it-all sports media hounds like GM-wannabe Adam Rubin were to actually take over a team, you'd instantly have a new Steinbrenner in town (without the billion$), and again, we all know about the Boss's total lack of baseball knowledge (The game. Not the money the Yankees use to buy everything they need). The media would have a field day with the new GM on the block, especially if he's a know-nothing loudmouth - be it a fan or a ex-scribe - and the fans would be screaming left and right about how great or bad he is... ...oh man, this is making me dizzy...
Anyway, my method of following my teams is simple: If I can't watch the game, I get my info from the box scores and the recaps. The rest I pick off the wire reports because they report the facts without a personal opinion. As for rumors, even in a national venue like Yahoo or USA Today, 99.9% of the time it's local. A rumor about the Mets or Yankees will be New York-based. Same for teams in every other city. However, if the rumor from one market is being reported in other markets, especially a market that has nothing to do with the story, then it could have some substance. Rumors are fun, but not if it's an abject, sleazy way to sell papers and get ratings at my expense. I don't like being lied to at any time, let alone day after week after month after year. That's why I stopped letting the media do my thinking for me. Sports fans think it's fun to bitch and moan about every single thing no matter what, but what they don't realize is that it's an insult to their own intelligence. Too many sports fans are not even intelligent enough to recognize it or they're just lazy. Or both. Those are the ones who are permanently ensnared in the sports media's web.
Just because the sports media is in print or on your TV and radio doesn't automatically mean that they know what they're talking about and, for the most part, they don't. Most of them are a bunch of pathetic, phony cartoon characters with no credibility. For whatever reasons, the stuffed suits in the network offices are obsessed with this type of loudmouthed style and as a result the airwaves are jammed with ex-athletes and amateurish excuses for talent all trying to make a name for themselves by seeing who can yell the loudest, be the most "outrageous," and gain the most notoriety and publicity no matter how stupid or dishonest they are. I recently came across one overnight radio host who obnoxiously claimed that anything in sports that took place before 1950 doesn't count. The "click" my radio made when I shut it off had more integrity than that load. There are a few exceptions who are really good at what they do - Jim Rome is one example - but otherwise all these newbies keep popping up like weeds and they all sound the same (which doesn't rhyme with "lame" for no reason here). They all have to have their unique "edge." Compounding the hysteria overload is the fact that many sports franchises around the country put their announcers under strict guidelines to openly root root root for the home team which makes any game virtually unlistenable. Right Mr. Sterling?
Olde School Solution: Winning (or at least making a sincere effort on and off the field) solves everything...unless your the Atlanta Braves playing in front of 15,000 empty seats in a playoff game, but that's another story for another time.
There's nothing wrong with emotion in sports media and fans. It's basically the name of the game. However, it's gotten way out of hand and it projects to get worse because integrity is going the way of the dodo because of all the yelling. I could never get a job as a TV/radio host or columnist because I prefer to use integrity, common sense, and (hang on to your jockstraps) the facts, instead of fiction, emotional outbursts and juvenile name-calling in a dopey attempt to prove how "tough" I am. In the sports media's eyes (and ears) the truth is boring and as they say, "Never let the facts get in the way of a good story." Why the hell not? That concept would be really controversial! Go ahead, sports media! Show some guts!
Yeah, right.
No comments:
Post a Comment