"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
O'Connell really is pretty limited. Also, I don't know what makes those guys (O'Connell and Swinney) think that people want to tune in and listen to mundane chatter about non-sports topics while driving home in the afternoon. It's a very weak show and I've stopped listening to it.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
Yo tambien.
Even when they are talking sports, its bad. OC was on the other day with former Jazz assistant Gordon Chiesa and it was awful radio. Gordie was nice and all, but you could tell he was annoyed that he had to keep correcting/educating OC on some basics.
Over the last year, 700 has tried to go with more local talk, but theyve had some awful shows in "TK in the midday" and now "OC and Swinney". Could be worse though, at least they are better than "Gunther and Ben".
That is not something unique to O'Connell and Swinney, every sports radio personality in this market have suffered from this affliction at one time or another -- each day. To be fair, there is a lot of air time to fill, and some days can be slow for sports topics, but the folks in this market stiff suffer from this affliction on busy sports topic days.
"It'd be nice to please everyone but I thought it would be more interesting to have a point of view." -- Oscar Levant
It's an easy problem to solve. Don't listen
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I listen to Riley's podcasts for the interviews -- that way I can scroll through all the Jazz and RSL stuff and pick up the interesting Ute-related interviews. I've sampled a few minutes of O'Connell and Swinney and have stopped. I don't listen to any of the other SLC sports talk.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
"It'd be nice to please everyone but I thought it would be more interesting to have a point of view." -- Oscar Levant
RSL has yanked the media credential from Gordon Monson. The Tribune has in turn yanked their reporter and photographer from covering tonight's game.
RSL says they don't believe Monson is fair, and believe his radio gig with Spence Checketts is a conflict of interest. The Trib says Monson has assured them it's not a conflict and they believe RSL is trying to control coverage.
MLS says they're investigating.
Should be interesting. I don't think many of us like Monson, and I think he does often use the "columnist" title to skate the line, but yanking the credential isn't going to help RSL IMO
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Remember when Monson reported something he admitted he imagined as fact under his 'columnist' guise. Dude needs to be out of journalism.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm bummed that the inevitable post from SCP hasn't hit yet....
Anyway good for RSL. I'm not sure I understand the trib response.....not cover the game so your readers go to your competitors?
Munson is a pot stirring hack. A local version of skip bayless. Working for the trib shouldnt make one immune to this kind of thing. Heck, ive seen dozens of articles trashing on byu and passed over them knowing that they are monson click bait.
This is going to be interesting to watch play out. I suspect that you are right, but this is maybe as good a time as any if they are serious. Granted, there will be a lot of backlash and weeping and wailing as the media bonds together over this absolute injustice. And then a new story will come out and just around the corner is fall camp. If monson and his crew continue to pout, they will lose listeners in droves. I think the sports fan population has much less interest in the day to day life and struggles of a media member than the media folks think.
Another funny note in this story......Monson and Spence have a fairly regular segment where they mock how little Gordon knows about soccer. (Spence will ask Gordon for his thoughts on how a certain player performed and Monson will start into a routine where he talks about a player he has never heard of doing incredible things in a game he didn't watch, or even know was going on. I gotta admit, its funny.)
As much as Monson will condemn this and put up a strong front, if RSL can weather the initial storm and wait this out without buckling, I think you'll see Monson come in off the fringes and be less of a Don Imus- wannabe and more of a Brad Rock. If one franchise can stand up to quack journalism, others might join the bandwagon (The Jazz won't, but if Utah and BYU decided to do the same thing, Monson would have no choice but to drop the act.) Its so unlikely as to almost be laughed off, but you never know.
Yanking a columnist's credentials is the hallmark of thin-skinned administrators who aren't doing their job when it comes to controlling the message they want. They resort to this because they can't stand that others are shaping that message better than they are, and it's a message they're embarrassed to admit carries no small measure of validity.
Those who applaud this are borderline losers in life who find their identity almost exclusively in what someone says about "their" team. This is the realm of Donald Trump and other entities -- commonly found in dictatorships -- that can't handle the weight of a free press doing it's job.
As one who has been involved, albeit slightly, in a case where my department committed libel against a MAJOR sports figure -- on a scale of 1 to 10, we're talking 11 in terms of his notoriety and impact -- I laugh at people who think revoking credentials on the basis that they don't like what the columnist is writing is appropriate. They literally have no clue as to how the media operates at any level. It would be like me insisting I know more about law enforcement than DiehardUte.
I'll be happy to share the experience in question later on -- my Sunday is busy, my daughter's birthday is tomorrow. But I logged on for a quick minute or two, and yes, I have plenty to say about this matter.
Last edited by SoCalPat; 07-17-2016 at 12:48 PM.
I don't follow soccer at all, let alone RSL. Still, I am getting a whiff of incompetence on the part of RSL management. Am I right?
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
I don't think anyone is applauding pulling press credentials, they are applauding punking Monson. RSL is managing this poorly but they are rightly saying he is a hack journalist. He is in every sense of the word.
Proof of that is the general abuse he endures from various organizations. Jim Boylen's "Nice of you to show up..." Is the sole reason I can't truly hate the guy. Kodiak offering free tickets to the press is also an indication that something is amiss with the local media.
Defending Monson is indefensible.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If Monson evokes these kinds of emotions from you or anyone else, guess what? He's already won. because he's doing his job by doing so, even if his critics don't recognize it. From a pure sportswriting perspective, Monson's writing is good, not great. He's a million miles from being T.J. Simers in his prime as a pot-stirrer, and his prose ain't gonna remind anyone of Jim Murray or Blackie Sherrod, two of my all-time favorites. But he gets people talking and responding. And as newspapers lose the influence and dominance they have within media, coupled with a decidedly niche listenership (sports talk radio is still very much a niche market in all but a handful of markets nationally; SLC is no exception to this), Monson remains the undisputed king of sports media in the state of Utah.
You think Monson is getting punked, but RSL pulling this stunt that it did only enhances that status. Do you really think anyone else in the largely milquetoast SLC sports media could evoke this kind of reaction from anyone else?
Sports fans are a passionate bunch, but they're also wildly hypocritical. They want sportswriters to give the enemy the 60 Minutes/Mike Wallace-showing-up-unannounced-at-the-front-door treatment, but they want their own team to be covered by Oprah. As it pertains to Utah athletics, I think Utah fans to varying degrees suffer (in their own self-inflicted ways) because there isn't a Dick Harmon-type covering our program, and I know how Ute fans go after him for his Pollyannish ways. Can't have it both ways.
Having walked in Monson's shoes in much more lightly tread areas of the country (translation: I didn't have nearly the readership), I can honestly say most sports writers and columnists are more amused than angered by their critics, if only for the fact that they so frequently put on display their own ignorance and/or bias when "critiquing" the performance of a media member. That said, I was thrilled to see Terry Orme react like he did -- and regardless of what you think of Monson, everyone else should be too. He has his writers' collective backs, which will empower them to not only do their job, but do the tough jobs we need and ask of a free press to do.
Wanna know what keeps journalists up at night? It certainly isn't getting their readers' panties twisted in a bunch, it's the fear of truly fucking up and ending up in court. Making the news instead of being the news. There is a ton of complexity to the following story, but I'll give the Cliff Notes version: I once worked at a newspaper that was sued by Bo Jackson. And he had us dead to rights. My sports editor attended a seminar on PEDs, and he quoted a nutritionist as saying that Bo's hip replacement surgery was necessitated because of anabolic steroid use. She denied it, and IIRC there was video of the event that caught our sports editor talking to her, and our sports editor wasn't taking notes and didn't record the interview.
I was off the day the story would've passed my eyes for editing. When the lawsuit was announced -- and it made SportsCenter and every newspaper ( http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sport...traction_x.htm ) of significance in the country when it was filed -- I was initially relieved that my ass was safe. Then I was pissed off that I wasn't on the copy desk that night to see that the quote never made the light of day. Then I thought to myself, "Would I have caught it for sure?" This was in an era in which everyone freely floated opinions in everyday conversation that Athlete X was on steroids.
In the end, the SE was fired, we ran an apology and retraction and I moved to Kansas a few months later. In a very interesting twist, my (now former) newspaper ran the same apology and retraction several years later -- indicating to me that the lawsuit had not yet been settled (It likely has been by now, but I do not know the particulars). I do know that Bo refiled the lawsuit because his initial filing was thrown out by an Illinois judge on the basis that said judge didn't have jurisdiction over what a California newspaper published. I also know that because one of the parties sued initially -- the fired SE's predecessor -- was wrongly named in Bo's initial lawsuit, that he got some nice autographed schwag from Bo for the inconvenience. The wrong sports editor was sued, because the staff directory that was posted online had not been updated. No other member of the sports department was sued outside of the SE -- just the publisher and editor-in-chief. Bo Knows Newspaper Hierarchy.
Back to Monson. Wanna hate him, not read him? I'm surely not going to force your hand. Wanna make him irrelevant? Ignore him. Become apathetic. By and large, he's just another sports writer to me. I read his stuff occasionally. But this hullabaloo over revoking his credentials got me to read one prior piece of his on RSL, and I suspect I'm hardly alone in this matter. I also found out about the credential revoking on Twitter from Monson critics, who are on his payroll without even knowing it.
Last edited by SoCalPat; 07-18-2016 at 12:26 AM.