Hangar18 Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 (edited) Chicago Tribune: 3 cub stories 3 sox stories Chicago SunTimes: 3 cub stories 4 sox stories Standings as of Thursday June 15th, 2006 Priviledged, Media Owned, Media Favored, 4th Place in 2005 Cubs 584 Underdog, Media Maligned, Media Ignored, WS CHamps in 05 Sox 485 Edited June 15, 2006 by Hangar18 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 Media Maligned, Media Ignored, WS CHamps in 05 Sox 484 Not to start this whole hornets nest up again, but to say the White Sox are "media ignored" is a huge misstatement. It just isn't true. Saying they are "media maligned" is questionable, at best. Saying they were WS Champs in 2005 is your only accurate non debateable statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hangar18 Posted June 15, 2006 Author Share Posted June 15, 2006 QUOTE(JimH @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 09:43 AM) Saying they were WS Champs in 2005 is your only accurate non debateable statement. Glad we finally agree on something. Now how about giving me some bars close to Great American Ballpark that we can take over this weekend... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 I'm confused. Yesterday, the Sox were 100 less than the Cubs. Today, even though they both have the same amount of stories, its 99 less. Am I missing something here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 Glad we finally agree on something. Now how about giving me some bars close to Great American Ballpark that we can take over this weekend... I don't think the search feature is working but there have been lots of threads on Cincy. If it were me I would go to the Hofbrauhaus, which is walking distance over the Ohio river across the purple bridge. RockRaines has talked about it, big huge outdoor patio, great place, lots of action. I want to say hofbrauhaus.com . Tons of places in Mt. Adams which is a 10 minute cab ride away, and an area every visitor should see. Mt. Adams Bar and Grill, City View Tavern, several others all within walking distance. Check cincy.com for a list of bars on the Cincy side. Do not believe people who tell you there's nothing going on. There are several places on Main St., particularly in the 12th St. area ... Japp's, Neon's, several great places. Also my personal fave which I've written about many times, Arnold's Bar and Grill at 210 E. 8th St., established 1861, oldest bar in Cincinnati, live music and no cover. If you are a chain hotel sports bar kinda guy, Champs in the Hyatt is as good as they come, on 5th St. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hangar18 Posted June 15, 2006 Author Share Posted June 15, 2006 QUOTE(Felix @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 10:09 AM) I'm confused. Yesterday, the Sox were 100 less than the Cubs. Today, even though they both have the same amount of stories, its 99 less. Am I missing something here? Felix, good call. I marked the stories yesterday on my calendar, and right when I finished, saw another cub story in trib and added it to the totals (and didnt mark my calendar, which I used for today) I'll Fix now. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 Did you have this story from page 2 of the Trib in your counts for yesterday? "Outside trial, Daleys talk--about Sox" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hangar18 Posted June 15, 2006 Author Share Posted June 15, 2006 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 10:23 AM) Did you have this story from page 2 of the Trib in your counts for yesterday? "Outside trial, Daleys talk--about Sox" Good Catch. this isnt listed online under the heading "SOX", which usually is. I will add this to the total. Ive noticed from time to time, Both papers will have a story in the paper, but not online and vice-versa. Not sure why that happens but it does. While I skimmed thru the Tribs sportspage online looking for this Daley/Sox article however, I did notice that the Trib has a section titled SPORTS VIDEOS and the Top Video apparently is ESPN analyst Rick "Im a Drunk" Sutcliffe singing the 7th inning stretch. I scrolled down and noticed its all sports related and there are 10 video clips. For what its worth, here is what the Tribune deemed important enough Chicago sportswise, to attach a video clip. 4 clips of Cubs (Drunk tv host sings 7th inning, rookie gets pie in face, Messiah update, Messiah AAA hilites) 2 clips of Rush (preparing for Arena Bowl, Win Arena Bowl) 2 clips of Bears (piece on Brown, Vasher missing) 1 clip of Bulls (rookie gets a workout) 1 clip of USAToday (columnist plugging her book for 4 minutes) Interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan76 Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 Just when you think winning would solve everything...I wonder what Mr. Knue has to say about the video highlights, because I notice every day how they're prodominantly Cub low-lites. Oh well, time to win a couple more Championships and make this a Sox city once more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hangar18 Posted June 15, 2006 Author Share Posted June 15, 2006 QUOTE(SoxFan76 @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 11:45 AM) Just when you think winning would solve everything...I wonder what Mr. Knue has to say about the video highlights, because I notice every day how they're prodominantly Cub low-lites. Oh well, time to win a couple more Championships and make this a Sox city once more. Mr. Knue doesnt like the Media Watches, I can tell you that for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 Wait. You have a calendar that you mark this stuff on? Does next Thursday say "Beat Ron Santo in a foot race" on it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan76 Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 QUOTE(knightni @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 12:53 PM) Wait. You have a calendar that you mark this stuff on? Does next Thursday say "Beat Ron Santo in a foot race" on it? I'm the least PC person you'll find... But that wasn't cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zach61 Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 QUOTE(Hangar18 @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 09:00 AM) Chicago Tribune: 3 cub stories 3 sox stories Chicago SunTimes: 3 cub stories 4 sox stories Standings as of Thursday June 15th, 2006 Priviledged, Media Owned, Media Favored, 4th Place in 2005 Cubs 584 Underdog, Media Maligned, Media Ignored, WS CHamps in 05 Sox 485 And all of these stories promote the cubs in a positive way and the Sox in a negative way? Isn't that what your media watch is supposed to prove? Or did that change now and you're just counting stories? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan76 Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 QUOTE(zach61 @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 01:05 PM) And all of these stories promote the cubs in a positive way and the Sox in a negative way? Isn't that what your media watch is supposed to prove? Or did that change now and you're just counting stories? It has always been just counting stories. I believe this is year number 3 of the media watch? Maybe it's just 2. Many media members know who Hangar is (from what I remember), and he isn't exactly their favorite person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 At a bare minimum, hangar needs to eliminate the "media ignored" statement from his White Sox sentence because it's completely untrue by anyone's definition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hangar18 Posted June 15, 2006 Author Share Posted June 15, 2006 QUOTE(JimH @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 01:12 PM) At a bare minimum, hangar needs to eliminate the "media ignored" statement from his White Sox sentence because it's completely untrue by anyone's definition. Fine. I'll redefine that tomorrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan76 Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 QUOTE(JimH @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 01:12 PM) At a bare minimum, hangar needs to eliminate the "media ignored" statement from his White Sox sentence because it's completely untrue by anyone's definition. Overall, I'd agree. But there are moments when I truly think the Tribune forgot the White Sox exist. For instance, the Sox beat...the Tigers maybe? It was during a little bit of a funk, and the Sox finally played and won a good game. What makes front page news? A huge story on the Detroit Tigers and how good they are. Or try watching the WGN Morning news once in awhile. I don't watch it much because...well...it's WGN and I can't stand that station. "In baseball, the Cubs played at beautiful Wrigley Field yesterday in front of a sold out crowd." note**rarely is every seat filled at Wrigley, or if they are, the place clears out by the 7th so the "fans" can go to the bars.** "The Cubs fell behind early...but in the middle of the 7th, superstar Billy Corgan sang the 7th inning stretch!" **cut to clip of Billy Corgan butchering a White Sox tradition** "It wasn't enough though, as the Cubs lose 13-3 to the Pirates. But it sure was good to see all those fans out there! In other baseball news, Sox win 3-2. Buehrle with the win, Jenks with the save. Now let's hear some thoughts from the players back at BEEAAUUUUTIFUL Wrigley Field!" Am I obsessed? No. But the fact of the matter is that the Chicago media...sucks. I'm not going to sit back and take it, and neither is Hangar. That is why I get so pissed when people blatantly rip on the guy for pointing out something that needs to be addressed. And the media IS taking notice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zach61 Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 QUOTE(SoxFan76 @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 01:08 PM) It has always been just counting stories. I believe this is year number 3 of the media watch? Maybe it's just 2. Many media members know who Hangar is (from what I remember), and he isn't exactly their favorite person. So how does just counting stories prove that the media is out to make the Sox look bad and the cubs look good? I thought he posted somewhere that he started this to prove the media bias against the Sox and that the trib would only print stories about the cubs in a positive way and the Sox in a negative way. Didn't he claim that the trib didn't push the story about the guy being shot outside their park cause they didn't want wrigley to seem dangerous, but then posted stories about Bridgeport that made it look dangerous? So what is being accomplished here by counting stories? I would expect the trib to promote the cubs a little bit more than the Sox since they own them and as a business, why promote the other product more? And if this is a Chicago media watch, why only count the times and trib? What about the other papers? Shouldn't this be the trib and times story count? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 Overall, I'd agree. But there are moments when I truly think the Tribune forgot the White Sox exist. For instance, the Sox beat...the Tigers maybe? It was during a little bit of a funk, and the Sox finally played and won a good game. What makes front page news? A huge story on the Detroit Tigers and how good they are. Or try watching the WGN Morning news once in awhile. I don't watch it much because...well...it's WGN and I can't stand that station. "In baseball, the Cubs played at beautiful Wrigley Field yesterday in front of a sold out crowd." note**rarely is every seat filled at Wrigley, or if they are, the place clears out by the 7th so the "fans" can go to the bars.** "The Cubs fell behind early...but in the middle of the 7th, superstar Billy Corgan sang the 7th inning stretch!" **cut to clip of Billy Corgan butchering a White Sox tradition** "It wasn't enough though, as the Cubs lose 13-3 to the Pirates. But it sure was good to see all those fans out there! In other baseball news, Sox win 3-2. Buehrle with the win, Jenks with the save. Now let's hear some thoughts from the players back at BEEAAUUUUTIFUL Wrigley Field!" Am I obsessed? No. But the fact of the matter is that the Chicago media...sucks. I'm not going to sit back and take it, and neither is Hangar. That is why I get so pissed when people blatantly rip on the guy for pointing out something that needs to be addressed. And the media IS taking notice! Can't comment much on the WGN morning news, I may have watched it 3-4 times in my life. The 9 pm news though, the White Sox get a fair shake IMO. Dan Roan and Rich King are both huge White Sox fans for what it's worth. But hangar's number crunching is specific to the Sun Times and Tribune. Simply counting stories doesn't paint the whole picture regarding those two papers anyways, as mentioned ad infinitum in the locked thread. As for the Chicago media being lousy ... personally I don't think much of any media anywhere. Shouldn't this be the trib and times story count? Agree, and as such, the title is extremely misleading. Actually it's flat out wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 From Today's Sun Times quick hits Oh, look at Jeff Samardzija, the fifth-round draft pick from Notre Dame who pitches as well as plays football. Oh, look at the wireless communication between the dugout and the bullpen. The Cubs are masters of media manipulation and scripting the story. If they were half as good on the field as they are off, they'd be in the postseason with far greater regularity and far greater success. I just thought that fit in well here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan76 Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 02:14 PM) From Today's Sun Times quick hits I just thought that fit in well here. Exactly. There isn't much of a need for a Sun Times watch or Daily Southtown watch. (minus Mariotti) Those papers are mostly fair in their coverage. I don't think anyone is asking for the Sox to absolutely own the Cubs in newspaper coverage, but more balanced reporting would be nice. And the stupid stereotypes about white trash mullets and gangbangers get rather old and offensive. Why do you think Cub fans spew that crap? Because they regurgitate what the media tells them. Cub fans are mindless sheep, that's how it has been the last 10-12 years. They believe whatever they are told. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 I don't think anyone is asking for the Sox to absolutely own the Cubs in newspaper coverage SF76, hangar18 has stated he believes the Sox should dominate media coverage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hangar18 Posted June 15, 2006 Author Share Posted June 15, 2006 QUOTE(JimH @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 04:03 PM) SF76, hangar18 has stated he believes the Sox should dominate media coverage. YES. I think its only fair. The Media BURIED the SOX in 03, and 04 with coverage for that other team, and they won NOTHING. The SOX actually win it all, and are still "losing" in coverage to that other team. A double standard exists and is exposed on a daily basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RibbieRubarb Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(Hangar18 @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 04:12 PM) YES. I think its only fair. The Media BURIED the SOX in 03, and 04 with coverage for that other team, and they won NOTHING. The SOX actually win it all, and are still "losing" in coverage to that other team. A double standard exists and is exposed on a daily basis. IN all honesty, the Cubs did win their Division in 2003 and became the First Chicago Baseball team in loooong time to win a playoff series. Then they came a few innings from going to the World Series. Again the facts elude you. Obviously there was some excitement towards that team in 2003 and going into 2004. Edited June 15, 2006 by RibbieRubarb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zach61 Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 QUOTE(JimH @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 04:03 PM) SF76, hangar18 has stated he believes the Sox should dominate media coverage. So nothing is actually being proven. Unless the Sox are the only team covered by the trib, then they are wrong? Why wouldn't the trib cover more of the cubs than the Sox? Isn't it in their best interest to promote their own product over another product? Don't they still own the cubs and need for people to pay to see the cubs if they want to make a profit? I thought this whole media watch was to show how many stories the trib and times wrote that made the Sox look bad and the cubs look good? Guess it changed again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts