Chicago NewsMedia Watch 6/15/06

[Hangar18]

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.

 

 

Zach, cmon man. How many times are you going to ask the same question/ask question already asked by others and answered.

Tribune is newspaper and they promised both teams would get "Fair" coverage and by their own admission,

said they wouldnt let their ownership get in the way of covering the Sox. They cant do that because its a conflict of interest. They DO want to promote their own team first. GET IT NOW? or are you gonna ask the same stupid question? MSPT

[Steff]

or are you gonna ask the same stupid question? MSPT

 

 

 

Unreal. :headshake

[Guest JimH]

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.

 

Zach61,

 

On page 26 of the locked thread, zach23 made the following point that in my opinion makes this entire media watch debacle totally a waste.

 

He posted to Hangar18: "You are also admitting that just equal coverage isn't good enough for you. You want the coverage biased toward the Sox. This makes you a hypocrite. (No shock there since I have seen you being hypocritical on other issues as well.) You make the accusation of bias when you in turn want bias in favor of your view."

 

In addition, you or the other zach (can't recall which) correctly pointed out that Hangar's motivation isn't simply to count stories. That's just his cover up for his true purpose, and that is trying to sway a popularity contest.

 

To summarize:

 

1. This media watch thing is misnamed. Hangar claims he will fix it. It isn't a media watch it's a Trib/Times story count.

 

2. There is continued debate whether the Sun Times should be included since most people suggest the Sun Times is balanced in its coverage. Therefore it should really be the Chicago Tribune Story Count.

 

3. Hangar also admits to stating that the White Sox are "media ignored" is completely false, and says he will eliminate it from his summary lines.

 

4. Hangar admits he isn't seeking equal coverage, he's seeking White Sox domination of the media. Apparantly only bad Cub stories, only good Sox stories. Ludicrous.

 

This whole train wreck is a bad page out of a fantasyland story. There are so many inaccuracies, half truths, underlying personal biases, bad math, and misstatements that any shred of credibility has long departed.

[Hangar18]

Zach61,

 

Whatever man. You keep a tally with me, and we'll let the people decide tomorrow.

Im not going to sit here and nitpick with zachs inane questions, which he is missing the point

greatly. Post your own watch, I promise I'll check it out. Otherwise, the 2 of you should quit clogging this thread with stupid and repetitive questions/assumptions in a blatant effort to get this thread closed.

Edited June 15, 2006 by Hangar18

[zach61]

Zach61,

 

On page 26 of the locked thread, zach23 made the following point that in my opinion makes this entire media watch debacle totally a waste.

 

He posted to Hangar18: "You are also admitting that just equal coverage isn't good enough for you. You want the coverage biased toward the Sox. This makes you a hypocrite. (No shock there since I have seen you being hypocritical on other issues as well.) You make the accusation of bias when you in turn want bias in favor of your view."

 

In addition, you or the other zach (can't recall which) correctly pointed out that Hangar's motivation isn't simply to count stories. That's just his cover up for his true purpose, and that is trying to sway a popularity contest.

 

To summarize:

 

1. This media watch thing is misnamed. Hangar claims he will fix it. It isn't a media watch it's a Trib/Times story count.

 

2. There is continued debate whether the Sun Times should be included since most people suggest the Sun Times is balanced in its coverage. Therefore it should really be the Chicago Tribune Story Count.

 

3. Hangar also admits to stating that the White Sox are "media ignored" is completely false, and says he will eliminate it from his summary lines.

 

4. Hangar admits he isn't seeking equal coverage, he's seeking White Sox domination of the media. Apparantly only bad Cub stories, only good Sox stories. Ludicrous.

 

This whole train wreck is a bad page out of a fantasyland story. There are so many inaccuracies, half truths, underlying personal biases, bad math, and misstatements that any shred of credibility has long departed.

 

I wish him luck then. It was presented as a watch to end the negative bias towards the Sox, and that's what I expected to see. The watch is a waste and is just his obsession to try to make a whole city only pay attention to what he wants or expects them to pay attention to. He should go back to being a cub fan and all will be right again in his world.

[Steff]

Otherwise, the 2 of you should quit clogging this thread with stupid and repetitive questions/assumptions in a blatant effort to get this thread closed.

 

 

Unf***ing real. :headshake

[zach61]

Whatever man. You keep a tally with me, and we'll let the people decide tomorrow.

Im not going to sit here and nitpick with zachs inane questions, which he is missing the point

greatly. Post your own watch, I promise I'll check it out. Otherwise, the 2 of you should quit clogging this thread with stupid and repetitive questions/assumptions in a blatant effort to get this thread closed.

 

I'm not trying to prove anything, you are. You keep claiming that you have proven that the trib and times are out to make the Sox look bad and make the cubs looks good. All you do is count how many stories are in the paper for each team. That tells me absolutely nothing about why the story made the Sox look bad. If you are only doing a popularity contest, you aren't going to change the trib. They own the cubs and it wouldn't be in their best interest to promote the other product. What are you trying to prove now? That the cubs are more popular in the trib? So what? They own the cubs, so they will always be more popular in that paper. Don't buy it and if their subscriptions go down, they will have to write about things that will make them go back up. The more you promote and read the trib, the less likely you will change anything. You are doing exactly what you make fun of the cub fans about. As long as that park is full, the trib could care less what happens on the field. I wouldn't be surprised if payroll gets cut again next yr on the north side. And as long as the trib owns the cubs, they will continue to promote them in their paper. Maybe you should buy the times so you could promote the Sox.

[Buehrle>Wood]

Hangar, where do your total numbers go back to?

[RibbieRubarb]

Hangar, where do your total numbers go back to?

 

He claims 2002, yet he admits he was a Cub until the end of 2003.

So you figure out where the truth lies...

[Guest JimH]

Whatever man. You keep a tally with me, and we'll let the people decide tomorrow.

Im not going to sit here and nitpick with zachs inane questions, which he is missing the point

greatly. Post your own watch, I promise I'll check it out. Otherwise, the 2 of you should quit clogging this thread with stupid and repetitive questions/assumptions in a blatant effort to get this thread closed.

 

Actually I think you're having a serious problem being challenged on some of your assumptions, it's bothering you, and you want SoxTalk to just blindly accept your crusade without question.

 

Ummm, no, ain't gonna happen.

 

"No thanks" on me keeping track. You'll recall I said this is your crusade, not mine.

 

yet he admits he was a Cub until the end of 2003.

So you figure out where the truth lies...

 

 

This is the most hilarious part.

 

I guess when the Sox don't win the World Series, he'll go back to being a Cub fan? I mean, once you lose in a tough series, abandon ship, right?

 

The watch is a waste and is just his obsession to try to make a whole city only pay attention to what he wants or expects them to pay attention to.

 

Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

or are you gonna ask the same stupid question? MSPT

 

Seeing as this is an open forum, I thought no questions were stupid questions.

 

And out of curiosity what does MSPT stand for?

[zach23]

And out of curiosity what does MSPT stand for?

 

My Senseless Paranoid Thread?

[Guest JimH]

A double standard exists and is exposed on a daily basis.

 

You are right.

 

That double standard is you complaining the Cubs dominate "media" coverage, but you expect the White Sox to dominate.

 

Most double standards are ridiculous, yours fits that profile to a T.

 

 

 

Otherwise, the 2 of you should quit clogging this thread with stupid and repetitive questions/assumptions in a blatant effort to get this thread closed.

 

Another double standard, you can tell others what to do? But we can't tell you to stop your misinformation?

 

Also, your math is bad again. RibbieRhubarb + zach 23 + zach61 + JimH. = 4. Not 2.

 

Now, having said that, let me be completely serious here.

 

Hangar ... you really should consider realizing that others are going to challenge you on your half truths and broad brush assumptions you paint as fact and proof. Honestly it's not personal but you should stick to posting about stuff between the lines instead of all this chip on the shoulder stuff. You have the ability to contribute but Steff is right, you are so bullheaded on this media crap and it has more than run its course.

[RibbieRubarb]

Also, your math is bad again. RibbieRhubarb + zach 23 + zach61 + JimH. = 4. Not 2.

 

Maybe we should combine the Zachs and create a SuperZach84!

[Brian]

[Hangar18]

He claims 2002, yet he admits he was a Cub until the end of 2003.

So you figure out where the truth lies...

 

 

Steff accused me of being a cub fan, so I was being a wise guy (forgot to use green)

and I told her, "your right, im busted, i just became a sox fan recently blah blah"

I was kidding. Ive been a sox fan since day 1

[RibbieRubarb]

Steff accused me of being a cub fan, so I was being a wise guy (forgot to use green)

and I told her, "your right, im busted, i just became a sox fan recently blah blah"

I was kidding. Ive been a sox fan since day 1

 

My comment was also toungue-in-cheek

[Steff]

Steff accused me of being a cub fan, so I was being a wise guy (forgot to use green)

and I told her, "your right, im busted, i just became a sox fan recently blah blah"

I was kidding. Ive been a sox fan since day 1

 

 

 

Oh for the love of God.. cut the s*** would ya. With each and every post you dig yourself a deeper hole and reveal just how much of an idiot and a liar you really are. I never said you were a Cub fan, not that there is anything wrong with that if you were (go check the locked thread.. it wasn't me that called you one). For the past 4 years you have leeched on to folks over at WSI who have been nothing but nice to you and now here you are throwing them under a bus. That speaks volumes about your credibility and loyalty.

 

I said the day you slithered over here that folks would not tolerate your condescending tone, and I was right. Regardless of whether your count is wrong, your delivery is insulting, boorish, disrespecful, bad-mannered, uncooth, foul, and vulger.

 

You had 2 ways to present yourself to a somewhat virginal audiance - in regards to your media watch - and you turned the wrong way. That's on you. Keep up the diversion of using me to mask your unintelligent rants. I'm used to such simple minded tactics. But know what your selling isn't being bought as evident by the continued questioning of your dim-witted posts.

[Guest JimH]

somewhat virginal

 

Hey Steff, either ya are or ya ain't.

[Steff]

Hey Steff, either ya are or ya ain't.

 

 

Maybe they've read "just the tip..."

[Hangar18]

Oh for the love of God.. cut the s*** would ya. With each and every post you dig yourself a deeper hole and reveal just how much of an idiot and a liar you really are. I never said you were a Cub fan, not that there is anything wrong with that if you were (go check the locked thread.. it wasn't me that called you one). For the past 4 years you have leeched on to folks over at WSI who have been nothing but nice to you and now here you are throwing them under a bus. That speaks volumes about your credibility and loyalty.

 

I said the day you slithered over here that folks would not tolerate your condescending tone, and I was right. Regardless of whether your count is wrong, your delivery is insulting, boorish, disrespecful, bad-mannered, uncooth, foul, and vulger.

 

You had 2 ways to present yourself to a somewhat virginal audiance - in regards to your media watch - and you turned the wrong way. That's on you. Keep up the diversion of using me to mask your unintelligent rants. I'm used to such simple minded tactics. But know what your selling isn't being bought as evident by the continued questioning of your dim-witted posts.

 

HEY, lets leave that other website out of this forever OK? any thing else, please PM me, we dont need to give them anymore credit than they deserve ......

[Steff]

HEY, lets leave that other website out of this forever OK? any thing else, please PM me, we dont need to give them anymore credit than they deserve ......

 

 

Hey.. shut the f*** up.

[SoxFan76]

Hey.. shut the f*** up.

 

Wow, are you done yet? Quit reading the threads for crying out loud.

 

SF76,

 

hangar18 has stated he believes the Sox should dominate media coverage.

 

Fair enough. I'm on Hangar's side, but I 100% disagree with that statement. If there is going to be any bias at all, it should lean towards the BETTER TEAM! What a concept...

[hammerhead johnson]

Maybe we should combine the Zachs and create a SuperZach84!

 

What I learned from this thread:

 

If your name is Zach, you are genetically predisposed to hating Hangar posts.

[Steff]

Wow, are you done yet? Quit reading the threads for crying out loud.

 

 

 

I'll be done when useless unrelated BS is no longer posted about me.

 

 

I'll read what I choose, but thanks for your concern.

[hammerhead johnson]

You had 2 ways to present yourself to a somewhat virginal audiance