A reporter being paid by the team will not/can not report impartially.
So? What exactly are the fans of the team looking for? someone to make unwarranted offhand insults at the players every time they win a game? Not likely... They want someone to tell them how awesome their favorite team is. They want.. EMPATHY! They desire a greater emotional connection to their team. (you know.. that whole CwF thing?)
Oh, and the local newspapers reporting on their local teams for the past.. forever? They have been partial to their team too.
You know what? That's what the fans wanted. That's why they read the newspaper.
you have no idea how hard I am trying to come up with a way to tie in the disgust I have for the current "sports reporting theater".
Anyways, espn has made me hate all sports with their absurdities.
So as long as this guy doesn't do the types of stupid stuff that espn and their ilk do, then I have a feeling this will be one of the best investments ever made by a sports team.
What fans desire in their sports reporting is emotional ties to their team. If he can deliver this, noone will care where his paycheck comes from.
I think we've passed that a point a LONG time ago. Unfortunately Americans are either too brainwashed or too apathetic to do anything.
No, the problem is we're not starving. Hunger changes everything. Hungry people are desperate people. People that are well fed are not quite so desperate.
"...were happy that she copied our post..."
An ingenious use of the word "happy"; anyone who read even a snippet - even merely looked at the length and number of your posts - would understand you were/are very upset, although now obviously enjoying your new fame.
Well, ya, its "wrong" cause that's how they are "better"
The "professional" journalists are trying to convince the world that you should pay for professional news exactly becasue its supposed to not be tainted. They have to non-professional journalists (which share a small cross section wiht bloggers) by portraying them as incapable of removing their bias from their reporting.
Now, oviously (sic) this is complete bullshit. But the papers long ago found out they could shovel bullshit all over the public.. and have been doing so for ages. Why would they stop now when they (they that they) need it the most?
No small music retailer, online or otherwise, like Aimie Street can afford to pass up an opportunity like a deal with a major label...it's just bad business to not take advantage.
ugh. that's stupidity talking there.
There is no advantage to them working with Sony. It goes against everything their customers love about them.
I am terribly insulted by this statement.
I'm pretty sure you should be.
So, in the past, you have distrusted law enforcement?
ya, back when I was a teenager. It's an adolescent thing.
Calling my distrust 'adolescent' is basically saying "I'm not listening because you're a kid, despite the fact that I have in fact held this very opinion in the past."
Not at all. I said basic distrust of police is adolescent behavior. Which it is. And I was an adolescent when I distrusted the police. Go figure.
YOUR protection? If I were to guess, I would say you still support the Bush administration.
I have no idea how you arrived at that logic. It makes no sense whatsoever. I am a citizen. The police are indeed here to protect citizens. What's your problem with my thinking the police are here for my protection?
On the post: The Los Angeles Kings Hires A Reporter To Cover... Themselves
Re: IF...
So? What exactly are the fans of the team looking for? someone to make unwarranted offhand insults at the players every time they win a game? Not likely... They want someone to tell them how awesome their favorite team is. They want.. EMPATHY! They desire a greater emotional connection to their team. (you know.. that whole CwF thing?)
Oh, and the local newspapers reporting on their local teams for the past.. forever? They have been partial to their team too.
You know what? That's what the fans wanted. That's why they read the newspaper.
On the post: USTR: We Can't Be Open About ACTA Because We Promised We Wouldn't Be (*Lobbyists Not Included)
Re: Re:
Still works for me.
On the post: The Los Angeles Kings Hires A Reporter To Cover... Themselves
you have no idea...
Anyways, espn has made me hate all sports with their absurdities.
So as long as this guy doesn't do the types of stupid stuff that espn and their ilk do, then I have a feeling this will be one of the best investments ever made by a sports team.
What fans desire in their sports reporting is emotional ties to their team. If he can deliver this, noone will care where his paycheck comes from.
On the post: USTR: We Can't Be Open About ACTA Because We Promised We Wouldn't Be (*Lobbyists Not Included)
Re: Re:
No, the problem is we're not starving. Hunger changes everything. Hungry people are desperate people. People that are well fed are not quite so desperate.
On the post: Is Ignoring RIAA Lawsuit Cheaper Than Going To Trial?
Re: ....[Silence]....
On the post: What Kind Of Innovation Do Patents Encourage?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The first is not always the best...
So your argument is that patents are good, because they stifle competition which would otherwise drive down the marginal costs of manufacturing.
I fail to see how thats a benefit to society....
On the post: A Song For Lily Allen... And A Little Conversation
Re: It's Never An Attack
he's quoting her song.... /sigh
On the post: What Kind Of Innovation Do Patents Encourage?
Only one kind..
As in, judging economic growth and stability by how many patents a nation/sector is pumping out.
If you don't have enough numbers, you're obviously failing.
On the post: A Song For Lily Allen... And A Little Conversation
Re: That's a catchy tune.
Any song that well done that is even partially about me, I would definitely buy.
But then, Mike bought an album.. not that song.. right?
On the post: A Song For Lily Allen... And A Little Conversation
Re: Your sin
Excuse you, but Lily Allen dragged techdirt into it. Not the other way around.
On the post: A Song For Lily Allen... And A Little Conversation
Re:
An ingenious use of the word "happy"; anyone who read even a snippet - even merely looked at the length and number of your posts - would understand you were/are very upset, although now obviously enjoying your new fame.
What? first time visitor I see...
either that or just plain delusional...
On the post: Is It So Wrong To Admit That Journalists Have Opinions Too?
Well, ya, its "wrong" cause that's how they are "better"
Now, oviously (sic) this is complete bullshit. But the papers long ago found out they could shovel bullshit all over the public.. and have been doing so for ages. Why would they stop now when they (they that they) need it the most?
On the post: Ownership Or License: The Difference Matters
Re: Dazed and confused
On the post: Only Took 9 Months, But Warner Music Videos Finally Back On YouTube
wow
never before heard of them, and I hope I never hear of them again.
On the post: Cash4Gold Drops Lawsuit Against Consumerist... Still Suing Whistleblowers
Re: Broken law
Smartest thing I have read all day.
On the post: Book Authors Realizing They Need To Connect With Fans Themselves... Because Their Publishers Sure Don't
Re:
Think for yourself please. CC is not needed and only serves to strengthen copyright laws.
On the post: Forget Fixing Poor Eyesight... How About Improving Eyesight With A Virtual Overlay
Re: Thinking Ouside the Box
Most clueless patent troll around. Keep up the drivel!
On the post: Sony Music Does Deal With Amie Street... But Using iTunes Pricing?
Re: Offer They Can't Refuse
ugh. that's stupidity talking there.
There is no advantage to them working with Sony. It goes against everything their customers love about them.
On the post: Lily Allen Distributing Tons Of Copyrighted Music; Blows Way Past Three Strikes
Re: +1 for Drew
She chose to enter the Lars Ulrich path... Now she's going to burn in it.
On the post: Austin Police Chief To Go After Anonymous Commenters
Re: RE:Re: Lets be honest here...
I'm pretty sure you should be.
So, in the past, you have distrusted law enforcement?
ya, back when I was a teenager. It's an adolescent thing.
Calling my distrust 'adolescent' is basically saying "I'm not listening because you're a kid, despite the fact that I have in fact held this very opinion in the past."
Not at all. I said basic distrust of police is adolescent behavior. Which it is. And I was an adolescent when I distrusted the police. Go figure.
YOUR protection? If I were to guess, I would say you still support the Bush administration.
I have no idea how you arrived at that logic. It makes no sense whatsoever. I am a citizen. The police are indeed here to protect citizens. What's your problem with my thinking the police are here for my protection?
Next >>