Rolling Our Eyes, Part II

Now it's front page news. At least they were able to utilize the word "salacious," which I'm sure has been a dream of theirs since they graduated(?) from journalism school (perhaps the same school where McNamme received his degree). They take the opportunity in the 1st paragraph to mention that the bloggers are having a good time with this story, and that's as close as they get to having relevant content, or perhaps that's just jealousy since the story "broke" here with much more appropriate non-fanfare days ago. But they couldn't resist linking this event to Ron's domestic abuse or E-Muss' DUI, could they? GOOD LORD!!! Their own poll is tracking 4-1 that too much is being made of this "story."

OK, you scamps. Back away from the keyboard, hand the story over to Marcos in Metro, and leave the "sports" stories to the professionals.

But one more thing. TZ, at 1st glance I thought the Venus d'Milo photo was actually Mikki Moore.

I was quoted in the article, and I'm just going to reiterate what I said yesterday:

1. I'm not surprised these young ladies like to party.
   
2. Whether I personally approve or not, it's totally their business.  This a non-issue that deserves absolutely no punishment from the team.

And guess what?  There's a war and Presidential campaign going on.  I propose that we give dancer scandals and Britney Spears the attention they deserve (little to none) and pay attention to something that actually matters.

Nice post TZ.  I love it when the blogosphere is more sane, ethical, and balanced than the actual media.  

Next up for the Bee: a scientific analysis of Britney's crotch shot.

I mean why go do real journalism when they can just surf the net and steal quotes from bloggers. I think you could find just about every opininion on every subject on the net. Better yet why not just start making up stories?  I fanyone is a fan of "The Wire" their new season is largely based on these topics.  Non important issues makes bigger headlines than the ones that need to be brought to the forefront.  Journalistic integrity...yeah right.

Where's my daily Artest rumor?

I apologize on behalf of the Sactown Royalty Lurkers Association for bringing such filth to the StR table.  

But ferreal though, like everyone has said, it's not that big of a deal.  The only reason I "broke" the story to the StR community is because this group is   not only the most knowledgeable and analytical Kings site on the net, but also the most hardcore.  A lot of us come here because we're fans and want to know everything and anything about the Kings organization.  I know that's why I come here.  So the blog comment wasn't made for "online gawking and racy commentary", but rather, "Hey there's something Kings related that's national...maybe the folks at StR haven't seen it yet."  

I'd have put more thought into mine yesterday. Gotta love the print media attacking the internet...umm, I guess blogs are a kind of media in a not really sort of way.

But anyways, the Bee is ridiculous. Anybody who reads it knows it's a big joke. The only reason I'd subscribe to it is for expanded Kings coverage and I get that here.

What the Bee, and most media in general, needs to realize is that blogs aren't really media like they are. Any actual media story referencing a blog is atrocious and a big loogie in the face of journalistic integrity. It makes me hate the profession I'd eventually like to make a career out of.

I understand slow news days, but I never thought that the front page of the Bee would essentially be "Men like hot chicks wearing tight/revealing clothing." And no offense to Carl because I 100% agree with his quote, but why the hell is the main newspaper in the capitol of our state quoting freaking blog comments in the first paragraph of their story? I've had my fair share of print journalism classes and was even an editor for a while (which, you know, makes me a big deal), and if someone had turned in that story I would have sent it back. And I was at a JuCo paper!

Thank you SacBee, you acheieved the impossible and made me think even less than you. I understand the direction media in general seems to be going, and I'm all for change in the super stuffy world of journalism, but this is definatly not the direction to go in. Hell, it's the exact opposite direction. Quit trying to be like blogs, quit being scared of blogs, quit even acknowledging blogs. Newspapers and blogs are two separate things and don't even belong under the same "media" umbrella.

/rant

That's the comment I'm leaving.

Puritanistic sensability!

If they did that what else would the "media" have time to do?

It's stuff like this that helps me to actually appreciate living in LA.

Lovely.

I think the corporate media is trained to have a knee-jerk puritanical response to anything even remotely 'sexy' or controversial because the FCC will levy huge fines for non-events like the exposure of Janet Jackson's nipple, or even Bono letting slip with a word used every day for hundreds of years.