Footnotes from the Annals of Irrelevance
In his most recent column, Tribune Public Editor Tim McNulty wonders aloud why no one seemed to notice when the Tribune's Editorial Bored reversed a 138-year position and came out, with much self-conscious fanfare, against the death penalty. "There was barely a ripple," McNulty notes.
In the Los Angeles Times, Midwestern Bureau Chief P.J. Huffstutter wonders aloud why Chicago — once upon a time a great newspaper town — hardly seemed to notice when the Tribune was sold. "This city of big shoulders," he writes, "greeted this week's news of Tribune Co.'s sale of its media assets with a shrug."
Both gentlemen entertain some speculations but neither considers the stark reality that underlies the collapse of Tribune's stock and the flight of readers and advertisers to new media: the Tribune long ago became irrelevant to its community. The Tribune long ago severed its trust with its readers by exploiting its position to pursue its own political and economic aims. Readers long ago stopped trusting the Tribune. Readers long ago stopped taking it very seriously. Does anyone in Chicago cleave to the editorial pages anymore to see what a bunch of stuffed shirts have to say, when they are far more white, far more privileged, far more insulated, and far more conservative than the city they impose their views upon? Tribune does not represent us, and baseball has provided the perfect picture of why: Either you're neglected by Tribune like a Sox fan, or you're exploited by Tribune like a Cubs fan. Where's the public good?
As the Columbia Journalism Review charged, Tribune media "aren't doing much public good." The newspaper's journalistic capital has been spent, leaving a few Tribune journalists flatfootedly wondering where it went.
Can we imagine Chicago reacting with outrage to staff cuts at the Tribune, the way Los Angeles reacted to cuts at the Times? No, it's pretty clear, Chicago would just as soon see them all get canned. Let's start over with a fresh staff please, Mr. Zell. Let's bury Colonel McCormick once and for all.
But don't worry, Tribune, we'll still pay attention to you:
Demanding the Finest Seats
Crotchety Tribune sportswriter Dave van Dyck has complained to Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig after the White Sox replaced the press box with luxury suites and moved the Tribune staff up the foul line where Shakespeare would put them: "Foul words is but foul wind, and foul wind is but foul breath, and foul breath is noisome, therefore I will depart unkissed."
Does a fiction writer like van Dyck even need to see the field? He could make up his stories at home. We're still awaiting a correction to his Jan. 11 report that Mark Buerhle is already gone.
Footnotes from a Foul Wind
Tribune beat-Sox reporter Mark Gonzales begins this season's first mailbag with a dig at White Sox pitching:
When we talk about Tribune pursuing its political and economic agenda at the cost of public trust, we're talking about a very broad agenda, from a stodgy editorial page trying to enforce 19th Century values to Tribune promotion of assets like the Cubs and Careerbuilder. But Tribune sportswriters impose their own little agenda on stories as simple as game coverage. Brett Ballantini provides this analysis of Gonzo's latest effort:
Garland "Wasn't Sharp"
Garland (three hits, three walks, three strike outs in seven shutout innings) "wasn't sharp," according to Gonzales. Nothing backs it up.
A little breakdown:
Garland followed the lead of Jose Contreras and rebounded from his disastrous first start against Cleveland. Although Garland wasn't sharp, he managed to work out of trouble.
We're told that Garland had a disastrous first start. Now, it wasn't good by any means, but he left the game in line for a win, which tells you he at least battled, and however laughably, kept his team in the game. Contreras' start was a disaster for sure. I'd peg Garland's as a disappointment. But I know I'm asking for nuance here, and that's asking too much.
His biggest escape act occurred in the bottom of the fifth shortly after being staked to a 1-0 lead.
"Escape act." As if Garland resorted to trickery or some kind of SoCal mind-meld.
Buck led off by pulling a triple down the right-field line. But Garland helped his cause by inducing the next two batters to ground back to the mound, and then got Shannon Stewart to fly to right.
"Helped his cause." Yeah, like moving over a runner helps the cause. Are you kidding me? Leadoff man on third, and Garland — without the overpowering stuff that might invite weak swings, without the benefit of an oops of a check swing creating one of those grounders -- extinguishes Oakland's hope for at least a sac fly by getting consecutive ground outs to the MOUND. Not screaming shots, but the perfect kind of Wiffleball taps that make for a no-brainer putout. The only easier outs would have been bunt pops back to the mound.
Garland threw 91 pitches through five innings, and he started to show signs of fading in the sixth.
"Signs of fading." Hmm. A 1-2-3 inning. Something tells me the White Sox will take that kind of fade out every inning.
Piazza hit a line drive that nearly knocked down shortstop Juan Uribe, who managed to hang onto the ball while falling down for the second out.
Piazza hit a line drive. In an infield gap, it's a hit. But it was right at Uribe, who moved to his left to make the stab. I hardly think the ball blew a tree stump like Uribe down. I don't know how far away the press box is in Oakland, but apparently it's much farther from the field than the new USCF box they're all crying about, because the description makes it look like Uribe made either a spectacular, juggling dive, or couldn't keep from tripping over his feet, neither of which was true. Momentum carried him left and he made a little feet-first slide after the catch. There was no body language or facial expression that indicated, "whew."
Chavez followed with another line drive that landed in Garland's glove.
"Landed." As if Garland's eyes were squeezed shut. Look, this is probably a spot in the story to point out that Garland is a pretty damn good fielder. He made the two plays in the fifth without flaw, his counterpart screwed up a double play with a bad throw earlier in the game, and now Garland stabs a screaming liner back to the mound. I don't think it would have been hyperbolic to have written something like, "continuing a very active and flawless night in the field, Garland ended the inning by stabbing Chavez's screaming liner back through the box."
But Garland retired the side in the seventh, and Buck's hit was the last one allowed by Garland in a 113-pitch outing.
A bit of a forced concession here. There's almost an incredulity ("we're just waiting for them to screw up") throughout this story that's really offensive and inaccurate. But it also continues the storyline that the Sox aren't supposed to win in Oakland (see Contreras' "accidental" great start to open the series, below).
Tribune Bets on Sox to Lose
West-Coast games are tough on a Tribune staff that barely keeps its act together under the best of conditions. For the first game in Oakland, the Tribune reserved a single column below the fold, right next to the big splash reserved for the Cubs' first hoisting of the L flag at Wrigley, for a White Sox story they knew would come in late. It's pretty clear the Tribune expected the Sox to lose that first game, because it sure looks like the main headline was pre-written for a loss: "Oakland not best place to get well."
When the White Sox pitching staff so despised by the Tribune combined to shut out the A's, the Tribune barely managed to twist that headline into a positive with this subhead: "But Contreras does, posting quality start."
We'd say it was a stunning victory, but unlike the editing staff at the Tribune, we weren't all grumpy from the day's events at The Shrine.
By the way, the Tribune seems to have unconsciously adopted Sox fans' ironic reference to Wrigley as "The Shrine," perhaps not realizing that "shrine" is a metaphor for toilet. A recent Tribune online poll asked readers if Wrigley is a dump or a shrine. It's both! Speaking of the shrine:
Subliminal Advertising?
The Tribune's online advertising seems to suggest what we ought to do, under these circumstances, with our local morning paper. A Kohler will flush anything.
In the Los Angeles Times, Midwestern Bureau Chief P.J. Huffstutter wonders aloud why Chicago — once upon a time a great newspaper town — hardly seemed to notice when the Tribune was sold. "This city of big shoulders," he writes, "greeted this week's news of Tribune Co.'s sale of its media assets with a shrug."
Both gentlemen entertain some speculations but neither considers the stark reality that underlies the collapse of Tribune's stock and the flight of readers and advertisers to new media: the Tribune long ago became irrelevant to its community. The Tribune long ago severed its trust with its readers by exploiting its position to pursue its own political and economic aims. Readers long ago stopped trusting the Tribune. Readers long ago stopped taking it very seriously. Does anyone in Chicago cleave to the editorial pages anymore to see what a bunch of stuffed shirts have to say, when they are far more white, far more privileged, far more insulated, and far more conservative than the city they impose their views upon? Tribune does not represent us, and baseball has provided the perfect picture of why: Either you're neglected by Tribune like a Sox fan, or you're exploited by Tribune like a Cubs fan. Where's the public good?
As the Columbia Journalism Review charged, Tribune media "aren't doing much public good." The newspaper's journalistic capital has been spent, leaving a few Tribune journalists flatfootedly wondering where it went.
Can we imagine Chicago reacting with outrage to staff cuts at the Tribune, the way Los Angeles reacted to cuts at the Times? No, it's pretty clear, Chicago would just as soon see them all get canned. Let's start over with a fresh staff please, Mr. Zell. Let's bury Colonel McCormick once and for all.
But don't worry, Tribune, we'll still pay attention to you:
Demanding the Finest Seats
Crotchety Tribune sportswriter Dave van Dyck has complained to Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig after the White Sox replaced the press box with luxury suites and moved the Tribune staff up the foul line where Shakespeare would put them: "Foul words is but foul wind, and foul wind is but foul breath, and foul breath is noisome, therefore I will depart unkissed."
Does a fiction writer like van Dyck even need to see the field? He could make up his stories at home. We're still awaiting a correction to his Jan. 11 report that Mark Buerhle is already gone.
Footnotes from a Foul Wind
Tribune beat-Sox reporter Mark Gonzales begins this season's first mailbag with a dig at White Sox pitching:
Javier Vazquez stinks and is the worst pitcher in baseball. I am not sure how many games I watch him blow. Why wouldn't the Sox send him packing? Overpaid bum blows games time after time. They sent Garcia packing and got rid of the wrong guy. Unless maybe no one else in the major wants this bum? -- Rodger Harris, Waconia, Minn.Ouch! Does Gonzo really expect us to believe that just happens to be the first question that arrived in his mailbag this season? Gonzales and van Dyck spent the winter predicting doom for White Sox pitching, with inconsistent help from Phil Rogers. Update since Gonzo emitted this foul wind: Vazquez's ERA is 0.00.
Ouch. This isn't how I envisioned the first question of this season's Q and A. Simply, the Sox value Javier's durability and see his upside, the fact he can accumulate double-digit strikeout games. Fixed costs are a big part of baseball, and the Sox gained financial certainty with Javier. But as you know, it's a game of results and we'll see if they get their money's worth with him.
When we talk about Tribune pursuing its political and economic agenda at the cost of public trust, we're talking about a very broad agenda, from a stodgy editorial page trying to enforce 19th Century values to Tribune promotion of assets like the Cubs and Careerbuilder. But Tribune sportswriters impose their own little agenda on stories as simple as game coverage. Brett Ballantini provides this analysis of Gonzo's latest effort:
Garland "Wasn't Sharp"
Garland (three hits, three walks, three strike outs in seven shutout innings) "wasn't sharp," according to Gonzales. Nothing backs it up.
A little breakdown:
Garland followed the lead of Jose Contreras and rebounded from his disastrous first start against Cleveland. Although Garland wasn't sharp, he managed to work out of trouble.
We're told that Garland had a disastrous first start. Now, it wasn't good by any means, but he left the game in line for a win, which tells you he at least battled, and however laughably, kept his team in the game. Contreras' start was a disaster for sure. I'd peg Garland's as a disappointment. But I know I'm asking for nuance here, and that's asking too much.
His biggest escape act occurred in the bottom of the fifth shortly after being staked to a 1-0 lead.
"Escape act." As if Garland resorted to trickery or some kind of SoCal mind-meld.
Buck led off by pulling a triple down the right-field line. But Garland helped his cause by inducing the next two batters to ground back to the mound, and then got Shannon Stewart to fly to right.
"Helped his cause." Yeah, like moving over a runner helps the cause. Are you kidding me? Leadoff man on third, and Garland — without the overpowering stuff that might invite weak swings, without the benefit of an oops of a check swing creating one of those grounders -- extinguishes Oakland's hope for at least a sac fly by getting consecutive ground outs to the MOUND. Not screaming shots, but the perfect kind of Wiffleball taps that make for a no-brainer putout. The only easier outs would have been bunt pops back to the mound.
Garland threw 91 pitches through five innings, and he started to show signs of fading in the sixth.
"Signs of fading." Hmm. A 1-2-3 inning. Something tells me the White Sox will take that kind of fade out every inning.
Piazza hit a line drive that nearly knocked down shortstop Juan Uribe, who managed to hang onto the ball while falling down for the second out.
Piazza hit a line drive. In an infield gap, it's a hit. But it was right at Uribe, who moved to his left to make the stab. I hardly think the ball blew a tree stump like Uribe down. I don't know how far away the press box is in Oakland, but apparently it's much farther from the field than the new USCF box they're all crying about, because the description makes it look like Uribe made either a spectacular, juggling dive, or couldn't keep from tripping over his feet, neither of which was true. Momentum carried him left and he made a little feet-first slide after the catch. There was no body language or facial expression that indicated, "whew."
Chavez followed with another line drive that landed in Garland's glove.
"Landed." As if Garland's eyes were squeezed shut. Look, this is probably a spot in the story to point out that Garland is a pretty damn good fielder. He made the two plays in the fifth without flaw, his counterpart screwed up a double play with a bad throw earlier in the game, and now Garland stabs a screaming liner back to the mound. I don't think it would have been hyperbolic to have written something like, "continuing a very active and flawless night in the field, Garland ended the inning by stabbing Chavez's screaming liner back through the box."
But Garland retired the side in the seventh, and Buck's hit was the last one allowed by Garland in a 113-pitch outing.
A bit of a forced concession here. There's almost an incredulity ("we're just waiting for them to screw up") throughout this story that's really offensive and inaccurate. But it also continues the storyline that the Sox aren't supposed to win in Oakland (see Contreras' "accidental" great start to open the series, below).
Tribune Bets on Sox to Lose
West-Coast games are tough on a Tribune staff that barely keeps its act together under the best of conditions. For the first game in Oakland, the Tribune reserved a single column below the fold, right next to the big splash reserved for the Cubs' first hoisting of the L flag at Wrigley, for a White Sox story they knew would come in late. It's pretty clear the Tribune expected the Sox to lose that first game, because it sure looks like the main headline was pre-written for a loss: "Oakland not best place to get well."
When the White Sox pitching staff so despised by the Tribune combined to shut out the A's, the Tribune barely managed to twist that headline into a positive with this subhead: "But Contreras does, posting quality start."
We'd say it was a stunning victory, but unlike the editing staff at the Tribune, we weren't all grumpy from the day's events at The Shrine.
By the way, the Tribune seems to have unconsciously adopted Sox fans' ironic reference to Wrigley as "The Shrine," perhaps not realizing that "shrine" is a metaphor for toilet. A recent Tribune online poll asked readers if Wrigley is a dump or a shrine. It's both! Speaking of the shrine:
Subliminal Advertising?
The Tribune's online advertising seems to suggest what we ought to do, under these circumstances, with our local morning paper. A Kohler will flush anything.
Labels: Chicago Tribune
posted by Chicago Cubune Watch permalink
