FREEP Covers Own ASS.....
http://www.freep.com/article/20090906/NEWS06/909060424/1319/The-U-M-sto…
Ok, now the FREEP is attempting the sugarcoat this mess and are coming out in favor of themselves. I guess they are worried they lost some subscriptions and caught some flack for poor reporting and sensationalism.
Mr. Anger, you sir, are an idiot.
September 6th, 2009 at 9:33 AM ^
Thanks for the report, but I'm done going to their website.
You sir, however, are to be commended for the information.
September 6th, 2009 at 9:33 AM ^
links to the freep or news regarding them. Btw, yesterday was one of the most enjoyable games I have been to in years. The fans really came together to support coach and the team. Go Blue
September 6th, 2009 at 9:34 AM ^
Just because 20% of the board thinks so, doesn't make it true.
Do your own boycotting.
EDIT: That could come of as being a dick. I didn't mean it that way. If you want to boycott the freep, go ahead. Not everyone will do that as it is a place to get solid content from when they aren't being huge asses.
September 6th, 2009 at 9:44 AM ^
be a personal decision to boycott the Freep, their story is proof that they do not have solid content. 1 poorly researched investigation can and should kill all of their integrity.
IMHO, please do not click on Freep links.
September 6th, 2009 at 3:32 PM ^
When it comes to covering everything but sports, the Freep is the better of the two Detroit papers by a mile. Telling people who may live in Detroit to get their local news from an inferior source because the sports department sucks is more than a tad absurd.
The Lifestyle section of the Free Press didn't write the article. The News section of the Free Press didn't write the article. Neither did the Business, Auto, Entertainment or Op/Ed sections. Our beef is squarely with their sports department, otherwise they're the better of the local papers.
September 6th, 2009 at 9:47 AM ^
Thanks for the clarifying edit...
Don't know if it is > 20% or 20%. They have some relevant and good content on a number of issues. If the Kilpatrick stuff broke now versus a year ago I'd find it hard not to read.
I also agree with the concept of not supporting the writers and editors connected with what I saw has a "hit" piece.
Difficult to balance the two. I had a chance to read a day old paper at the barber shop. Sports section still involved in covering their collective assess.
I would be nice if there was a way to distill the information, without providing them with additional revenue. That is a difficult and very tricky gray area.
September 6th, 2009 at 10:14 AM ^
Judging by such large readership, I thought 20% should be a pretty good line. Perhaps ~20% instead.
Much of their post game content has been pretty good. The Sharp piece saying how Michigan fans went back to their tailgates early to sip on wine and eat cheese made me laugh (even if it wasn't in jest). The rest of it was pretty positive.
September 6th, 2009 at 3:31 PM ^
I think considerably more than 20% of the board is sick of the Free Press's coverage. You're one of the only posters to have argued against shunning them.
September 6th, 2009 at 9:43 AM ^
The freep is generally reliable to get your news information for the Detroit area. Just dont visit their spots section if you really want to boycott.
September 6th, 2009 at 3:24 PM ^
Honestly, you can get the same news coverage from the Detroit News, Oakland Press, one of the MLive sites, or the local TV station websites. The Free Press's editorial staff has made it clear that it stands behind Rosenberg. I'm not going to reward them, either. If they can his ass, I'll reconsider.
September 6th, 2009 at 3:39 PM ^
No, you can't. That's like telling a New Yorker they can get the same coverage from the Post and the Newark Star-Ledger as they can from the Times. The Freep has a better news staff than any other paper around, there's a reason the News barely even ships copies to retail outlets 20 miles from downtown while the Freep sells them in Ann Arbor, Howell, Romeo, etc.
And local news? You know as well as the rest of us that the local news in Detroit is shit, shit, shit. They report on half the local stories and then spend ~70% of the newscast on national stories nobody cares about or special reports that amount to "hey you might get robbed if you live in pontiac" which is like, no shit.
September 6th, 2009 at 9:44 AM ^
This is the second editorial ass covering the fr@@p has done in a week on this story. How many other stories have we read in the fr@@p, Det News, Ann Arbor News that have had ANY front page editorials to defend their story? I can't think of any. They are doing this because they know that their witchhunt is losing its legs. Without any other "bombshells" to put on the front page, they are throwing editorials out there just to keep something on the front page regarding UM.
September 6th, 2009 at 9:47 AM ^
i ain't advocating nuthing,honey. i read like 9 newspaper every morning and just ran across this article and found it to be pathetic....everybody get you panties out of a bunch. WE WON YESTERDAY! Let the schedenfruade flow!
yeah, i am a lousy speller person.
caw caw!
September 6th, 2009 at 9:48 AM ^
What "solid content" can't we get from the Detroit News site? Do Sharp, Rosenberg, and Snyder lend any unique insight or do you just love the drama? I'll admit, it's been tough to avoid "checking into" the train wreck, but I'll happily take DetNews content from now on.
September 6th, 2009 at 10:07 AM ^
While I agree with the general sentiment (hope) that the Freep should suffer by way of lost subscribers and lost online ad revenue (I haven't visited the site since Monday), Elno was absolutely right in posting this link. I saw it in print this morning (it's actually an entire mini-section), and it's an absolute must-read for anyone who feels compelled to defend U-M and/or hold the Freep accountable for this hit job/shoddy journalism.
In a nutshell: Freep editor circles the wagons, says article was well-researched, that his writers know all about non-countable hours, and attributes backlash to U-M homers.
I'll say no more.
September 6th, 2009 at 10:34 AM ^
Especially funny:
Writing the sentences to seemingly insinuate that players were given Sunday off *because* of the investigation. Again, no specific lies, but it certainly gives the incorrect impression.
Saying the reporters got detailed accounts of activities to distinguish what was countable and non-countable, yet giving none of those details in the article.
I feel like these guys are political talking heads whose only goal is to defend their candidate.
EDIT: that's the only article I've read by them the past week; will stop entirely when this all has blown over.
September 6th, 2009 at 10:25 AM ^
I won't be boycotting. I certainly understand those who do and credit their reasons, but IMO the Freep are like any other media outlet--you read them while understanding their POV and potential biases. If you find any value in the content despite that you read, if not you don't. In my case, since they cover Michigan in far greater depth more than the Det News, despite my disgust at last week I will continue reading. To boycott would be to deprive myself of my favorite reading subject, Michigan Football. The Freep isn't worth depriving myself.
Lastly, another thing: I am well in the minority, but I don't blame the Freep at all for running that story--when you have players making that claim, that is news. What I blame them for is not doing their homework and providing necessary context to the story.
September 6th, 2009 at 10:51 AM ^
Your last sentence is the difference between what the National Enquirer does and what accountable responsible media do. homework, context, Facts, document sources - protecting only when necessary, and provide ... gasp! both sides of a story. (If there is a story)
I expect to see an "investigation" like that by someone (with an agenda) on spartan tailgate or a similar fan site.
This seems so far away from the standard of a paper with Pulitzer prize winning investigations.
It's even sadder that other credible journalist from the paper are trying to dump perfume on to this pile of crap Rosensnyder produced.
Watching them twist and turn like a contortionist as they attempt to cover their ass is hilarious and disgusting at the same time.
September 6th, 2009 at 11:50 AM ^
But the fact that players made that claim IS news. I sent many many posts to the editor and the boards criticizing the story, but to claim, as many do here, that it is a "non-story", in my opinion is incorrect. Very seldom do players, whether former players or not, allege that a coach committed NCAA violations--that in and of itself was reason for them to raise a question. They then failed to provide the necessary context to examine that claim more thoroughly--so there's no defending that, and I don't. I simply stated that for me, a boycott is not how I choose to respond--but I don't neg or criticize those who choose differently.
September 6th, 2009 at 12:02 PM ^
When you say: "Very seldom do players, whether former players or not, allege that a coach committed NCAA violations." Not one single [anonymous] player included in the report proactively contacted the Freep with these "allegations." The reason that the report is deplorable is that the entire premise for it was concocted out of thin air by the publication. Once they had the idea, they called the players to confirm what they wanted to hear.
Reporting: Allegations --> Investigation --> Research --> Report
Politicking: Muckraking --> "Investigation" --> Allegations --> Report
Even if the whole process was initiated by player allegations, this should have been nothing more than one of the brief, bland notes that Snyder usually writes on the sports website.
September 6th, 2009 at 11:49 AM ^
". . .IMO the Freep are like any other media outlet--you read them while understanding their POV and potential biases."
I agree, to an extent. This brings to mind a link Brian posted on Mgo.licio.us a few days or a week ago, I think. The author talks about how objectivity is sort of a pipe dream, and that with that in mind, it's best to let your biases show, because only then can people really trust your writing. The Freep obviously believes that objectivity is possible; they say that Rosenberg is a professional and does not let his biases affect his work. I lean in the direction that says that's impossible, and it'd be best if he made those clear (which wouldn't really be possible at a major news outlet; I'd settle for him not being allowed to do something like this, because I don't think that he can set aside the biases that he's made pretty clear through his writing).
September 6th, 2009 at 3:44 PM ^
Fox News would tell you, if you wrote a formal complaint, that Glenn Beck is an unbiased, objective person who doesn't let his personal biases reflect his work. The idea of transparency as objectivity is a new media concept, the old media clings to their J-school ideas that appearing objective is the most important thing ever.
September 6th, 2009 at 6:08 PM ^
I don't disagree. . .?
September 6th, 2009 at 10:35 AM ^
Mike Patrick can understand and articulate that there should be no issue, then Rosendouche has no excuse...
This article again fails on the facts... which at least means the Freep remains consistent.
Go Blue!
September 6th, 2009 at 10:37 AM ^
I refuse to click on their link. Can someone summarize?
September 6th, 2009 at 10:37 AM ^
I find it hilarious that the Freep now feels the need to defend itself ... if the piece was truly as well written and researched as the Freep claims it was, it should be able to stand on its own.
September 6th, 2009 at 10:53 AM ^
I blocked the FreeP site from my browser. Can somebody provide a summary on how they are "covering their ass"?
September 6th, 2009 at 10:53 AM ^
Was saying they gave all sides a voice. Where in the original article did they do anything but attack coach Rod and the program? Mr. Anger needs to get his head out of his ass.
September 6th, 2009 at 10:58 AM ^
I cannot believe that they would actually defend the article as well-researched.
If they wanted to appear to have some credibility, they would make some small allusion to the fact that there was a lot of ambiguity in the original article.
Pathetic.
September 6th, 2009 at 11:17 AM ^
The fact you had to explain a story that was written a week ago in a self-serving editorial one day after a convincing win says it all.
Would this editorial have been printed if Michigan had lost?
The fact is your story has come under siege from other coaches, other players and other media members who actually KNOW something about running, and participating in, a major college football program.
Whether true or not, the appearance is your reporters have an agenda. The result is that your credibility has been damaged. It's time to stand down.
September 6th, 2009 at 11:23 AM ^
The Ann Arbor Chronicle has a brief recap of the article:
http://annarborchronicle.com/2009/09/06/um-football-50/
September 6th, 2009 at 11:42 AM ^
I think the only thing that the FREEP grasped in that piece was that the author was named Anger. B/C we are all pissed. Seemed to be a worthless piece of "hey, remember this story we wrote? Look at what we did?" They are even bigger ASS*S than I thought!
September 6th, 2009 at 11:44 AM ^
i am a little conflicted about boycotting the freep too just because i like to get a detroit newspaper take while relishing in a win but the Detroit News doesnt publish a sports section on Sunday (or a paper at all) which obviously makes it impossible not to read the freep. Plus Brian doesnt get his editorial up until Monday and I need to read something about the game.
Today I have only halfheartedly read the freep's account and have generally just read the comments from people on this site. Getting all my Michigan news here is kind of like reading the huffington post or the smoking gun for all your political news; you only get the take from someone who has your own bias. That may be an extreme example (i think people here are generally honest and well-informed) but i think getting your news from a national or regional source lets you know what spin is being placed on the game/practice scandel/whatever...
so, whatever, that editorial just made me more angry and i am going to have to get suck it up and not give the freep and more of my money/hits.
September 6th, 2009 at 3:30 PM ^
am a little conflicted about boycotting the freep too just because i like to get a detroit newspaper take while relishing in a win but the Detroit News doesnt publish a sports section on Sunday (or a paper at all) which obviously makes it impossible not to read the freep.
Are you talking about a newspaper actually printed on paper, or just a website? There are a ton of news websites that covered the game yesterday. I just visited two (the Detroit News and AnnArbor.com) and found about 10 articles on the game.
September 6th, 2009 at 11:53 AM ^
i particularly enjoyed the 'its true because i say so' routine the editorial kept using. i agree with those saying this is just the freep going back to the well.
re: boycott. im not boycotting, but i used to go to freep.com several times a day, but have gone maybe 3 times since the story came out.
i basically think in their 'investigation' they targeted a few players rather than getting a true representation of the team's view. this doesnt seem very fair. i think they used annonymous sources only to protect their credibility. and i think they were chasing an angle. therefore, it seems appropriate that a suspension and refutation follow. maybe not completely back down from the story, but say certain practices were not followed correctly and it could have been covered better. if that happens, i'd go back to the freep.
September 6th, 2009 at 11:53 AM ^
My favorite part is the subheadline:
"All sides of the issue need to be heard as U-M, NCAA investigate"
Not fucking once in the article do they mention any need to give the coaches any benefit of the doubt, listen to "their side" of the story, etc. etc. The Freep knows it stirred up a shitstorm and they know that most people - Michigan fans or not - think this story is a crock. In other words, this isn't a case of a misleading headline or the headline writer not paying attention to the story. It's a plea for hearing them out, as most don't believe them.
September 6th, 2009 at 1:27 PM ^
Paul Anger doesn't know his Shakespeare very well.
At the bottom of the first page he uses "Sound and fury" as the subheader for the story blowing up onto the national scene. The full phrase is, "It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
Hm, I wonder how we could apply that to this story.
Hopefully the quote will be predictive, as well: "A poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage, and then is heard no more."
September 6th, 2009 at 2:39 PM ^
Mr. Anger is a loser. If he hadn't been so thoroughly discredited, then he would have no reason to write a defense like that. Pathetic.
September 6th, 2009 at 5:13 PM ^
Is he talking about us?
September 7th, 2009 at 9:27 AM ^
I am done with the Free Press. Most, if not all of Snyder's articles seem to originate here on this site. Each time, someone posts a link here, posting the entire article, posters on this site, regulate the content. More experienced posters will self regulate the content.
I find this interesting, since Snyder's articles are either lifted from this site without proper citiation, or completely made up unsubstantiated fiction.
To the argument, the Freep has quality Lifestyles sections and News Departments. I quote my Father old adage, "You are either part of the solution, or part of the problem." The Free Press allows this garbage to exist. In a commercial environment they chose to print and content, then the advertisers and consumers get to cast DOLLAR VOTES. I say screw them.
UM should post Rosenpalms and Snydlee Do Wrong's photos at UM Stadium on the jumbotron during commercial breaks. I would love to watch them chased through the street of Ann Arbor, perhaps we could start our own Ann Arbor tradition, : "The Running of the BullsHIT"