Possible Freep repercussions?
Just wondering (as I have zero legal savvy) are there any actions that can be taken against Freep for so falsely stating, " played spent two to three times that amount on required workouts", though the NCAA report released Tuesday said players more often exceeded the limit by two hours per week in most cases?
It's so obvious that the outrageous claims were made by Freep to simply draw more attention to the story and paper... which in turn = more papers sold and more $.
I just can't believe these kind of false accusations can possibly fall under freedom of speech?
February 23rd, 2010 at 4:47 PM ^
In a word: no.
February 23rd, 2010 at 8:14 PM ^
I cancelled my subscription. And when the woman who took my cancellation asked why, I told her. And I sent an email to Paul Anger advising he just lost a 30 year subscriber. Do they care what I did or think? I suspect not. Will they soon die an inglorious death? Yes. Death by aggressive irrelevance.
February 23rd, 2010 at 10:04 PM ^
It would be a disaster if UM tried to go after the Freep.
1) Whether you believe they blew it out of proportions or not, the basis of the story was correct.
2) You'd have to somehow prove that not only was their information wrong, but that they knew it was wrong and STILL wanted to go ahead with the story. You really think that happened?
3) It would look like sour grapes.
February 23rd, 2010 at 4:47 PM ^
Have you never read the National Enquirer, Weekly World News, Detroit Free Press? This is just status quo.
February 23rd, 2010 at 4:49 PM ^
They were quoting allegations made by others. Their methodology was unethical from a journalistic perspective, in my opinion, but it certainly was legal.
February 23rd, 2010 at 4:54 PM ^
I believe their weasel words allow them to say whatever they want, as long as they quote someone else.
"Former players claim..." or "So-and-so states..." let's them print anything.
February 23rd, 2010 at 4:51 PM ^
1)A reduction of font size
2)the text must be sans serif (NO MORE SERIF!!)
3)Reduced word counts
4)May only sell the paper on Sundays
5)No more access to a Thesaurus
February 23rd, 2010 at 5:01 PM ^
"5)No more access to a Thesaurus"
I have a feeling this one may not hurt them too much.
February 23rd, 2010 at 6:07 PM ^
you would be punctilious in assuming that.
February 23rd, 2010 at 8:16 PM ^
I'm going to miss serif.
February 23rd, 2010 at 4:51 PM ^
The Freep has already exerienced repercussions from last August's report: I have not looked at the web site or one of their papers since then. I know all comrades in MGoBlogland have been practicing the same thing.
February 23rd, 2010 at 4:54 PM ^
Not one click
February 23rd, 2010 at 8:31 PM ^
even one click. Everytime I see Drew Sharp on TV I know I can never go back.
Bye bye Freep. Life is better without you.
February 23rd, 2010 at 4:56 PM ^
If you want them to face repercussions, stop reading it, stop linking it and stop talking about it. The Freep is not going to stop, and given today's press conference, they will declare victory. The columns will continue and folks will talk about it. I'd expect it to get worse before it gets better because they have to justify their witch hunt.
February 23rd, 2010 at 4:55 PM ^
Someone who lifted a $10 movie from Wal-Mart is considered a thief. Someone who lifted a $1000 TV from HHGregg is also a thief. The NCAA found us to be in violation, no matter how small or insignificant it may be. Unfortunately, if an issue was made about how Freep reported this, it would become a debate of how crooked the Michigan Athletic Program is and not about the incompetence of Freep. Freep being incompetent is not big news and wouldnt sell other papers either...
February 23rd, 2010 at 4:56 PM ^
The thing to do with Smails is, if he bothers you, I'll take care of him. What you've got to do to Smails is, you cut the hamstring on the back of his leg, right at the bottom. He'll never play golf again, because he goes back, his weight displacement goes back, and he stays there. All his weight is on his right foot, and he'll be pushing everything off to the right. He'll never come through on anything. He'll quit the game.
February 23rd, 2010 at 5:05 PM ^
All you can do is boycott them. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, no matter how ridiculous that opinion may be.
February 23rd, 2010 at 5:05 PM ^
Most are reporting VIOLATIONS. These are ALLEGATIONS. Yeah, there are probably some violations there, but not yet.
February 23rd, 2010 at 5:10 PM ^
Rather than continually ostracize M fans, I think the Free Press should cater to Michigan fans. For example, they could print out a daily edition of the paper on a roll of toilet paper. I for one would pay money to wipe my ass with Drew Sharp's columns.
February 23rd, 2010 at 5:10 PM ^
Probably not, though I hear that the University of Alaska hype bear may be making a strafing run on the Freep building if they keep this up.
I think the real damage will be the continued decrease in readership both in print (inevitable) and on the web (an area that they need to leverage successfully if they expect to stay competitive). Let's not forget that there are a couple hundred UM fans on this site, and my guess is that a fair number of them used to visit the Freep pretty consistently before this whole fiasco. Turning off a loyal contingent like this is going to be felt, especially when most of their "news" can be found other places. Local news is important, but beyond that most newspapers struggle to attract readers. With local sports, most papers are able to at least keep the local fans interested and coming back for more info. Don't be surprised to see the Freep experience a drop in sports traffic if our MGoBargo continues.
February 23rd, 2010 at 5:16 PM ^
is hit them where it hurts, in their wallets.
Boycott the paper & ignore them.
Also, why doesn't the University just not invite/ ban the freep from all press conferences and give opposing writers exclusives?
February 23rd, 2010 at 5:18 PM ^
The Freep changed their title to add the word "alleged" after everyone called them out on it.
The public:1
Freep: 0
February 23rd, 2010 at 6:08 PM ^
The fact that there's been an investigation leading to allegations justifies the Freep. The fact that we complain about their article justifies the Freep. Whatever their motives, all of our cries regarding 'journalistic integrity' will be heard as sour grapes and only legitimizes the Freep's relavence. The best thing we can do is never mention the Freep or anyone reporting from the Freep again.
I will attempt to patiently wait and see what happens.
February 23rd, 2010 at 6:34 PM ^
Can we please just ignore the freep? Every mention just gives them more of what they want - attention. I understand the anger...it just kills me that we are feeding their lust for credibility.
February 23rd, 2010 at 7:20 PM ^
Wouldn't they be freepercussions?