Why I still read the Free Press
I wasn't planning on posting this, but after seeing this thread it finally pushed me over the edge. I honestly don't understand the beef most of you have with the Freep. In short, I feel like they were just doing their job. Yes, they may have brought the wrath of the NCAA on our program, but don't forget that we are guilty of the violations. Why shoot the messenger? Shouldn't you be angry at the compliance department instead?
Most of the complaints I've seen have been that their story contained inaccuracies. It had some accusations that turned out to be false (mandatory activities), some that were excessive (practice time) and some that were 100% true (presence of QC staffers). To this I just have to say: Have you watched the news recently? This doesn't just happen to Michigan Football, this is what journalism is. I don't know the last time I've seen ANY news story that didn't take things out of context, or get some of the facts wrong. Rosenberg didn't witness this stuff firsthand. He did a bit of investigative reporting, and backed up his report with plenty of sources. Not everything panned out, but I still think he was sufficiently thorough. There was plenty of evidence to back it up:
In separate interviews, five players gave almost identical accounts of how the program is run, and a sixth player confirmed most of the descriptions.
Not to mention that some former players like Morgan Trent have come out and backed up the story. What more can you ask of a journalist? I'm not saying I believe the original story is true (I think it's a massive exaggeration), but I still feel that Rosenberg did an acceptable job in checking sources. To those not satisfied with this, I want to ask you "How was Rosenberg supposed to determine what was true and what was not?" Or should he have just kept quiet on a huge story like this, and not done his job?
Maybe I'm missing something huge here. If so, then please give me a reasonable explanation why I should hate the Free Press becase I just don't see one.
Perhaps it just comes down to Homerism, but I refuse to hate someone just because they attacked Michigan. Especially if it was justified and we were in the wrong.
At the end of the day, I don't think Rosenberg hates his alma mater, and I don't think he is on a quest to get Rodriguez fired. If you read the rest of his writings, he actually has a lot of support and optimism for RR and his system. It's not a crime to say something bad about Michigan, especially if it turns out to be true.
EDIT: Based on the responses below, I suppose my standards for responsible journalism are pretty low. I blame 24 hour cable news.
EDIT2: Just wanted to thanks to everyone for their responses before I'm banned. Although I still think a lot of you take things too far (like the tshirt idea), you've convinced me that the Freep did do a pretty terrible job in the fairness, thoroughness, and ethical(ness) department.
Sorry for not individually replying to all the comments below. I didn't expect to get such a response, and I've always been more of a reader of this board than a participant. To those who wanted me to step up and defend my initial position, I can't because you've changed my mind. Just like "everyone else does it" is not a defense for our violations, "everyone else in the media does it" is not a defense for failing to even mention the word "countable" in their story, presenting a biased one-sided piece, misrepresenting quotes from two freshmen, and failing to give the athletic department enough time to defend themselves.
Also, I'm sorry for posting a topic that could be considered "trolling". If I had bothered to look up most of the links presented below, I could have had my questions answered without angering everyone. I just saw the "Free Press Tshirt" thread and thought it was completely uncalled for. It seems the anger is justified.
Go Blue.
Why I don't read the Freep in 4 words...
It sucks donkey balls.
One of the really unfortunate things is that the Freep wasn't always like this. At one time, it was a good paper, edited and published according to much higher standards.
Neal Shine, long-time Detroit Free Press reporter, editor and publisher was known for a high level of journalistic ethics. MSU's journalism school created the Neal Shine Fund for Ethics in Journalism.
The paper has sunk very far and we have lost something as a result.
Now they can do more harm than good.
articles thats it.
Still reading the Free Press? Why on earth were you ever reading it in the first place??
Meet sacrifice.
This is not going to end well.
First. To give Bando +1 for this.
Bando, this one hasn't even started well...
already got my tub of popcorn ready and waiting!
I think he should have just entitled the thread "Why I don't like MGoPoints".
Check it out.
MGoMatt didn't get neg-bombed. He got 1 MGoPoint (as of this writing, noon on 5/27/10), and he got an answer to his question which, I gather, he found helpful.
And best of all, when MGoMatt said that he had been "pushed over the edge" by (gasp!) a viewing of the 'Fuck the Free Press T-shirt design thread', I think we have now, safely, brought young Matt back from the precipice.
Another life saved by MGoBlog.
Is this your homework, MGoMatt? Is this your homework, MGoMatt?
Look, MgoMatt. Have you ever heard of Vietnam?
You're killing your father, MgoMatt!
Actually, he did get (massively) negbombed. Check out the "Voting details" at the top of the thread. The "1 point" thing in the corner of an OP never changes - it's some kind of glitch.
Sorry. Well, Bando warned him.
You're the rascal who posted a few hours ago that Jim Harbaugh "was just trying to help" when he issued the infamous quote that the Michigan football program (would that have been Bo's football program?) inexcusably pushed football players, including, uh, Jim Harbaugh, into inferior BGS degrees.
Best of luck to you, Matt. You're gonna need it.
Dude, the bias against Michigan displayed by Rosenberg and Sharp is pretty ridiculous. It seems like there's some personal animosity towards the U by most of their sports writers. And how about the Demar Dorsey story? That's what made me stop reading it.
Well, if we're gonna try to be fair and objective, you probably should hold a similar animosity towards annarbor.com, re: Demar Dorsey.
dokey.
We're still waiting on the "Demar Dorsey redemption story" that was promised to his family by Rosenberg. Any inside info on when that one is scheduled to be released?
Didn't think so.
probably early January 2012
I disagree that Rosenberg or Sharp have a personal vendetta against Michigan. They might have a little residual dislike from the stonewalling they got from Carr, but I think the piss poor journalism they have displayed is a clear example of them selling their souls for marketshare. They saw how much attention the Kwame Kilpatrick scandal got the lcoal media outlets and realized that a scandal against an institution like mIchigan would keep all of teh Michigan haters reading their paper every day. People love to see hubris punished and as most MSU and OSU, etc, fans think of us as arrogant, that story was bound to sell papers and advertising. I bet that Sunday edition that started this whole nonsense was one of the FREEP's altime biggest sellers. That is why I cringe everytime I see those douchebags mentioned when someone is reporting on the violations, because I know they are somewhere patting themselves on the back.
The Freep's issues extend beyond their coverage of Mich football. They have serious issues in their editorial department. A few months back, they wrote a series of articles on healthcare reform. The problem? A HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANY 'suggested' they write the article and then took out a full-page ad each day the feature ran. How is the paper supposed to remain unbiased in a situation like that? It's completely unethical and absurd. You don't need to be a journalism major to understand that....
btw- I don't have a link, but I got the info above from Rivals (not paywalled). I think it was Chait who wrote the original article.
I don't know, it might be the twisting information (or conviently igonoring contrary information) in order to make gross over-accusatory statements about the football program, or the lack of any sort of quality research (IE completely ignorant of what a countable hour is). Dude, have you even read anything that Brian has written lately about this??
My favorite part was when Mike Rosenberg and Mark Snyder walked into Bruce Madej's office on a Friday (August 28, 2009, to be exact) and told Michigan that they were getting ready to run a huge story on Sunday and, hey, would the University like to comment? If the University had any documents to counter the story that would be posted to Freep.com in a matter of hours, could they please get copies?
The OP gives an honest, intelligent, serious, intricate view of the situation.
With all due respect to the MGoCommunity, I doubt he will receive a response of similar value. I hope I'm wrong.
FTR: I'm not totally anti-Freep. Like the OP, I think the original article was a gross exaggeration and the writers and sports-editor should address this. I don't find this as reason to boycott the entire newspaper.
My opinion. I respect others, but that's my view.
I'll give you a + 1.....but only for your avatar. Less than one month!!!
Less than one month? Sorry, what are you referring to?
EDIT: Ha! I'm dumb. Kinda ignored your whole reference to my avatar. Can't wait for Futurama to start back up!
I'm not necessarily anti-freep either, as I'm sure there are some good journalists that work for them, its just not the place you want to get UofM sports news. And some people that don't live in Michigan (like myself) have no reason to read it otherwise. So why not get your M Football news from another source if what you read at the Freep is just going to piss you off?
This is exactly my view. I'm not going to Freep for any sports news, Michigan related or not. I do think boycotting the entire newspaper is childish. There are probably (certainly) some hardworking people at the Freep that do their job to the utmost of their abilities.
At economic times like these, I'm not one to make bringing down an industry that still supplies jobs a goal of mine.
So you believe the Freep would rather go out of business than begin fairly reporting the news? I'm sorry, but any paper who is willing to go that route deserves to be put out of its misery.
Furthermore, the Freep is trying to sabotage our entire coaching staff. This will also cause quite a few people to lose employment, and will severely disrupt the lives of many student athletes. All of this is being done just so they can get a few extra clicks on the Freep.com website. How disgraceful.
Dude I think you forgot your tinfoil hat at home.
I think we've already proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the Freep is trying to sabotage our coaching staff. It's not exactly a "Conspiracy Theory" anymore.
+1 to you sir, mostly because I read the "c" and the "l" as a "d" in your last sentence.
you believe substandard dishonest work should continue to be rewarded?
If boycotting the newspaper forces their hand to bring on journalists who do a thorough, exhaustive job when reporting and breaking news, I'm all for it. We might actually be doing them a favor if bringing on better staff drives more hits to their website and increases their circulation.
But, although I would never say that the Freep did the Athletic Dept a "favor", their article finally got certain people named "Brad" and "Scott" off their dead asses. It exposed weaknesses that should never have been there in the first place.
I actually take offense to the notion that boycotting the entire paper is childish. You've already acknowledged that the "article" in question was a gross exaggeration, and U-M has basically seconded that conclusion in the release of their response to the allegations.
But expecting the columnists or sports editor (is there one?) to address this is a losing proposition. Clearly, they have no intention of doing so. In fact, the head editor (Paul Anger) circled the wagons shortly after the original article, standing by the content of the article and basically calling anyone who objected a U-M homer. That position has not changed, as far as I know.
I, like you, believe that the Freep has a right to report the facts, even if they cast U-M in an unfavorable light; I don't pretend like they should be shills. If U-M is doing something wrong, it needs to be corrected.
But to this day, the Freep refuses to acknowledge that their original piece was inaccurate, overstepped their understanding of the rules/terminology, ethically questionable, and caused U-M much more harm than the actual violations merit. Snyder and Rosenberg are under no obligation to explain their inaccuracies, and they've taken the weasel way out when questioned directly. What motivation does the paper have to come clean? None. They got what they wanted: they sold more papers.
So those of us who choose to be childish and boycott the paper do it because it's our only recourse to make the paper own up. When they do, I'll gladly resume my patronage. In actuality, I miss it. I hate the News. It's boring. I miss the non-sports content of the Freep. But again, the Freep leaves me (and others) with only one option: hit 'em in the wallet until they do the right thing.
If that's childish, then my year-long tantrum will continue.
Like I said, I'm only providing my opinion. I understand people have other opinions. Like you, I like the Freep for non-sports related news. As someone who is in Education, I go to the Freep for alot of my news about the Detroit Public School system.
In my opinion (I cannot stress this enough, I respect everyone's opinion to boycott the paper), for me to not seek out information and news about the Detroit Public School system because of a Michigan football story would be a childish decision for me to make.
I certainly don't have a subscription, but I'm not going to stop seeking out news that's important to me.
One idea: instead of preventing clicks (I think we all know that their story has done what they wanted it to - generated a net positive in traffic), maybe write a letter - on paper! - to the editor? Maybe actually visit Freep offices? I understand that every little bit helps the cause, but I personally think internet protests fall on deaf ears.
He's the Freep's editor/publisher. It was clear to me after three times back and forth that he was being totally disingenuous. If the editor/publisher of a paper is going to throw out weak red herrings instead of making an actual defense of a major story, that casts doubt on everything his paper does.
It may have been honest and serious, but it's not intelligent or intricate. There's no need to go through the ways in which the article was poorly researched....nay, willfully blind....nay overtly dishonest over the fundamental issue which determines violations (what is a countable hour). To downplay it to the level the OP does is to acquiesce to yellow journalism (and "that's how journalism is these days! don't you watch FoxNews?!" is not a valid retort)
Your condescending comment regarding the commentariat here is absolutely spot on (the lemming-like responses now often suffocate intelligent discussion), but the irony is that in this case, this post giving credit to the Freep reporting simply can't rationally be defended, given how blatant the Free Press hit job was.
In sum, the poster IS receiving responses of similar value....the mostly worthless kneejerk reaction of the community (OMG Eff the Freep!) is ripping apart the mostly worthless original post (that the Freep wrote a reasonable article)
"The OP gives an honest, intelligent, serious, intricate view of the situation. With all due respect to the MGoCommunity, I doubt he will receive a response of similar value."
This must be the OP's first trip to this board, because if I recall correctly, and I do, Brian has done just that... more than once... on the front page no less. On the other hand, is it a "response" if each of Brian's posts on the subject were written BEFORE the OP posted his drivel? Does it really change the point?
What do you think now?
Do you think the OP got an "honest, intelligent, serious, intricate" response to his original question? Did he get "a response of similar value"?
Methinks the OP believes that he did (witness his own edit)...
Do you think the OP got an "honest, intelligent, serious, intricate" response to his original question? Did he get "a response of similar value"?
Yes I do! Maybe I'm just tired of hearing shit about the Freep - I just wanna focus on UConn at this point. But, like the first few replies indicate, I expected this thread to be a complete shitstorm. It wasn't thanks to several patient responses, yours included.
Also, note I never said that the OP was right. I just respected the manner in which he presented his argument, which is what made me want to play Devil's Advocate. He didn't throw a one-liner in the post, ala Henning, but actually tried to make a logical argument. I respect that, even if I don't agree with it.
Please read for long list of things you are "missing":
http://michigan.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1088066
In addition, if a journalist is "thorough," he would try to represent both sides of the story. There was not an attempt here.
This article was a crime against fairness and stretched the principle of truth to its limits. This is an entity that we trust to protect our liberty. If this is the best that it can do, it needs to move out of the way of those that can do a much better job.
To say that article was justified......... Wow.
Excellent points. Journalists should make an effort to address both sides of the story and clearly there was only one side in the article.
Does anyone remember if there was a "Michigan refused to comment" line in the article? If not, then, again, the Freep really laid an egg (obviously).
It took Brian all of 5 seconds, if memory serves, to post comments from players' parents refuting the drastic practice hours overage charge. All of the great journalistic power at the FP could not uncover this information and save itself from this massive self-inflicted wound to their integrity? Please.
Have you ever worked for a large organization? I suspect that 99% of them would choose the same route: not to comment. The other 1%, if they choose to acknowledge the article, would take 2 business days to formulate a public comment.
This isn't like an oil spill, where the accident happened two weeks prior, everyone knows what happened, everyone knows who is responsible, and the chairman takes the podium to announce that the company takes responsibility. This was article full of inaccuracies. Even if some with the AD knew about the late CARA forms and whatnot, there's simply no way anyone within the department would be able to speak intelligently about the allegations that were about to be released in print.
This wasn't Rosenberg and Snyder giving U-M an opportunity to comment, or even trying to make sure they had the facts right. I guess it would be a Freep-like stretch to compare what they did to blackmail, since they probably didn't demand anything and never had any intention of not running the article. But this was simply two journalists smugly baiting U-M into throwing more gas on the logs before they lit the match. U-M made the right decision.
http://michigan.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=982287
Because that's just the kind of guy that I am.
Not everything panned out, but I still think he was sufficiently thorough.
You must have some extremely fucking low standards then.
Congrats on figuring out the Internet and making an account! I didn't think you had it in you. Aren't the interwebs fun!