Michael Rosenberg Deserves Better!

Submitted by restive neb on September 1st, 2009 at 10:57 PM

Michael Rosenberg should be outraged. He deserves better than what he’s gotten. I know most of the readers here are already moving their cursors toward the “-1” arrow, but please read what I have to say before joining in the “negbang.”

First an analogy:

Ned works as an engineer for a large company. He enjoys his job, and is proud of the 15 years of his life he has dedicated to the company. Last year, they hired a new employee, Edna, in the human resources department. Ned has been frustrated by what he’s seen from Edna. One of the many things that bothered him is that she seems to bend the rules on personnel issues on a regular basis. Ned hasn’t said anything to anyone, because he doesn’t have proof. He is pretty sure he is right, but he cautiously keeps quiet.

Then one day, Ned becomes ill. After several trips to the doctor, he learns that insurance isn’t covering his expenses. The bills pile up as he begins to dig into the insurance problems. Finally, he finds that his insurance records were filed incorrectly, and that he has lost his coverage. Irate, Ned immediately composes a long, angry, accusatory letter to Edna, and copies several of her bosses and co-workers. After he sends the letter, a quick investigation shows that it had actually been Ned’s fault for the lapse in insurance.

Is Rosenberg Ned?

Well, yes, even though it isn’t a perfect analogy… One of the admittedly numerous differences in Mr. Rosenberg’s case (besides the fact that Michael Rosenberg had never let the lack of evidence slow his criticism) is that unlike Ned, Michael Rosenberg didn’t just send out his hate-filled diatribe in a mass e-mail. He submitted it to Mark Snyder. It was Mr. Snyder’s responsibility to review the document, judge it for its merits, and send it back to Rosenberg to be fixed.

As the editor, Snyder failed Rosenberg. Sure, Rosenberg wrote the filth that was made it to news programs across the country, but unlike Ned, there is a system put in place to protect Rosenberg from himself. When even a buckeye calls out the article for what it is (a ”witch hunt”), it is clear that the system failed him. Even Rosenberg deserved better.


The King of Belch

September 2nd, 2009 at 5:37 AM ^

There just isn't any room for sarcasm in today's world. Hence, the popular phrase, "Irony is dead in America."

When America gets 1000 years of history and literature under its belt, we might get that you can satirize anything you want and it will be part of our DNA to look at everything with a sideways glance.

Americans are still too busy looking for happy weddings at the end of every movie.

The Other Brian

September 1st, 2009 at 11:02 PM ^

He didn't submit anything to Snyder. Snyder isn't the editor, he's the accomplice in this case.

And Rosenberg deserves nothing. HE is the one who is gunning for Rodriguez. HE is the one who made Carty and Heuser appear to be ethical when he deceived Je'Ron Stokes and Brandin Hawthorne. HE is the one who decided to throw serious allegations at Rich Rodriguez without any sort of solid proof. The fact that the editor at the Free Press gave this the greenlight doesn't absolve Rosenberg of anything, it just means the editor of the Free Press deserves the guillotine right after Rosenberg's head hits the basket.


September 1st, 2009 at 11:08 PM ^

If Ned has even one testicle he would admit his mistake and apologize to Edna in a public way. When I see Rosenberg do that, I'll start thinking about what he deserves.


September 1st, 2009 at 11:10 PM ^

So your analogy basically states that its okay for me to be a complete idiot at work, create and perpetuate a biased opinion that accuses many people of major wrong doing and malice in their profession and my boss should cover my ass to make sure i am not doing my job wrong?

I will grant you the editor did a crap job and shoulda thrown this back to Rosenbozo and told him to get more facts, check more sources for more balance and do some comprehensive homework on the actual NCAA rules.....but in no way does Bozo deserve better for being a hack writing yellow biased drivel....

If I half assed my work this badly, i sure as hell wouldn't expect my boss to "clean me up"......

Big Boutros

September 1st, 2009 at 11:10 PM ^

Ned...Ryerson! "Needlenose Ned"? "Ned the Head"? Come on, buddy. Case Western High. Ned Ryerson. I did the whistling belly-button trick at the high school talent show? Bing! Ned Ryerson! got the shingles real bad senior year, almost didn't graduate? Bing, again. Ned Ryerson! I dated your sister Mary Pat a couple times until you told me not to anymore? Well?

The King of Belch

September 2nd, 2009 at 5:51 AM ^

So are we to post with Groupthought in mind? Is there no room for dissension? Is there no room for creativity? Have we relegated this entire blog to posting with points in mind?

Have the Cool Kidz line of thinking taken MGoBlog from its humble, campy beginnings (its "roots" if you will) where it was rife with wit, self deprecating humor, intelligence that would make Stephen Hawking want to go back to colege, zaniness that would make Douglas Adams start over, and satire, yes, SATIRE that turn Mark Twain, er, green with envy?

Have we left no sarcasm and wit, sir? Have we at long last left no sense of sarcasm and wit?!


September 2nd, 2009 at 7:34 AM ^

and incorrect. Look at the damage done by the writer. He basically said that the RR and his staff cheated by ignoring NCAA rules at the expense of college players. That is a pretty serious accusation.

Now, RR did nothing wrong to the writer or paper (perceived or otherwise). Actually, the University was nice enough to that writer to grant him access to write about Bo & Woody. In addition, RR grants more media interviews, practice invites... than the previous staff. The writer should have been happy.

This writer should be fired and forced to write for the local newsletter in a small Alaskan town.