The Paper-Whose-Name-We-Dare-Not-Say hates Michigan - A non-sports example

Submitted by James Burrill Angell on

So people who support the Newspaper-Whose-Name-We-Dare-Not-Say can't deny the actual active hatred that it has towards the University of Michigan.  I submit for your consideration the following two articles, one from said paper, one from their crosstown rivals the Detroit News. The article is about a breakthrough by a UofM engineering professor in the design of a robot that can walk on two legs like a human being.

The Detroit  News headline: UM Robot Mabel Clears Stacked Wood. May Jog Soon.

http://www.detnews.com/article/20100613/SCHOOLS/6130314/U-M-robot-Mabel-clears-stacked-wood--may-jog-soon

Same exact topic, said lousy fishwrap on the other side of Detroit titles their article: UM Robot Breaks Leg!

COME ON! The point of the experiment was apparently to keep throwing obstacles (in the form of stacked wooden boards in front of this robot until it couldn't do it any more thereby breaking its leg.  Its not like the damn robot was called RichRobot or something. What is going on over there?

Njia

June 14th, 2010 at 4:08 PM ^

But, I was just taking the Lewis Black bit to the next level:



"There are two general rules of health. Number one: the good die young, and pricks live forever. And number two: if you masturbate 20 times a day, you'll never make it out your front door. You might make it to the door, but once you grab the handle, you'll fall down."

GoBlueInNYC

June 14th, 2010 at 11:49 AM ^

That was really cool.  I wonder how long until they can give it feet.  I'm far from an engineer, but feet would obviously give it a lot more stability (and are also probably really, really difficult to design and implement).

The way it walks kind of reminds me of when I'm walking up or down stairs and take a step expecting another stair when there isn't one.

Fuzzy Dunlop

June 14th, 2010 at 11:33 AM ^

The writing and "spin" of the one versus the article written in the News is clearly more negative

Umm, both articles were written by the Associated Press, and they are virtually identical (the one in the Freep is just an edited-down version of the longer one in the News).

Agree with you on the headline.  And the disgusting comments in the Freep gives an idea of the type of readers they're appealing to.  ("The robot practiced too much, that's why its leg was weak!  Hurh hurh!").  But this might be pushing things a bit.

Bosch

June 14th, 2010 at 11:35 AM ^

All sarcasm aside, I'm pretty sure that the writers for the Freep with U of M ties consider themselves proud graduates of Michigan.  They don"t "hate" U of M.

However, in order to sell print, they have chosen to throw the Michigan football program under the bus, which has alienated them from fellow alumni, as well as the fans.

The irony is that everytime we discuss these articles, we are doing exactly what they want us to do.  We are recognizing them for their product and, with journalism, negative recognition is usually as good as positive.

In no way am I defending these reporters.  I couldn't fathom advancing my career at U of M's expense, and I'm appalled that they could.  Then again, my career path as a Civil Engineer will never put me in their position.

Feat of Clay

June 14th, 2010 at 12:00 PM ^

I saw the video featured on a website for robotgeeks a coupla weeks back, and it too highlighted the broken leg issue, mainly because it aroused sympathy for that poor blind robot.

However, having followed the way papers around the country report on higher ed, I think both Detroit papers love to take potshots at U-M.  They rarely miss a chance to help perpetuate the myth that the U is arrogant, overstuffed, and out-of-touch.  It's a real shame because parts of our state have really parochial views about higher ed.  A better paper would look for opportunities to inform the public and correct those misunderstandings.  I guess it's easier to feed people's disgruntled stereotypes.

Space Coyote

June 14th, 2010 at 11:50 AM ^

But most of these freep posts on here are just getting whiny.  Everytime they even say Michigan there is a post on mgoblog that takes every little thing in the worst possible way as if to say "quit picking on me."  Honestly, everyone who keeps claiming every article ever written by the Freep is an anti-Michigan campain needs to relax.

Wes Mantooth

June 14th, 2010 at 12:58 PM ^

 

The story isn't new, but it was just printed in the most recent Michigan Today Newsletter.  Just showed up in my inbox last week, so I'm sure that's where this is coming from.  

I think it's funny that Michigan included this in the newsletter as something the University is proud of, but the Freep still printed a story with a headline like that.  That headline makes it sound like the experiment was a failure when it's actually pretty phenomenal work and is something that's on-going...

Happyshooter

June 16th, 2010 at 8:48 AM ^

I think the difference is that Michigan grads and most smart journalists know what an experiment and trial is, and why you get data to make improvments.

 

The Free Press, however, seems to have gone to MSU. They think an 'experiment' is the time they drank a bunch of Everclear, smoked a joint the size of a cigar, and ended up in bed with their roommate.