Really Freep? Really?

Submitted by Augger on August 2nd, 2010 at 9:54 PM

Oh dear oh dear oh dear.  I am trying so so hard not to hate the Free Press these days, plus I know a growing segment of the Mgopopulation hates any mention of the paper, but I had to mention this...using Tim's awesome notes from the hallway press conference we get this question regarding Mike Shaw:

"What is Michael Shaw's eligibility status?

Well we're still waiting on some - we don't comment on our guys' academically, and they still have two weeks of summer school left. Uh, which for some of our players, uh, we'll keep in touch with them."

 

Here is the top of the page headline on Freep.com right now:

U-M's top rusher, Michael Shaw, not yet eligible

 

While this may or may not be true, leave it to the Free Press to cast the information in the worst possible light.  Is Shaw our leading rusher by yardage, yes, but was he the most liklely #1 choice at RB this year, probably not from the information I have seen...plus maybe he is eligible right now, but his current grade could drag him under the limit who knows...I just don't understand why the Freep continues to show every bit of U-M information in the worst possible light, its nuts.

 

Aug

 

 

Comments

OMG Shirtless

August 2nd, 2010 at 10:09 PM ^

Some might actually like to read the context before going all OMGFreepLinkzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz! With the OP's various font selections, sizes, and lack of quotations marks, it isn't exactly clear which text is from the Free Press and which is the OP's. 

At least this time it was fairly obvious that it was a Freep link. 

Dan Man

August 3rd, 2010 at 1:26 PM ^

OMG Shirtless was given the opportunity to post a link, and he did so.  Lots of readers here hate the Freep for good reason, and they have the opportunity to neg OMG shirtless and tell him he's an asshole.

It's important for readers to know that clicking on a Freep link = $ for the Freep (albeit in a miniscule way).  I don't see anything wrong with criticizing the posting of a Freep link.

jmblue

August 2nd, 2010 at 9:58 PM ^

Give in to your inner Freep-hater. 

Until that paper changes its editorial staff, it won't be readable for its few remaining years of existence.

the_white_tiger

August 3rd, 2010 at 1:28 AM ^

That's true, there is more rationality than most places out there, but I think a lot of people convince themselves that we are better than we are, and the homerism infects the logic and twists it. Just my $0.02.

jtmc33

August 2nd, 2010 at 10:20 PM ^

Freep "Journalist":   "Coach, when did you stop beating your wife?"

RR:  "I never started beating my wife in the first place."

Freep Headline:  Dick Rod Does Not Deny Stopping the Beating of his Wife

 

 

 

lexus larry

August 2nd, 2010 at 10:35 PM ^

Earlier today, same location on the webpage, (paraphrasing) negatively slanted headline about the 2 a days being impacted by Rich Rodriguez heading out to Seattle for the NCAA meeting. Of course, it never rose to higher than 10th most viewed, so the cretins needed another negative U-M football story headlined on the website.
(For the record, I view the home page, see what headlines they're generating, then head over to DN, or back here to fact based writing.)
It's obvious the strategy is to attempt as many reasons as possible to generate pageviews, not accurate reporting or intelligent analysis. As far as the 2 a days, Rodriguez confirmed no impact to the actual practices, just moved around a bit.
(As an aside for the few mgobloggerati who think there are too many tin foil hats atop sensitive heads, read a Sunday Fr**p front to back for a month...digs at U-M abound...MSC, tOSU, the Borens, you name it. A very snide (pun intended) rag, dripping yellow all the dismal way to its final, Ed Meese protected resting place. I'll cheer when that blight is gone.)

Wolverine318

August 2nd, 2010 at 10:30 PM ^

anyone want to email snyder and remind him coach Rod never stated in the post press conference comments that Shaw was ineligible? 

They are not even hiding their bias anymore. Congrats to Paul Anger on creating a complete sparty propaganda machine. 

kevin holt

August 3rd, 2010 at 3:46 PM ^

we didn't have the boycott instituted, all the comments on their site would be logical arguments against their bias and pointing out inaccuracies. I'm not familiar with the site, as I won't click a link to it, but if there is a comments section, it's likely riddled with "You tellum" and "scUM is gettin' they're doo [hurr hurr]"

so in that way, maybe the boycott is stopping a flood of us logical folk from pointing out their inaccuracies. But really, who wants to have a youtube-style debate with sparty on there, when no one would really care if we point out their faulty journalism? They would probably just print "Someone in Connection With University Attacks Free Speech, Desecrates Constitution Repeatedly"

In the same way, I feel like an email would go right into his trash folder unless the subject line reads something stealthy like "I love MSU too! Hope Shaw flunks LOL"

Mustachioed Ge…

August 2nd, 2010 at 10:32 PM ^

OMGShirtless: I understand thinking something is stupid and not adhering to it but why are you so up in arms about this? It seems that you have deigned yourself the protector of the FREEP here and go about this duty so vehemently. Why is this?

OMG Shirtless

August 2nd, 2010 at 10:40 PM ^

Sometimes, every once in a great while, people like to read the article before bashing the Free Press.  It is standard e-blog protocol to post a link to an article you are discussing.  I understand if you don't want to click on the link, that's cool, that's your prerogative.  All I was doing, this time, was providing the link for those that are interested. 

It was a shitty headline, that doesn't mean that I shouldn't at least read the article for myself before taking Augger's word for it.

plaidflannel

August 2nd, 2010 at 10:36 PM ^

You know, we could not post it here.  That would solve a lot of everyone's problems with the Freep, especially if so many of you are boycotting it.  Just a thought.

MgoViper

August 2nd, 2010 at 10:45 PM ^

I HATE the Freep and this is what im gonna say in response:


haters gonna hate

I just consider the source and it makes me laugh.  Is that the best they can do? It just goes to show what you can expect from a MSU Grad(Freep Journalist).

Tim Waymen

August 3rd, 2010 at 12:13 AM ^

Don't try not to hate the Freep.  Let out that hate.  Remember what the Freep did and never forgive them.  Ever.  I've said this a bunch of times already: they're dead to me.  Nothing the Freep does can make up for what it did.  It sounds overly dramatic, but consider two major points:

  1. What Rosenberg/Snyder did by manufacturing a scandal demonstrated a complete lack of journalistic integrity, and the fact that they and the editor not only are still at the paper but had used practicegate as a launching pad for Rosenberg's career tells me that the newspaper--every section of it--is not interested in the truth.
  2. I enjoy Michigan football and like when the team does well.  That makes me happy.  If someone at does something to get Michigan in trouble, then he's interfering with my pursuit of happiness, and the staff at the Freep set out to do just that, all while embarrassing my alma mater.

Marley Nowell

August 3rd, 2010 at 12:25 AM ^

What do they have to gain from alienating a huge part of their potential readership base?  Are they somehow gaining readership between MSU and all the other schools in Michigan who hate us?  I can understand why 1 person would do it to boost their own career, but why would the FREEP as a business do this?

chunkums

August 3rd, 2010 at 12:26 AM ^

At a certain point people will stop being surprised about the negativity in the freep.  I am no longer disgusted when my dog licks its own asshole because I expect such behavior.  Expect to be disappointed and read at your own discretion.