01-31-2017, 11:31 PM
I note that there is a show on the PAC-12 network tomorrow re: LOI signings in the conference. Is Stanford having its own presser? If so, is it available on line? Thank you
LOI PRESSER?
02-01-2017, 01:52 PM
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
02-01-2017, 06:50 PM
I didn't hear the word "phenomenal" even once. How good could this class really be?
"It's not what you don't know that gets you in trouble. It's what you think you know that just isn't so."
Mark Twain
02-01-2017, 06:56 PM
I like the way Shaw called out Wilner for jumping the gun on reporting that Burns was leaving. Just said it was unfortunate and mentioned "John" in a teasing rather than angry way. I guess I'm also a Shawpologist when it comes to his press conference performance!
Cheers,
Pete F.
Cheers,
Pete F.
I like the way Shaw called out Wilner for jumping the gun on reporting that Burns was leaving. Just said it was unfortunate and mentioned "John" in a teasing rather than angry way. I guess I'm also a Shawpologist when it comes to his press conference performance!
Cheers,
Pete F.
Cheers,
Pete F.
02-01-2017, 07:20 PM
To be semi-fair to Wilner, his reporting got into a common ontological problem with journalism. IIRC he said it was "expected" Burns would transfer. Expectations, as we know, can be wrong: the coaching staff might have overestimated the odds Burns would leave, or Burns might've simply changed his mind. As Shaw said the idea was seriously considered. So was Wilner *wrong*? It's really difficult to say.
Not to get overly political, but this is an issue the news media is going to encounter again and again for various reasons in the coming years.
Not to get overly political, but this is an issue the news media is going to encounter again and again for various reasons in the coming years.
To be semi-fair to Wilner, his reporting got into a common ontological problem with journalism. IIRC he said it was "expected" Burns would transfer. Expectations, as we know, can be wrong: the coaching staff might have overestimated the odds Burns would leave, or Burns might've simply changed his mind. As Shaw said the idea was seriously considered. So was Wilner *wrong*? It's really difficult to say.
Not to get overly political, but this is an issue the news media is going to encounter again and again for various reasons in the coming years.
Not to get overly political, but this is an issue the news media is going to encounter again and again for various reasons in the coming years.
02-01-2017, 07:41 PM
I don't think one need be fair to Wilner in this case. His construction was deliberately vague and designed to sound more definite than it was.
Here's the story
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/01/11/st...-transfer/
Let's start with the headline:
Stanfords vanishing quarterback depth: Keller Chryst out at least six months, Ryan Burns to transfer
Not "Ryan Burns expected to transfer". Then, in the story he cites "multiple source" when talking about Keller Chryst, without telling us whether the sources were Chryst's doctors or two random fans speculating on the Cardboard. His construction on Burns then is problematic, because he pivots and says "Senior Ryan Burns, who replaced Chryst in the Sun Bowl (and started the first seven games of the season) is expected to leave Stanford under the NCAAs graduate transfer policy." but doesn't say whether that info came from sources or is message board speculation. He compounds it in his next paragraph, where he writes "With Burns gone and Chryst recovering..." as if Burns' transfer is a done deal. A responsible journalist might have written "If Burns does in fact leave..."
So, I don't give credit to Wilner for weasel wording his way out of that one.
BC
Here's the story
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/01/11/st...-transfer/
Let's start with the headline:
Stanfords vanishing quarterback depth: Keller Chryst out at least six months, Ryan Burns to transfer
Not "Ryan Burns expected to transfer". Then, in the story he cites "multiple source" when talking about Keller Chryst, without telling us whether the sources were Chryst's doctors or two random fans speculating on the Cardboard. His construction on Burns then is problematic, because he pivots and says "Senior Ryan Burns, who replaced Chryst in the Sun Bowl (and started the first seven games of the season) is expected to leave Stanford under the NCAAs graduate transfer policy." but doesn't say whether that info came from sources or is message board speculation. He compounds it in his next paragraph, where he writes "With Burns gone and Chryst recovering..." as if Burns' transfer is a done deal. A responsible journalist might have written "If Burns does in fact leave..."
So, I don't give credit to Wilner for weasel wording his way out of that one.
BC
I don't think one need be fair to Wilner in this case. His construction was deliberately vague and designed to sound more definite than it was.
Here's the story
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/01/11/st...-transfer/
Let's start with the headline:
Stanfords vanishing quarterback depth: Keller Chryst out at least six months, Ryan Burns to transfer
Not "Ryan Burns expected to transfer". Then, in the story he cites "multiple source" when talking about Keller Chryst, without telling us whether the sources were Chryst's doctors or two random fans speculating on the Cardboard. His construction on Burns then is problematic, because he pivots and says "Senior Ryan Burns, who replaced Chryst in the Sun Bowl (and started the first seven games of the season) is expected to leave Stanford under the NCAAs graduate transfer policy." but doesn't say whether that info came from sources or is message board speculation. He compounds it in his next paragraph, where he writes "With Burns gone and Chryst recovering..." as if Burns' transfer is a done deal. A responsible journalist might have written "If Burns does in fact leave..."
So, I don't give credit to Wilner for weasel wording his way out of that one.
BC
Here's the story
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/01/11/st...-transfer/
Let's start with the headline:
Stanfords vanishing quarterback depth: Keller Chryst out at least six months, Ryan Burns to transfer
Not "Ryan Burns expected to transfer". Then, in the story he cites "multiple source" when talking about Keller Chryst, without telling us whether the sources were Chryst's doctors or two random fans speculating on the Cardboard. His construction on Burns then is problematic, because he pivots and says "Senior Ryan Burns, who replaced Chryst in the Sun Bowl (and started the first seven games of the season) is expected to leave Stanford under the NCAAs graduate transfer policy." but doesn't say whether that info came from sources or is message board speculation. He compounds it in his next paragraph, where he writes "With Burns gone and Chryst recovering..." as if Burns' transfer is a done deal. A responsible journalist might have written "If Burns does in fact leave..."
So, I don't give credit to Wilner for weasel wording his way out of that one.
BC
02-01-2017, 07:48 PM
Ah, I had attributed more responsibility to Wilner in my memory than he displayed. He did screw up.
Ah, I had attributed more responsibility to Wilner in my memory than he displayed. He did screw up.
02-01-2017, 08:29 PM
(02-01-2017, 07:48 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Ah, I had attributed more responsibility to Wilner in my memory than he displayed. He did screw up.
You were right, though. I think we will be encountering this problem a lot in the years to come.
"It's not what you don't know that gets you in trouble. It's what you think you know that just isn't so."
Mark Twain
(02-01-2017, 07:48 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Ah, I had attributed more responsibility to Wilner in my memory than he displayed. He did screw up.
You were right, though. I think we will be encountering this problem a lot in the years to come.
"It's not what you don't know that gets you in trouble. It's what you think you know that just isn't so."
Mark Twain
02-01-2017, 08:55 PM
My first reaction to the article was "expected by whom, and on what basis?"
My first reaction to the article was "expected by whom, and on what basis?"
02-02-2017, 12:50 AM
Often headlines are a layout decision and not created by the reporter. Wilber deserves about half the beating he gets around here.
In 1938 Neville Chamberlain declared "Peace in our time", Superman first appeared in Action Comics, Seabiscuit beat War Admiral ....... and C.a.l last won the Rose Bowl.
Often headlines are a layout decision and not created by the reporter. Wilber deserves about half the beating he gets around here.
In 1938 Neville Chamberlain declared "Peace in our time", Superman first appeared in Action Comics, Seabiscuit beat War Admiral ....... and C.a.l last won the Rose Bowl.
02-02-2017, 09:14 AM
(02-02-2017, 12:50 AM)leftcoast link Wrote:Often headlines are a layout decision and not created by the reporter. Wilber deserves about half the beating he gets around here.
A very good point. At least in the newspapers I read, headlines are irresponsible much more often than articles are. I've also noticed that the headline on a paper's website often differs from headline in print for the same article, and that the web headlines tend to be substantially less accurate and more click-baity.Â
(02-02-2017, 12:50 AM)leftcoast link Wrote:Often headlines are a layout decision and not created by the reporter. Wilber deserves about half the beating he gets around here.
A very good point. At least in the newspapers I read, headlines are irresponsible much more often than articles are. I've also noticed that the headline on a paper's website often differs from headline in print for the same article, and that the web headlines tend to be substantially less accurate and more click-baity.Â
02-03-2017, 01:17 PM
I've noticed this also concerning a newspaper's web headlines. Last year at this time the Chronicle, I believe, had a Super Bowl preview article with the headline, "What Time is the Super Bowl?" I know this because I found it after entering that exact phrase in my search engine.
Please clear the field! The game is not over!
I've noticed this also concerning a newspaper's web headlines. Last year at this time the Chronicle, I believe, had a Super Bowl preview article with the headline, "What Time is the Super Bowl?" I know this because I found it after entering that exact phrase in my search engine.
Please clear the field! The game is not over!
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »