Pro-Sox media bias?

[southsider2k5]

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...-home-headlines

 

CSN admits it 'dropped ball'

 

By Teddy Greenstein

Tribune sports media reporter

 

June 16, 2006, 12:12 AM CDT

 

 

The most significant story coming from the White Sox's 8-0 loss in Texas on Wednesday night? That's easy. It was A.J. Pierzynski getting hit with a pitch twice—and Sox pitchers failing to retaliate.

 

Every Chicago newspaper led with that angle, noting reliever Sean Tracey drew manager Ozzie Guillen's ire because he didn't hit Hank Blalock.

 

 

 

Stories also mentioned TV cameras caught Ozzie Guillen yelling at someone in the dugout, Tracey burying his head in his hands and Guillen spiking a bottle of water.

 

Dramatic stuff, huh?

 

But Comcast SportsNet didn't show any of it during its 30-minute "SportsDay" wrap-up show.

 

It showed Pierzynski getting hit once, in the fourth inning. But there was no mention of how Vazquez and Tracey had declined to retaliate. And there was no video of what had transpired in the dugout.

 

So what was this—bad news judgment or an effort to show controversy-free highlights that might please the Sox? (The Sox, Bulls, Blackhawks and Cubs—and, thus, Tribune Co.—collaborated to form the network.)

 

"We dropped the ball," news director Joe Riley said. "We want the fan who might have gone to see 'Blue Man Group' last night and missed the Sox game to get the whole story from our highlights. We did a poor job on that and I'm sorry.

 

"But our relationship with the teams is never a factor. We don't get a mandate from the Sox."

[gojimthome]

"But our relationship with the teams is never a factor. We don't get a mandate from the Sox."

 

Guess you missed that.

[southsider2k5]

"But our relationship with the teams is never a factor. We don't get a mandate from the Sox."

 

Guess you missed that.

 

Cool. The Tribune saids the samething, so now we can cancel the media watches. Thanks

[Hangar18]

Good Catch SouthSider. I was going to bring this up yesterday in the media watch, but was too busy with "other" things ...........

Its funny that the websites and radio were Jammed talking about this, but the all the rest of the papers and newschannels seemed more interested in the Messiahs pitch count.

 

Cool. The Tribune saids the samething, so now we can cancel the media watches. Thanks

 

 

but lets not give the Trib that much credit here, they also underreported this,

and are only too happy to point the finger at Comcast.

[SoxFan76]

I've always thought CSN has been very fair in it's coverage, if not more biased towards the White Sox. I don't watch ESPN anymore, I only watch CSN. Even Chicago Tribune Live has a lot of good Sox coverage.

 

They call it like it is. Sox are going to make the playoffs, they're making a run for another World Series, they deserve coverage. The Cubs suck, they're almost in last place, and even if all their guys return from injuries they're still a 3rd place team at best. That's all you can ask for, now why can't other media outlets do the same?

[Felix]

Cool. The Tribune saids the samething, so now we can cancel the media watches. Thanks

yes please

[whitesoxfan101]

Comcast is always VERY pro Cubs AND Sox because of the sweet little T.V. deal. But hey, that's how it goes these days in sports media...

[southsider2k5]

Comcast is always VERY pro Cubs AND Sox because of the sweet little T.V. deal. But hey, that's how it goes these days in sports media...

 

Not to mention they own the majority of CSN between them...

[SoxFan76]

yes please

 

You don't like em? Don't read em.

[Guest JimH]

You don't like em? Don't read em.

People will read and comment on what they want around here, it's always been that way.

[SoxFan76]

People will read and comment on what they want around here, it's always been that way.

 

But it's awfully frustrating to want to read the media watch of the day and have to sift through 100 posts of people saying how much they hate it. You don't like it? Congratulations. Say it once and be done with it. Not everyone agrees with your viewpoint.

 

I'm not going to go to a rap concert every day and tell the guy next to me how much it sucks. That wouldn't make much sense now, would it. See what I'm sayin?

[southsider2k5]

But it's awfully frustrating to want to read the media watch of the day and have to sift through 100 posts of people saying how much they hate it. You don't like it? Congratulations. Say it once and be done with it. Not everyone agrees with your viewpoint.

 

I'm not going to go to a rap concert every day and tell the guy next to me how much it sucks. That wouldn't make much sense now, would it. See what I'm sayin?

 

Then why would you come onto a White Sox message board and tell people what to post and what not to post? That doesn't make a lick of sense.

[Guest JimH]

But it's awfully frustrating to want to read the media watch of the day and have to sift through 100 posts of people saying how much they hate it. You don't like it? Congratulations. Say it once and be done with it. Not everyone agrees with your viewpoint.

 

I'm not going to go to a rap concert every day and tell the guy next to me how much it sucks. That wouldn't make much sense now, would it. See what I'm sayin?

 

Well I'm sorry that it's frustrating and yes I know what you're saying. But the same holds true for his media watches (Trib and Sun Times story counts to be accurate). He doesn't like what he sees in the newspapers and comments on it every single day. Maybe he should say it once and be done with it?

 

If people here don't think something makes sense, they will comment on it. If something is posted every day that people feel doesn't make sense ... you guessed it, they will comment on it.

[SoxFan76]

Well I'm sorry that it's frustrating and yes I know what you're saying. But the same holds true for his media watches (Trib and Sun Times story counts to be accurate). He doesn't like what he sees in the newspapers and comments on it every single day. Maybe he should say it once and be done with it?

 

If people here don't think something makes sense, they will comment on it. If something is posted every day that people feel doesn't make sense ... you guessed it, they will comment on it.

 

It wouldn't be much of a media watch if he did it once and was done with it. That would kind of defeat the purpose.

[Guest JimH]

It wouldn't be much of a media watch if he did it once and was done with it. That would kind of defeat the purpose.

 

That's true.

 

But in many people's opinion there are issues with it every single day, hence the daily comments.

 

Fact is, he keeps doing 'em, people will keep commenting. Again, it's the way it is here.

[SoxHawk1980]

That's true.

 

But in many people's opinion there are issues with it every single day, hence the daily comments.

But the problem is that any fan of any team can come up with some aspect of media coverage of their team that they don't like...every day. It is pointless to keep bringing it up day in and day out. And the implication that there is some vast anti-sox conspiracy out there is both ludicrous and immature.

Edited June 16, 2006 by SoxHawk1980

[Hangar18]

It wouldn't be much of a media watch if he did it once and was done with it. That would kind of defeat the purpose.

 

 

 

Good Points SoxFan76, all very much valid. If I did a media watch for one day, then told everyone thats the truth, people would say get out of here, you have to do it on a daily basis to see whats true or not.

Ribbie seems to be the only one commenting on a specific story whether its positive or negative. Truth be told, the SOX need coverage (positive-not negative) and if a story is "negative" such as "Sox bullpen stinks-heres who they should get", its still a story and it keeps the SOX product in the public eye. Out of sight Out of Mind is the rule-of-thumb in marketing. Why do you think you see Coca-Cola ads and commercials everyday, every year. and McDonalds? You will see that forever, because the minute they stop advertising Coke or McDonalds, Pepsi and Burger King will step up their advertising campaign five-fold and take over the market.

 

"Your such a poo-poo head Hangar, so your saying the only reason I prefer Coke over Pepsi is because of media advertising? You have to get a clue, no wonder they banned you yuk yuk"

 

Tribune knows this. Theyve been in the business for a long long time, they dont want to promote the SOX, it hurts the Cubs, so they make sure to give as much coverage as possible to that team, and if they have to slam the SOX in the process, hey so be it

 

"Hangar, Im a SOX fan because Im a SOX fan, not because of the media, your such an idiot"

 

So every time I see the same people saying the same thing "this is a stupid thread", doesnt really serve a purpose

 

And the implication that there is some vast anti-sox conspiracy out there is both ludicrous and immature.

 

then you sir, havnt been paying much attention the last 20 or so years have you?

Ive noticed, and they (trib and others) have noticed that I noticed and acknowledge me, quietly

[Guest JimH]

Tribune ... been in the business for a long long time, they dont want to promote the SOX, it hurts the Cubs, so they make sure to give as much coverage as possible to that team, and if they have to slam the SOX in the process, hey so be it

 

You have yet to prove the Tribune doesn't want to promote the Sox. You can't, you never will. You are simply reaching your own personal conclusions.

 

You also can't prove that promoting the Sox hurts the Cubs. It's simply a guess on your part.

 

Your last statement is also your personal opinion.

 

In summary, you've proven nothing in relation to there being a giant anti White Sox conspiracy.

 

 

But the problem is that any fan of any team can come up with some aspect of media coverage of their team that they don't like...every day. It is pointless to keep bringing it up day in and day out. And the implication that there is some vast anti-sox conspiracy out there is both ludicrous and immature.

 

Yes, good post, agree totally.

[zach61]

Good Points SoxFan76, all very much valid. If I did a media watch for one day, then told everyone thats the truth, people would say get out of here, you have to do it on a daily basis to see whats true or not.

Ribbie seems to be the only one commenting on a specific story whether its positive or negative. Truth be told, the SOX need coverage (positive-not negative) and if a story is "negative" such as "Sox bullpen stinks-heres who they should get", its still a story and it keeps the SOX product in the public eye. Out of sight Out of Mind is the rule-of-thumb in marketing. Why do you think you see Coca-Cola ads and commercials everyday, every year. and McDonalds? You will see that forever, because the minute they stop advertising Coke or McDonalds, Pepsi and Burger King will step up their advertising campaign five-fold and take over the market.

 

"Your such a poo-poo head Hangar, so your saying the only reason I prefer Coke over Pepsi is because of media advertising? You have to get a clue, no wonder they banned you yuk yuk"

 

Tribune knows this. Theyve been in the business for a long long time, they dont want to promote the SOX, it hurts the Cubs, so they make sure to give as much coverage as possible to that team, and if they have to slam the SOX in the process, hey so be it

 

"Hangar, Im a SOX fan because Im a SOX fan, not because of the media, your such an idiot"

 

So every time I see the same people saying the same thing "this is a stupid thread", doesnt really serve a purpose

then you sir, havnt been paying much attention the last 20 or so years have you?

Ive noticed, and they (trib and others) have noticed that I noticed and acknowledge me, quietly

 

 

So then start counting stories from zero for both teams and show us which articles are in the trib and times to make the Sox look bad and the cubs look good. The total count means nothing. Why does a specific article that you are pointing out and counting make the trib biased against the Sox. Please start showing that if you want to prove your point. An article saying that the Sox bullpen stunk last nite cause they gave up 10 runs and lost the game doesn't count if thats what happened. If the trib and times is out to make the Sox look bad, then please post those articles, how many there are, and why they make the Sox look bad. Or the way you put it, sways fans from wanting to go to see the Sox.

[Hangar18]

You have yet to prove the Tribune doesn't want to promote the Sox. You can't, you never will. You are simply reaching your own personal conclusions.

 

 

The Tribune isnt going to come right out and tell you this, dont be ridiculous. Short of them coming out and saying "HANGAR WAS RIGHT, we prefer to market the Cubs instead of the SOX", we wont know definitively. Next step would be to simply keep track of the numbers of stories dedicated to both teams.

Are you saying Jim that the Cubs have been way more "interesting" the last 10 years (1996), and thats why they get more coverage?

 

Lets see, in that same timespan, that other team has been HORRIBLE, nearly losing 100 games 4 times in that span, and finishing 172 games out of 1st place in those years (17.25 games out of 1st on average)

How is that more interesting than a team that has won 90 games twice in that span, and finishing 85.5 games out of 1st place in those same years (8.5 games out of 1st on average)

 

Those numbers say the SOX have been pretty darned good for a period of time. Heck, they went 11-1 in playoffs last year and Won It All. How is that not worthy of some respect ?

 

Or are we going to go with the equally unprovable "well, there are more cub fans than sox fans-your clueless hangar" The Cubs have gotten more stories when they were bad, and have gotten a TON more when they were "good".

 

Thats what the numbers are Saying to you. Your just not Listening.

Until George Knue comes here personally and tells you personally over dinner, that they prefer to market their team (which they own by the way), your going to come to this thread, clog it up with your same questioning of my thesis and conclusions. They noticed fans are on to them, theyve told me. I'll take someone over at the Trib/Times quietly telling me to keep it up, over you telling to stop doing this

Edited June 16, 2006 by Hangar18

[Guest JimH]

The Tribune isnt going to come right out and tell you this, dont be ridiculous. Short of them coming out and saying "HANGAR WAS RIGHT, we prefer to market the Cubs instead of the SOX", we wont know definitively. Next step would be to simply keep track of the numbers of stories dedicated to both teams.

Are you saying Jim that the Cubs have been way more "interesting" the last 5 years, and thats why they get more coverage? Or are we going to go with the equally unprovable "well, there are more cub fans than sox fans-your clueless hangar" The Cubs have gotten more stories when they were bad, and have gotten a TON more when they were "good".

 

Thats what the numbers are Saying to you. Your just not Listening.

Until George Knue comes here personally and tells you personally over dinner, that they prefer to market their team (which they own by the way), your going to come to this thread, clog it up with your same questioning of my thesis and conclusions. They noticed fans are on to them, theyve told me. I'll take someone over at the Trib/Times quietly telling me to keep it up, over you telling to stop doing this

 

You haven't proven anything. Don't be ridiculous and say you have. You've said repeatedly you've proven a media bias, now you seem to be backing off it. I seem to have gotten under your skin, I see you choose to respond to me and not zach. Interesting.

 

What is also interesting is you failing to see the newspapers appeal to their demographic. I'm sorry you don't like it or won't accept it. I find THAT ridiculous.

 

No, the numbers of stories proves nothing, and you saying I or other people aren't listening is your personal opinion. You thought you could just come over to SoxTalk and ram your conspiracy theory down everyone's throat and it's gotten your goat that you're being challenged.

 

The Cubs, no matter what they do (win, lose, get injured) are going to be more interesting to a certain segment of the population. It's the way it is. You choose not to accept that reality, preferring instead to come onto this website and tell Sox fans how they should react and how they should think. Thus far, you're failing miserably, because several people see serious holes in your crusade.

 

You also continue to exhibit a double standard. You want to post whatever you want, but you have a problem if other people post what they want. You will just have to get over it.

 

I have also been told by a Daily Herald staffer and a Sun Times contributer that they find your knowledge of the media "extremely limited and naive", and that your rants do little more than make people shake their heads and laugh. So there you go. You have people at the papers who tell you to keep it up, and I have heard from others who think your schtick is laughable. So I guess it's even.

 

I'll take that little bit of feedback, plus the feedback of long time posters here whose opinions I value, over you telling me or anyone to stop raining on your Paranoia Parade.

 

So then start counting stories from zero for both teams and show us which articles are in the trib and times to make the Sox look bad and the cubs look good.

 

He can't, he knows it, but prefers to simply state that his way is the right way to measure, and the only way.

[Guest JimH]

Those numbers say the SOX have been pretty darned good for a period of time. Heck, they went 11-1 in playoffs last year and Won It All. How is that not worthy of some respect ?

 

You are apparantly saying the White Sox get no respect from the media. That is an outlandish and completely moronic statement. Please tell me that's not what you're saying.

 

Further, you equate coverage with winning only. That is naive. Unfortunately media does not operate that way. It operates on what their audience is most interested in. As I said in my previous post, there is a very large group of people, as misguided as they may be, who are interested in all things Cub ... again, whether it's win, lose, get hurt, throw simulated games, whatever.

[zach23]

Oh what the hell, since this madness continues...

 

Hangar, if the Tribune has this master plan to hurt the Sox by ignoring them, is it even working? They have a World Series win, they added to their team and payroll, they have sold out all their season tickets, and they are setting team attendance records. Wow, all those extra Cubs stories are sure killing the Sox right now.

And speaking of attendance, weren't you the one ranting about boycotting the Sox and giving up your tickets a few years ago because the team was cheap in your opinion? So were you staying away because you were pissed at the Sox or because the media told you to? Were others doing the same as you? Which is it, did Sox fans stay away because they won't accept an inferior product, or did they do so because the media told them to do so? So by you staying away, didn't you help the Tribune in their perceived cause? Wouldn't the empty seats help them in the quest to make the Sox look bad?

 

Once again all of this come full circle to your real motivation behind this. You crave popularity and want reassurance that the team you support is the most popular. Fine if that is what you want, but you may never get it. Most people don't need that and are happy just to enjoy their team.

[spiderman]

I've always thought CSN has been very fair in it's coverage, if not more biased towards the White Sox. I don't watch ESPN anymore, I only watch CSN. Even Chicago Tribune Live has a lot of good Sox coverage.

 

They call it like it is. Sox are going to make the playoffs, they're making a run for another World Series, they deserve coverage. The Cubs suck, they're almost in last place, and even if all their guys return from injuries they're still a 3rd place team at best. That's all you can ask for, now why can't other media outlets do the same?

 

They call it like it is ? Maybe they do most of the time, but they clearly dropped the ball here.

 

Somebody made a decision not to cover this. Why ? I have no idea. It was THE STORY of a game that was over early for the White Sox.

[Kyyle23]

I've always thought CSN has been very fair in it's coverage, if not more biased towards the White Sox. I don't watch ESPN anymore, I only watch CSN. Even Chicago Tribune Live has a lot of good Sox coverage.

 

They call it like it is. Sox are going to make the playoffs, they're making a run for another World Series, they deserve coverage. The Cubs suck, they're almost in last place, and even if all their guys return from injuries they're still a 3rd place team at best. That's all you can ask for, now why can't other media outlets do the same?

 

So shouldnt that be counted in the media count? lol

 

These spillover threads are fun to watch usually. But they also get shut down fairly quickly too, which makes me sad....