Philadelphia Sportswriter Bill Conlin Invokes Hitler

by Al on Nov 23, 2007 7:09 PM CST in News Comment 63 comments

Just when I thought it was a slow sports weekend, my SBN colleague Peter at the Phillies site The Good Phight called our attention to an email exchange that another Phillies blogger had with Philadelphia Daily News writer Bill Conlin on the topic of Jimmy Rollins' MVP award victory and an article Conlin had written defending his vote for Rollins.

All pretty innocent, and a legitimate topic for debate, right? Conlin, as you'll see in the link, was a curmudgeonly jerk to Bill from crashburn alley, and then ended the exchange with this stunning verbiage:

The only positive thing I can think of about Hitler's time on earth-I'm sure he would have eliminated all bloggers. In Colonial times, bloggers were called "Pamphleteers." They hung on street corners handing them out to passersby. Now, they hang out on electronic street corners, hoping somebody mouses on to their pretentious sites. Different medium, same MO. Shakespeare accidentally summed up the genre best with these words from a MacBeth soliloquy: ". . .a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. . ."

Oh, man. Where do I even start with this? It is, first of all, fear showing on his part; fear that we bloggers might actually know something about what we write -- I, personally, take the comparison with the 18th-Century "Pamphleteers" as a badge of honor, as those men were among those who helped the colonial Americans throw off their shackles of bondage.

The reference to Hitler? Well, dajafi wrote at The Good Phight:

That he invokes Hitler is sufficiently offensive on its face that I feel no additional need to comment on it.

He may not, but I do. As a Jewish person, I am deeply offended by that reference; but I don't think you have to be Jewish to be offended. A quick google doesn't reveal Conlin's age, but he's been a sportswriter since the mid-1960's, which would make him at least 65 years old, not only old enough to know better, but old enough to understand exactly what Hitler meant to world history. This email exchange also hit Deadspin yesterday, and by posting it here I intend to help it get to a wider audience.

This isn't even about the arrogance that Conlin showed in his responses to crashburnalley. It's about simple human decency, something apparently completely absent in a smug, pompous ass of a writer whose sensibilities were left behind two centuries ago.

If you'd like to let Conlin's bosses know how you feel about this, you can find some relevant email addresses here. Bill Conlin's time for an audience should be done.

0 recs | Comment 63 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

what a jerk

has no respect

by hiphopgamer26 on Nov 23, 2007 6:57 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Blogging is the balancing of the elitism that took

over the information age. Journalism used to be rough and tumble where some of the best journalists were not college educated but had a nose (intuition) for what was news. Today is carved up with a formula like in sports where so much is made of the personal angle or some contrived historical perspective, I would be more interested in the use of numerology than what the effect of the Cubs history of players who had no previous connections.

That said blogging is the modern day pamphleteers. Let us think of Paine's 'Common Sense' as a modern day blog.

That said it matters little in that blogging is here to stay and will proliferate as it balances the attempt to control information.

As far as control of information what a story on ABC and Chuck Gowdy this week about the JFK Assassination....holy mackeral....that is probably a peabody or something.

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Nov 23, 2007 7:07 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Yes, it's horribly pretentious...

...for common people! to think that their opinions on baseball have any merit! Why, you have to have a newspaper column or a TV gig to make your opinions on baseball noteworthy! How dare these bloggers act this way!

What a maroon.

The simple fact of the matter is that guys like him are suddenly operating in a much different environment than they were just a decade or two ago. I'm sure when Conlin started writing, most of his readers at best had newspaper box scores, radio casts and maybe a Saturday game-of-the-week on TV. If I wanted to know something about baseball, Conlin and his ilk were the only source of information.

Nowadays, absent blackout rules I can watch any ballgame I want, I can go to MLB's website and watch highlights and full innings of any game I please, and have access to more stats and play-by-play data than even I know what to do with. And I can very cheaply publish my views to as many people as Conlin can, and it's stupid easy. Guys like him have gone from being the town crier to a voice in the crowd; they no longer control the flow of information, and this frightens them because we don't need them anymore, and unless you have the massive Rolodex and connections of guys like Gammons, Olney and Rosenthal you have very little value to add above and beyond what a passionate and knowlegable fan has to say.

It's an awful lot like watching buggy drivers protesting the advent of the automobile, or ice delivery services railing against the advent of the refridgerator -- or the record companies fighting against Internet downloading. The popular sporting press is coming upon an "adapt-or-die" moment, and a lot of them are stubbornly chosing to die. It's pathetic, and more than a little sad to watch, really.

FREE CARMEN PIGNATIELLO!

by cwyers on Nov 23, 2007 7:22 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I agree with a lot of what you said, cwyers

But not everything. And, by that, I do not condone what Conlin said. His comments were ridiculous and offensive.

Before I launch in, full disclosure. I'm a reporter at a major American newspaper, though I haven't covered a sporting event since college. That said, I'm going to take issue with one thing you said.

"Guys like (Conlin) no longer control the flow of information, and this frightens them because we don't need them anymore, and unless you have the massive Rolodex and connections of guys like Gammons, Olney and Rosenthal you have very little value to add above and beyond what a passionate and knowlegable fan has to say."

First of all, there are a lot of good beat reporters out there covering baseball at major newspapers who AREN'T Buster Olney or Gammons. I'm not saying Conlin is any good, but I like Gordo at the Sun-Times. And what about BCB fav Bruce Miles?

Second, members of the press, ideally, should be DISPASSIONATE. And that's the difference between what we do here and what sports journalists are supposed to do.

Cwyers, you clearly spend a LOT of time researching your posts, and that's great. But a sports journalist's value is that he/she does that without bias (or, at least, that's how it's supposed to work).

That doesn't mean your posts aren't valuable -- but they're not impartial. And it's that impartial stance that journalists are supposed to bring to the table.

I think most journalists do a very good job when it comes to that. And, no, I'm not impartial on that point, and, yes, I know I'm about to get flamed by every Rush Limbaugh fan who reads this site.

All I'm saying is that good sports reporters had more than "a little value" before more information became generally available, and they still have it today.

Conlin is the exception. Not the rule.

by elgato on Nov 23, 2007 9:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You're right, except....

... that Conlin is a columnist, not a reporter per se. Thus he is getting paid to express his opinion, a la Jay Mariotti. That doesn't excuse for a second what Conlin said, nor should it.

What you said about reporters, whether writing about sporting events or hard news, however, is absolutely correct.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Nov 23, 2007 9:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

true

I got the impression that all sports journalists were being thrown under the bus in that post -- Olney, Gammons and Rosenthal are all more reporters than columnists, in my book.

I guess I just hate blog posts that attack ALL journalists. But go crazy on Conlin. What a douche bag.

by elgato on Nov 23, 2007 9:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Olney, Gammons and Rosenthal...

...are columnists who report, sort of a gray area. They have a national profile and cover a lot more ground than local beatwriters do, and are given a lot more latitude than, say, Gordon Wittenmeyer in presenting their opinions alongside their reporting. (Most of the Chicago beatwriters also write columns, but they're mostly kept seperate from the actual reporting.)

FREE CARMEN PIGNATIELLO!

by cwyers on Nov 23, 2007 9:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly.

To clarify the above, just like Al said: Conlin isn't a beat writer or a reporter, he's a columnist. His job is to have opinions -- in the case of an at-large sports columnists, generally he's supposed to be half-analyst, half-storyteller.

Absolutely the blogs haven't replaced the beat writers as the primary source of information; they have access that bloggers can't match. Conlin doesn't have a beat, per se - he covers a variety of local and national sports topics, and often has to be critical of his subjects to do his job well. That necessarily curtails the sources he has.

The fact is that bloggers and beat writers are complimentary to each other -- sports blogs couldn't function, or at least function well, without professional sportswriting. On the other hand, guys like Conlin -- who provide narrative, not facts -- do pretty much the same thing as bloggers; the sad truth is, they're not doing it as well as the best bloggers out there.

FREE CARMEN PIGNATIELLO!

by cwyers on Nov 23, 2007 9:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

fair enough

Misunderstood your generalization.

by elgato on Nov 23, 2007 9:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I got to know many reporters

I will confess that at one time I was a two-bit sports and human interest stringer for a few suburban newspapers. I will also confess that I have come to know a few major sports writers and TV personalities, mostly about college BB than anything, and a few cross over to other sports.

Blogging is an extension of the message boards that sprang up in the '90's, and are an interesting exchange of thoughts and expressions. In fact I often enjoy reading the reaction to news posts than the original news item.

That said the dynamics of news and information is changing, the exchange is two-way or more a BLOWBACK broadcast. The only trouble of course is substantiation. Sometimes I am told things in private conversations from those I know who have some basis of knowledge but can't release it, some of course is conjecture.

But the columnist is the worst offender, they are there to agitate, draw interest or eye balls, and the marginal ones simply offer little reporting. But I respect genuine journalists. Few people know the issue of coming to an editor with a story that is not quite there but has the legs and trying to get people on the record where ultimately the whole story is never really told. But when a journalist does get a story it is a grand thing.

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Nov 24, 2007 1:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree. And

he is a MORON not MAROON, cwyers, imo. ;-)

Wait 'til next year. And the next. And the Next. And the next after that too.

by TheEman on Nov 24, 2007 9:04 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for the great post

I too work for a newspaper (not a major one, more in line with a city the size of Peoria). What hasn't been mentioned yet is that he sent this email as a representative of the Daily News. Even taking out the Hitler part, no one at the newspaper that I work for would be allowed to send something like that in response to a reader inquiry. I talk to readers every day complaining about coverage of this team over this team, we only cover this team when they lose, etc., and it is hard to not get upset. But there's really no excuse when you are sending an email. You have time to collect your thoughts and settle down before replying.

by markleonette on Nov 23, 2007 11:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

According to his bio on philly.com

he's been a sportswriter since 1960, which means he's old enough to remember World War II, if only vaguely.

I remember reading this guy in the Sporting News in the late 70s. He was an arrogant jerk then.

The good news out of all this is that he's probably doomed his chances at the Spink Award, which he never deserved in the first place.

The artist formerly known as JoshinLA

by Josh77 on Nov 23, 2007 8:11 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

what a dick

this rivals the comments of Don Imus

Dinosaurs? "Didn't exist. You can't say there were dinosaurs when you never saw them." -Carl Everett

by NDcubsfan on Nov 23, 2007 9:06 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

As a Jew.....

I am disgusted by his comment. His lack of understanding and/ or knowledge of the events Hitler orchestrated are shocking.

As disgusted as I am, I stand by his right to say it. I want for people like Mr. Conlin to have a forum to speak his mind. Freedom exposes one's true feelings. It is a window to one's sole. Mr. Conlin should be fired because his views are vile and disgust the people who pay his salary; the advertisers and the public that pay .50 for the dead tree edition.

I also want Mr. Conlin to have a forum because it allows Al, other bloggers and all of US to voice our opinions. I am not comparing what Conlin said to what is voiced here. What I am saying is that stopping one person, no matter how vile their opinion is, is the first step in allowing others to make judgments of what can and can't be said. I am comfortable making these decisions myself.

"You are an asshole": NDcubsfan

by timeforachange on Nov 23, 2007 9:06 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

He's always been like this.

Conlin has always been an arrogant ***

If you remember him from he was on ESPN's "The Sports reporters", he hasn't changed. He shows up once a week on Daily News Live on Comcast Sportsnet and barely brings anything to the conversation. He can't keep up with the changing times.

You should have heard the distain he had for blogs and other forms of electronic media when they reported rumors about how Andy Reid was going to resign because of the trouble his sons were in. Conlin went off on the bloggers stating that they can say anything they want and don't have to backcheck sources, or venture in the clubhouse or locker room for to face the people they are writing about.

Conlin's been in trouble for comments he made before. In his past columns, he would refer to a team, management, coach, etc...... having a "final solution" to a problem with the issue facing that team. He used that many times in the past before his editors told him to stop using that phase.

I have a feeling that Bill might have written his last column for the Philadelphia Daily News.

by PhillyCub on Nov 23, 2007 9:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Sure he has a right to speak.

Let him get his own damn blog, then.

There's simply no obligation on the part of his employer to retain him after he went ahead and used offensive and demeaning language towards a paying customer. If the counter clerk at Taco Bell told a customer "The good thing about Hitler is that he would have killed all of your kind off," he'd be summarily fired. I don't see what makes Bill Conlin all that different.

And, to address another point, I really don't care that it was in an e-mail. Let's put it to you this way - let's say that the Phillies GM were to respond to one of Bill Conlin's columns in a racially offensive fashion. Lay me the odds that Conlin wouldn't print that.

I'm not saying two wrongs make a right (not that I think that there's any reasonable expectation of privacy; just that I don't really want to have that arguement). I'm just saying that of all people he should know better.

FREE CARMEN PIGNATIELLO!

by cwyers on Nov 23, 2007 11:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

What.....

the hell are you saying??????

"You are an asshole": NDcubsfan

by timeforachange on Nov 24, 2007 4:59 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Surely I can't be the only one

Surely I can't be the only one to note that these comments Conlin made were made in a private, one-on-one email exchange.

Conlin's comments were disgusting, shocking, ridiculous, offensive, and every other nasty term you can imagine. They were also never intended for your eyes or mine, or anybody's but the person at the other end of that email addy.

At least guys like John Rocker and Tim Hardaway expressed their barbaric views in a public forum, and knowingly and willingly put their hateful thoughts out there for public consumption. Not so here.

I can in no way defend the comments themselves. They are absolutely reprehensible, and never should have been thought, let alone expressed.

But by the same token, I can't shake the thought that on some level, Conlin is getting a raw deal here. He only meant those comments for one person, a person he clearly perceived to be disrespecting and mocking him and his column. I'm sure that similar circumstances, many of us have said some meanspirited things we've been ashamed of, but more to the point, things that we would be absolutely mortified to have broadcast beyond the intended recipient.

by davearm on Nov 23, 2007 10:33 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

That was my reaction too

I kept wondering: did he write this hateful crap in his column? Did he post it in the comments on this guy's Phillies blog? Oh, it was in an email, not intended for public consumption. So, the recipient was hurt by it and thought some juicy revenge might be in order. Let's start a witch hunt (which much of this page sounds like).

Maybe the guy has a history of this stuff and deserves to be outed on it. If so, maybe that should have been done, in the first instance, in another private communication to his bosses. But if not, if this was isolated in a private email exchange, the blogger should merely have invoked Godwin's Law* in his last reply, and in the process educated Conlin on the long tradition of open debate on the Internet.

*Or at least one interpretation of it, the one that states: "A good rule in most discussions is that the first person to call the other a Nazi automatically loses the argument."

Why does everybody stand up and sing "Take Me Out to the Ballgame" when they're already there? ~Larry Anderson

by JohnM on Nov 24, 2007 4:29 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Er, that is...

"....the first person to bring up or mention the Nazis or Hitler loses the argument..."

Why does everybody stand up and sing "Take Me Out to the Ballgame" when they're already there? ~Larry Anderson

by JohnM on Nov 24, 2007 4:37 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

This is essentially a cliche.

Conlin has clarified his comments!

I think I'll let the words I wrote after the death of my dear friend and colleague, the former local Associated Press Bureau Chief Ralph Bernstein and the nearly half century relationship my wife and I have had with Ralph and his family through good times and bad represent me against any contrived and baseless attempt to slime me as an anti-Semite. I was a speaker at Ralph's Memorial service. Quite obviously, the Hitler line was used in a satiric response to what has turned into a concerted assault on my Jimmy Rollins column and on my career. It was quite obviously used in a personal e-mail. I did not publish the insulting things said about me. As editor of the Temple University News in 1960-61, I received death threats from the White Citizens Council after writing an editorial denouncing Gerald L. K. Smith and his anti-black and anti-Semitic hate-mongering newspaper "The Cross and the Flag." I was one of the most outspoken critics of Marge Schott's blatant anti-Semitism to the point some of my columns had to be toned down. Ditto my stand on Al Campanis, a friend, by the way, and Jimmy The Greek Snyder. I also had a long and close relationship with the late, great Dick Schaap, who wrote about my impact on The Sports Reporters at length in his autobiography, "Flashing Before My Eyes." I am heartened that both a clear conscience and the First Amendment will be at my side.

Let's reexamine the money quote: "I think I'll let the words I wrote after the death of my dear friend and colleague, the former local Associated Press Bureau Chief Ralph Bernstein and the nearly half century relationship my wife and I have had with Ralph and his family through good times and bad represent me against any contrived and baseless attempt to slime me as an anti-Semite."

I'm not going to address the substance here. It's possible, perhaps even likely, that Conlin is both a philo-Semite and an all-around decent human being.

But seriously. How tone deaf and PR-unsavvy do you have to be to trot out "Many of my best friends are Jews!" when you're accused of anti-Semitism? Isn't there ANYTHING else you could have lead off with there?

FREE CARMEN PIGNATIELLO!

by cwyers on Nov 23, 2007 11:33 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

i find it interesting

He complains that his comments shouldn't have been posted since they were in a personal email and one reason is that he didn't post the emails that were sent to him. I mean...fair enough, but, of course he didn't post the emails exposing his poor writing. Why would he do that?

MURTON!!!

by tal1286 on Nov 24, 2007 2:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

if you're interested

he's a pretty crappy columnist.

http://www.firejoemorgan.com/2007/11/thanksgiving-more-like-nothanksgiving.html

If you want to whine about having to back check sources and doing things of the sort you damn well better be at least a halfway decent journalist and if this article is even remotely representative of how he normally writes, he's pretty bad.

MURTON!!!

by tal1286 on Nov 24, 2007 12:33 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

as an example

He writes:

"I was concerned that Rockies hitting dynamo Matt Holliday, the close runner-up, might steal the election with the hanging chad of his heroic batwork in the Rockies dramatic comeback playoff victory over the Diamondbacks. I could envision BBWAA ball writers ready to e-mail the results of a season extended to 163 games, needing just to fill in lines 1 and 2."

Setting aside the pretty crappy writing...can anyone spot the pretty frickin obvoius factual error in this paragraph? Oh yeah, the Rockes SWEPT THE DIAMONDBACKS!!! It wasn't a comeback!

You, Bill Conlin, are an absolute moron.

As a sidenote, I don't know what the original emailer wrote, but I wouldn't be surprised if the FJM article came up.

MURTON!!!

by tal1286 on Nov 24, 2007 12:41 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Not that I want to defend Conlin here...

... but I suspect he was referring, in the first paragraph, to the "163rd game" he mentioned in the second, and that he typed "Diamondbacks" when he meant "Padres".

That wasn't a "playoff"; if Conlin wanted to be accurate he should have called it "the wildcard tiebreaker game".

Holliday did have a good night that night; 2-for-6 with a triple and scored the run that put the Rockies into the playoffs (and yes, I know he still hasn't touched the plate), and his 2 RBI gave him the RBI title.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Nov 24, 2007 4:21 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Update...

... I commend all of you to this comment posted at The Good Phight, written by a high school student who is the editor of his school newspaper, and who also happens to be Jewish.

Well-written and an excellent summary of the issues raised here.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Nov 24, 2007 4:24 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Al...

I highlighted this story as well, but didn't add much commentary. I strongly disagree with you, however. I won't get into this with you because it would more than likely be a waste of our time, but when did people become so oversensitive? Conlin said something he probably shouldn't have, but I do not see how it is offensive. It's certainly not anti-Semitic. People need to take a step back and stop getting so upset over nothing. It's gone way too far.

Conlin should be fired for being an idiot and knowing nothing about the game. There's no business whatsoever in keeping him on when he knows more about hop scotch than he does baseball. He should be fired, suspended or reprimanded because of some tasteless joke that OBVIOUSLY was not said with the intention of being anti-Semitic.

by Maddog on Nov 24, 2007 8:44 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

I agree

Conlin should have been fired for being an idiot a long time ago. The original article was bad enough but the email thread between him and the blogger also contained the following:

You're a Mets fan and you had your little bubble of arrogance and smugness burst. Your team choked big time, an epic gagaroo.
I wonder how it feels to be the Phillies bitch.

I never like this guy from the old ESPN show. Looks like he's even went downhill from there.

by rlpete on Nov 24, 2007 8:53 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

And those comments....

... show his stupidity even further, because the blogger who wrote Conlin is a Phillies fan and clearly identified himself as such in the original email.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Nov 24, 2007 9:32 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for your reasoned response...

... I agree, Conlin is an idiot and, like Dick Young in NYC years ago, the sports world has passed him by.

Maybe it's personal for me and I take it a little more so that way because I'm Jewish. Had you lost an entire branch of your family in the Holocaust, I don't think you'd say it's "nothing". What he said takes an event that destroyed the lives of millions of people and 1) dilutes the impact of that loss and 2) says he'd just as soon have what happened there happen to others, because they're a member of a certain group.

There is a poem attributed to a German priest, Martin Niemoller, originally a supporter of Hitler but who later became a passionate opponent of Hitler. You've probably heard it; one variation goes:

First they came for the Communists,
- but I was not a communist so I did not speak out.
Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists,
- but I was neither, so I did not speak out.
Then they came for the Jews,
- but I was not a Jew so I did not speak out.
And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.

And yes, I believe this is relevant. We must never forget what Hitler did and what his regime represented. Comments like Conlin's, whether said privately or publicly, show that perhaps we need to be more diligent in remembering.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Nov 24, 2007 9:30 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not

Jewish, but this was not an attack on Jewish people by Conlin. It was an attack on bloggers, which the MSM has been doing for years and will continue to do so. The reason they do so, as I'm sure you know, is because they're scared.

I wasn't saying that what Hitler did was nothing. I would never say such a thing. I was saying that what Conlin said was nothing in that it was not an anti-Semitic remark. We've become way too sensitive these days.

He wasn't praising Hitler for exterminating Jews. In fact, he said the one positive thing about him was that he would have gotten rid of bloggers, which implies that everything else Hitler did was wrong.

Perhaps he shouldn't have used Hitler's name when talking about bloggers. There's really no need to, but it was not an anti-Semitic response on his part and it shouldn't be treated as such. There's no evidence whatsoever that he is an anti-Semite.

Fire him for being less intelligent about baseball than the average 7 year old.

by Maddog on Nov 24, 2007 10:09 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Absolutely...

... as I said in the original post, a lot of what Conlin (and some other MSM writers, too) say about bloggers is based on fear, fear that they are no longer relevant. In Conlin's case that is almost certainly true, and you're right, he should have been canned a long time ago, a la Dick Young in NYC.

Again, as you said, a long debate on this is likely pointless. Suffice to say that I was offended, and I accept that you didn't see it that way. Reasonable people can disagree reasonably, and I thank you (and others who have posted thoughtfully in this thread) for doing so.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Nov 24, 2007 10:12 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Fair enough.

No reason to argue something we're never going to agree on.

I would like to say that I don't think the MSM fears becoming irrelevant, however. I think the executives fear that, but most of the writers fear they'll be exposed for what they are -- hacks with little or no knowledge about what they are writing about. I think Conlin's emotional response confirms that. Blogs give people the ability to remark, publicly, on the same events that columnists do and many times the blogger proves to be the more intelligent and more knowledgeable person. I think many bloggers have exposed MSM writers for their lack of intelligence and knowledge about what they write. I don't think they have a fear of becoming irrelevant. We're too "NOW" oriented to consider long-term possibilities subconsciously.

by Maddog on Nov 24, 2007 10:26 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not sure what you're arguing here.

You say that the MSM doesn't fear becoming irrelevant, but at the same time you show that many bloggers, who can often write and comment more quickly than columnists on various issues, do so more intelligently and knowledgeably. I agree. I think this DOES cause fear in the columnist's mind that his or her job will become irrelevant, thus the hatred toward bloggers that showed up in Conlin's email.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Nov 24, 2007 10:30 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The fear of becoming irrelevant

would not be a rational fear for sportswriters because it will never happen. Most people are rational (not all, but most). What's more likely is that they fear being exposed because other, more intelligent people are now able to write about the same issues they write about. Keep in mind this exposure is limited.

We're arguing a small difference, but I think there is one.

by Maddog on Nov 24, 2007 10:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I see your point.

So what is the ultimate resolution of this? That said writers' managers see this exposure and replace them?

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Nov 24, 2007 11:44 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

There will likely be no resolution.

The media has chugged along as they are today for so long that it's not going to change because some/most/all sportswriters are complete idiots. We have to remember the target audience. Most of the people who read the sports pages aren't that knowledgeable about the games they watch. Most of them are happy to read through the paper and get a little information about their favorite team. Only a few people challenge those opinions, search for knowledge to help them learn more, and ultimately form knowledgeable opinions about the sport they watch. Most are just happy to sit back and watch the game, drink a beer, take a nap, or whatever else it is they do.

Most people that read that article didn't flinch. They probably didn't question whether Conlin was right or not and they probably didn't even care.

The people who comment on line or write blogs are the few who do care. A large business isn't going to make changes to please the few when the many aren't unhappy to begin with.

by Maddog on Nov 24, 2007 12:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

What if the few

happen to be the group that is the most passionate, and most willing to consistently spend time and money on your product?

Also, if your hypothesis is true, why the huge proliferation of sports blogs, not just in the US, but all over the world? Why do even newspapers have blogs? Read through some of posts about the Braves on a paper like the Atlanta Journal Constitution, or some of the posts about the Astros on the Houston Chronicle, to use some examples. Most of the posters are not SABR-heads. That doesn't mean that they blindly agree with the blog authors.

Or go look at the blogs on the British newspaper, the Guardian, to use a non American example. Many of the posters that respond to the Guardian's writers are passionate and knowledgeable.

visiting A's fan.

by rfloh on Nov 24, 2007 2:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The proliferation of sports blogs

is in line with the proliferation of other blogs (personal, economic, political, etc).

The point I'm trying to make is that a newspaper like the one Conlin works at isn't going to make a decision regarding its sportswriters based on keeping a few happy. It's also relatively simple...it's easier to keep the simpletons happy than it is the more knowledgeable fan base. There are fewer knowledgeable fans.

As for why some newspapers have blogs, it's also simple. To publish something in the daily paper you need more than one source and there's only one publication. A writer for a newspaper has more freedom online and can post news immediately. Go read the comments left on The Tribune's Hardball blog. Sullivan and the rest are writing for the same people that read their articles in the paper. Just the online version of them. Most of the comments I've read on that site are from fans with little knowledge of the game.

As for the question about the few spending the most money on the product, the answer is that they don't. Again, these people represent so little of the readership. What would make me happy would piss off about 95% or more of the rest of the people.

by Maddog on Nov 24, 2007 4:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

No, most fan comments

on the newspaper blogs are not SABR heads. So what? In most cases, the posters do not agree blindly with the writers. In fact, on newspaper blogs that are mostly unmoderated, the vitriol directed at the writers is amazingly over the top. My point is that readers of a newspaper article are NOT happy with the slop that is put out.

My point is that you are overrating the "knowledgeable" fans and underrating the "simpletons".

Yes, the proliferation is in line with the proliferation of other blogs. So? Still doesn't change the fact that a huge amount of people, not just some small "knowledgeable" group are involved in blogs.

visiting A's fan.

by rfloh on Nov 25, 2007 12:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Look up the White Rose

visiting A's fan.

by rfloh on Nov 24, 2007 10:20 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Not anti-semitic perhaps

But, he stated that in his opinion, a group of people should be exterminated.

visiting A's fan.

by rfloh on Nov 24, 2007 9:46 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Bingo!

See my post above on this part of the issue.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Nov 24, 2007 9:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

So, now

we're going to group people together not only by race, color, sex, and religion, but also by their hobbies?

Conlin made an error in judgment. He was pissed off and incapable of intelligently arguing his reasons for Rollins deserving the MVP with someone who was obviously more intelligent than he was. He threw a fit and said something he shouldn't have said. That's all there is to it.

By the way, I'm sure I've said, at one point or another, that an entire group of people NOT based on race or religion should be eliminated. I may have even said it about the mainstream media. I didn't mean it. I doubt Conlin did either.

I'm sure most of the rest of you here have said similar stuff at one point or another...most likely in frustration or as a joke or something. We don't always mean what we say.

by Maddog on Nov 24, 2007 10:19 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

And if their hobbies happen

to challenge you? Would exterminating them be acceptable? Who's to say what is a "hobbie"?

Also, isn't it Conlin who has done the grouping together?

Look, I understand that Conlin was pissed off. As I pointed out to the author of Crash Burn Alley elsewhere, linking to Fire Joe Morgan in his initial email was unwise, and probably provoked Conlin.

Conlin could have snarked about noses in spreadsheets, slide rules, pocket protectors, mom's basements, and it would have been par for the course.

He instead chose to make a snark about exterminating people.

I'm usually way to sarcastic when I argue about baseball. But no, I've never advocated that anyone be exterminated.

visiting A's fan.

by rfloh on Nov 24, 2007 10:29 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Of course not...

but I think it's important to recognize when one is being serious and when one is not. Conlin is guilty of a very poor sense of humor, but do you actually believe he would be in favor of exterminating all bloggers?

In my opinion, Conlin was obviously not being serious with his comment about Hitler. Poor judgment on his part for sure.

by Maddog on Nov 24, 2007 10:57 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, poor judgement.

So, apologise.

visiting A's fan.

by rfloh on Nov 24, 2007 11:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Meh.

He's an idiot whether he apologizes or not. At this point, the least he could do is have some conviction and say he won't apologize for something that wasn't intended to be taken seriously.

by Maddog on Nov 24, 2007 12:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

So if he is unwilling

to compromise and show some civility, why should his opponents?

visiting A's fan.

by rfloh on Nov 24, 2007 2:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Regrettably

the anonymity of the internet has spawned a generation lacking in civility. Read numerous comments on BCB for confirmation of that creed. How often have we read a suggestion that something should happen to a player or GM or even a fellow blogger?

In the past public comments were subject to approval in the letters to the editor. Nowadays bloggers have no such restraint. Conlin blew it. He owes an apology. Don't expect one.

It's not to late to go to Soto.

by tharr on Nov 24, 2007 4:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Al

Couple things. I understand the outrage. I also understand the reference to extermination of bloggers that Conlin made.

I am not as outraged as you and other seem to be. Conlin really wrote something ignorant but I am so much more offended when world leaders openly question if the holocust even happened. I am more physically ill when I hear such things and "outraged" is appropiate, at least to me.

Conlin's comments expose him for what he it.

The Cubs will be great in 2008!

by Scott G F on Nov 24, 2007 8:49 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Many big city newspapers

have their designated a**hole. In Chicago it's Mariotti, Rozner, and Morrisey, in LA it's TJ Simers. Their job is to stir the pot, post controversial views that generate response and show the bosses that somebody out there is reading their dying newspapers. They are the print versions of Rush Limbaugh, Howard Stern, and Ann Coulter.

Conlin was just doing his assigned job. When his column generated lots of reaction, he probably got a pat on the head from his bosses and a big Xmas bonus. People getting riled over his schtick are doing exactly what he wanted.

In the online world, the best way to handle a troll is to ignore him or her.

by Clark Addison on Nov 24, 2007 9:25 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Yeah.... they all have a schtick.

And, introducing controversial topics is part of the schtick. But, nobody, and I mean NOBODY, should be that mindless and insensitive enough to use Hitler as pot stirrer.

Disclosure: I'm a member of the tribe.

Ed Lynch is STILL on the Cubs payroll, as our D-Backs scout in Phoenix. Lynch attends all 81 D-Back home games with a notepad in hand. Really paid off for us!

by SackMan on Nov 24, 2007 10:55 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm relatively unphased

I think it's pertinent to note that I'm Jewish.

I really couldn't care less about what this guy wrote. He might as well have written: "I wish all bloggers were taken out back and shot in the head". Which doesn't offend me, should it really? I believe he only referenced Hitler IN AN E-MAIL for a (achieved) dramatic effect.

He also said "The only positive thing I can think of about Hitler's time on earth..." he seems pretty resolute to me that he didn't approve of Hitler nor his actions.

I may not applaud his historical reference, but I certainly would go to bat for him to defend his right to say it, a la Noam Chomsky. Every man needs to have the same rights extended to him, whether his views be just or not.

But again, and I think most importantly, this was written in an E-MAIL, this was not published word, this wasn't intended for public viewing by any stretch of the imagination. Granted this wasn't sent to one of his buddies, it was sent to a guy he meant to offend (a blogger, not a Jew or any other non-Aryan sect of humanity), but censorship is a scary scary thing. He best be watching his words when it comes to his column, but the word gestapo should have no influence over his unpublished thoughts and words.

by WittyUserName on Nov 24, 2007 9:49 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Someone once said...

As soon as you invoke Hitler or the Nazis you've lost you're argument, and so has Mr. Conlin.

I think mainstream journalists are afraid of losing their jobs to "amateur" bloggers. As if a degree in Journalism separates the competent from the unprinted masses.

The fact is that newspaper circulation is down. Due to bloggers? Partially I'm sure. Doesn't excuse an invocation of Adolf Hitler.

by Snake Plissken on Nov 24, 2007 1:54 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I must disagree in part

Simply because someone said invoking a word causes the loss of an argument doesn't make it so. Suppose he used the name of Stalin or Saddam or Genghis Khan. Would his comments have been acceptable?

Conlin acted like a jerk. It happens every day. It supposedly was a private email. Do we start extending censorship to telephone calls and private conversations?

I can almost guarantee that Conlin has been the subject of many flaming criticisms on the local blogs just as Mariotti and Rogers and Muskrat. I am certain that a number of them were below the belt and personal.

Perhaps everyone should endeavor to raise the standard by which they communicate.

It's not to late to go to Soto.

by tharr on Nov 24, 2007 4:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah...

You missed the point of the quote. Even though Hitler is the only one mentioned by name, the saying is meant to imply crazies throughout time. So, no, if he had said Stalin, Hussein, Castro, ect. it would not have been OK.

Hitler and the Nazis, however, are most often recognized as the most evil scum to ever inhabit this planet.

If it was a private e-mail it shouldn't have been leaked, but it's out there now, and people are covering it and commenting on it.

No, we should not censor private communication. I'm the first one against a "Thought Police", but the comment is out there. Should we not now hold him accountable for it? And, instead of blaming those who comment on his stupid remark, perhaps we should blame the person who leaked the e-mail. That person is the one invading Conlin's privacy.

So, perhaps we shouldn't comment it, and should've ignored the contents of a private correspondence. But, you can't unring a bell. Let's just remember this for the future.

by Snake Plissken on Nov 24, 2007 6:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I have always felt

that folks in the media have a moral obligation to be as objective as possible in what they report and if they are stating an opinion, back it up with something that makes sense.

The first amendment is all ours to cherish, but the fact is, the media (and even hollywood) has a very powerful ability to sway how many people perceive reality and a lot of people abuse this by bending or ignoring the truth in how they report or tell a story. The good news is, in today's information world, there are too many iniformed people to not see through this, and eventually, most of the abusers get called to task.

Unfortuanately, some people get away with it for a long time and it causes damage, but I would think Conlin has suffered serious damage from his stupid comments.

"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel

by MPH73 on Nov 24, 2007 3:58 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

So what's the latest on Cubbie baseball?

by IllinoisCubs on Nov 24, 2007 4:37 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

A few thoughts

First is that its not his Hitler inclusion that bothers me, its his sentiment that bloggers need to be purged. This man must have a significant amount of hated to feel that they are worthy of eliminating to the extent that they should be linked to a group that was gotten rid of by Hitler. This man's hatred towards bloggers really is amazing.

I don't believe that he's anti-semitic. I also don't believe that the fact that I'm Jewish makes me any more or less worth of having indignation towards Hitler and anti-semitic comments. I hope everyone is outraged by antisemitism. But I don't believe Conlin's comments to be anti-semitic, but they are still stupid at the very least and quite possibly dangerous and threatening.

It doesn't matter if the email was intended to be private or public. As a columnist Conlin is a public figure and he should be smart enough to realize that his making incendiary statements are likely to end up on a blog or other website.

I do think at times, however, many who post on blogs diminish what writers do and inflate what bloggers do. Yes, there are many excellent bloggers and many crappy writers. Both have their places, thats for sure. But people seem to thumb their noses at times towards writers as though they were just given their jobs with no work done to earn them and they seem to feel that the comments made are just fabrication and/or without a great deal of leg work done. Blogs often come without any responsibility and the posters are provided a great amount of anonymity that allows them to say whatever they wish. We tend to go to extremes here and we miss some vital middle ground.

Oh, and since when is Barry Rozner a designated a**hole? I've rarely read one of his columns and felt that they were incendiary.

DmL

by dmlichte on Nov 24, 2007 7:04 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Anti-Semitic or not...

... Conlin was advocating genocide (the elimination of a group simply because of who they are).

You can say, correctly, that this was in a private email exchange that Conlin probably didn't think was going to be public, and you'd be right, although the other side of that coin is, as discussed here, that Conlin is a public figure and since this was in response to a column he wrote, written by a blogger, he should have guessed it might be posted.

But beyond that is this. How old is Conlin, 12? The bottom line is that stuff like that just isn't funny. If Conlin thinks that's funny, he needs to have his sense of humor removed.

I have a 12-year-old son who's smarter than that.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Nov 25, 2007 4:08 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think I've found a new home for Conlin

In today's Parade news magazine, there's an article about North Korea and the extreme lengths its leader, Kim Jong-il, goes to keep citizens in line. When I read the paragraph below, I got to thinking, hmm... this sounds like the perfect place for Conlin to continue his writing career without fear...

"To retain a strong hold, Kim Jong-il has sequestered his citizens from the world. Cell phones are illegal--mine was confiscated on arrival and returned to me when I left the country. Regular people cannot access the Internet, and newspapers consist of state propaganda. Radios and TVs receive only government channels (security forces enter homes to make sure this is so)."

http://www.parade.com/articles/editions/2007/edition_11-25-2007/North_Korea

Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."

by ballhawk on Nov 25, 2007 2:54 PM CST reply actions 0 recs