The lazy media baiting trap

[Sportsbabe]

What I mean by that is these are guys that belong in the NFL, unlike the endless assembly line of castoffs we had to go through last year. Also, I'm talking about guys that didn't play last year, which includes some guys that were here, but were injured.

Along with Selvie and Hayden, they've added Melton, Crawford, McClain, Mincey, Spencer, Bass, Lawrence, Okoye, Bishop, Gardner, Coleman, Whaley, Brent (maybe)...

That is so much better than the jokers that played the last half of last year, not to mention an always dinged up Ware.

I think you just said something. I don't know who these people are that think you can just buy success like in the old days (i.e., Deion, Haley, Norton, etc.). That formula is dead and gone. If NE was using this same approach that we are using this year, we would be labeled "smart". But truth be known, I like it this way. I'm just disappointed that a lot of the Cowboys Nation are not buying it.

 

[CCBoy]

I think you just said something. I don't know who these people are that think you can just buy success like in the old days (i.e., Deion, Haley, Norton, etc.). That formula is dead and gone. If NE was using this same approach that we are using this year, we would be labeled "smart". But truth be known, I like it this way. I'm just disappointed that a lot of the Cowboys Nation are not buying it.

You go girl!

 

[Rockport]

Sometime ago, amidst this Smartphone-tranced alternative world, all cognitive thought and deductive reasoning ceased. The greater the technology, the dumber we seem to become.

And nowhere has it been more pronounced than in the third-world dimension known as sports journalism. AP Stylebooks used to litter newsrooms like qualifiers in a Cialis ad, but it'd take Indiana Jones to find such a relic under all the dust and debris these days.

(Pardon me, hold that thought, I just got a tweet. Oh never mind, Adam Schefter just broke the news that the Jaguars might sign a tackle, but might not, but they might. Good to know.)

The rules now, well, there are no rules.

Reporters tweet rumors practically as fact to intentionally gluttonous degrees, from so many angles and sources that they can barely be tracked. We're left to wonder who said what about whom and when. It's impossible to sort through the smoke to find the real fires anymore. We remember almost nothing about anything that we heard or read.

(So what's this I hear about Jacksonville? I can't remember.)

Anyway, ProFootballTalk just ranked the Cowboys at No. 24 in the league. ESPN applied a 28th "future ranking" to the Cowboys. This qualifies in this bent industry as actual "analysis", based on....I suppose a Fantasy Football expert or something. Not sure.

Stop and consider. Here's a team that has gone 8-8, 8-8, and 8-8 the past three seasons, with the same QB as now, the same coach, and the same GM. That there is a trend, folks, one that should comfortably and concretely put Dallas right at or very near No. 16.

Now, add a guard to a good young line and an offense that is safely in the top 10 in the league. Then, replace a cupboard full of nobodies with at least 10 legitimate NFL defensive linemen, as well as the return of healthy starters behind them. How can that not be at least slightly better than that awful defense a year ago? Objectivity says it likely can't.

From all that, two very popular sources of opinion just determined that Dallas is worse than the Cleveland Browns. Huh?

The truth is, the media now allows itself unapologetically to let its "analysis" reflect the true want of its analysts, rather than their observed thought. There's not a whiff of science to it at all. Add an insatiable thirst for stir up public outcry and **** fights, as well as utter detest of doing any real work. I swear, none of these folks do any research beyond talking to each other and forming a collective agreed-upon opinion.

Sadly, in this is the case in almost every arena anymore, the message is geared for the toothless and tattooed minions and lemmings who ask few questions and take up pitchforks on hint of a rumored whisper. Little attention is paid to those that pay attention.

Just watch the reaction by week 3 when Denver and the media figure out what we already know about Demarcus Ware. Note the spin as their beloved Patriots and Giants derail. And watch how the "Cinderella Cowboys" inexplicably end up middle of the pack or better and shock them all to their dissatisfaction.

However, that will again morph later into "Dallas has one of the most talented rosters in the league", as usual, then they'll lament how underperforming again the Cowboys are. Of course, there'll be no reference to that 28th-ranking they prescribed a few months prior. You can throw it in their face, but they'll ignore you. PFT runs so many stories per minute, good luck ever finding that 24th ranking again.

Journalists often carry a chip because they don't feel properly compensated or worshipped for their self-acknowledged immense talents. They pour the scars of their youth into thinly-veiled vitriol and a disturbing love for poking bears in cages with sharp sticks. They care little anymore about doing right by their trade and name.

I believe we should call them on it at every turn. Thus, this rant. We should also largely ignore them, and not fall for the bloody meat they leave laying in our path. We won't, but we should.

And the worst part is, these are just the sports journalists. But that's another session for another forum and another day.

Good post. I'm glad to someone else gets it. 95% here don't.

 

[tm1119]

What I mean by that is these are guys that belong in the NFL, unlike the endless assembly line of castoffs we had to go through last year. Also, I'm talking about guys that didn't play last year, which includes some guys that were here, but were injured.
Along with Selvie and Hayden, they've added Melton, Crawford, McClain, Mincey, Spencer, Bass, Lawrence, Okoye, Bishop, Gardner, Coleman, Whaley, Brent (maybe)...

That is so much better than the jokers that played the last half of last year, not to mention an always dinged up Ware.

You're quite confident in guys who have never done anything in the nfl. New bodies doesn't exactly mean better production. With that said, I do expect improvement just because it's hard to get much worse. But would it surprise me if McClain, Okoye, Mincey, and the 7th round picks/UDFA's you have listed all flat out stink? Nope, not in the slightest.

 

[jazzcat22]

I think you just said something. I don't know who these people are that think you can just buy success like in the old days (i.e., Deion, Haley, Norton, etc.). That formula is dead and gone. If NE was using this same approach that we are using this year, we would be labeled "smart". But truth be known, I like it this way. I'm just disappointed that a lot of the Cowboys Nation are not buying it.

nice post.
I been saying that for a long time. If NE did what we are doing, or if NE traded a 2nd and 3rd for Lawrence, they would be "smart"...but the "Cowboys FO don't know what they are doing and Lawrence will be a bust"....since we did it, it never seems good enough.

Then we get the "well NE has a good track record and Jerry doesn't". Well that's not the issue, it's the same icing on a different cake. And the Cowboys cake will be better because of it.
The Cowboys are making a change in their approach for the better, and some people don't like it or want to admit it.

 

[erod]

You're quite confident in guys who have never done anything in the nfl. New bodies doesn't exactly mean better production. With that said, I do expect improvement just because it's hard to get much worse. But would it surprise me if McClain, Okoye, Mincey, and the 7th round picks/UDFA's you have listed all flat out stink? Nope, not in the slightest.

Most every team has little depth. This group, perhaps, can provide enough to depth to make a big difference.

Imagine just an average defense this year. That would be a HUGE improvement.

 

[tm1119]

Most every team has little depth. This group, perhaps, can provide enough to depth to make a big difference.

Imagine just an average defense this year. That would be a HUGE improvement.

The only point I was trying to make is that new warm bodies doesn't mean they will be better than the last ones. I'm well aware of how bad the D was last year and that changes needed to be made. You just seem to be very confident in guys we signed for dirt cheap off of the scrap heap and UDFA'S when in reality they could be just as bad as what we it had last year. The fact is, is that no one really knows and there are a ton of questions.

 

[Sportsbabe]

Most every team has little depth. This group, perhaps, can provide enough to depth to make a big difference.

Imagine just an average defense this year. That would be a HUGE improvement.

... and whatever happended to giving people a chance before you write them off. Gee wheez wally.

 

[junk]

Im quite certain you know, so Im not taking the bait.

I have no idea and I'm not baiting.

I'd guess Romo, Jerry or Garrett as those seem to be the most hot button topics. Bigger issue is the overall performance of the team since the last run of Super Bowls, so it could be that as well.

I think Romo is a fine QB who could benefit from better coaching, Jerry is fantastic at promoting his team/generating revenue, but his horrible at building a competitive football team and Garrett appears to be rather inadequate as a head coach.

Those opinions are mine formulated from watching and following the team extensively since the early 80s.

I find it odd that people may think the media may change my feelings about any of those things and I find it odd that people get mad at the media for such things. The media doesn't dictate how the players, coaches or front office performs. Why not direct your anger at the source of the issue?

I guarantee you that if Dallas starts winning, the tone of the articles from the media will change. Look at Seattle from 5 years ago versus now.

What do you want the media to report? Puff pieces filled with hope and wishful thinking? What a waste of time.

 

[ringmaster]

Sometime ago, amidst this Smartphone-tranced alternative world, all cognitive thought and deductive reasoning ceased. The greater the technology, the dumber we seem to become.

And nowhere has it been more pronounced than in the third-world dimension known as sports journalism. AP Stylebooks used to litter newsrooms like qualifiers in a Cialis ad, but it'd take Indiana Jones to find such a relic under all the dust and debris these days.

(Pardon me, hold that thought, I just got a tweet. Oh never mind, Adam Schefter just broke the news that the Jaguars might sign a tackle, but might not, but they might. Good to know.)

The rules now, well, there are no rules.

Reporters tweet rumors practically as fact to intentionally gluttonous degrees, from so many angles and sources that they can barely be tracked. We're left to wonder who said what about whom and when. It's impossible to sort through the smoke to find the real fires anymore. We remember almost nothing about anything that we heard or read.

(So what's this I hear about Jacksonville? I can't remember.)

Anyway, ProFootballTalk just ranked the Cowboys at No. 24 in the league. ESPN applied a 28th "future ranking" to the Cowboys. This qualifies in this bent industry as actual "analysis", based on....I suppose a Fantasy Football expert or something. Not sure.

Stop and consider. Here's a team that has gone 8-8, 8-8, and 8-8 the past three seasons, with the same QB as now, the same coach, and the same GM. That there is a trend, folks, one that should comfortably and concretely put Dallas right at or very near No. 16.

Now, add a guard to a good young line and an offense that is safely in the top 10 in the league. Then, replace a cupboard full of nobodies with at least 10 legitimate NFL defensive linemen, as well as the return of healthy starters behind them. How can that not be at least slightly better than that awful defense a year ago? Objectivity says it likely can't.

From all that, two very popular sources of opinion just determined that Dallas is worse than the Cleveland Browns. Huh?

The truth is, the media now allows itself unapologetically to let its "analysis" reflect the true want of its analysts, rather than their observed thought. There's not a whiff of science to it at all. Add an insatiable thirst for stir up public outcry and **** fights, as well as utter detest of doing any real work. I swear, none of these folks do any research beyond talking to each other and forming a collective agreed-upon opinion.

Sadly, in this is the case in almost every arena anymore, the message is geared for the toothless and tattooed minions and lemmings who ask few questions and take up pitchforks on hint of a rumored whisper. Little attention is paid to those that pay attention.

Just watch the reaction by week 3 when Denver and the media figure out what we already know about Demarcus Ware. Note the spin as their beloved Patriots and Giants derail. And watch how the "Cinderella Cowboys" inexplicably end up middle of the pack or better and shock them all to their dissatisfaction.

However, that will again morph later into "Dallas has one of the most talented rosters in the league", as usual, then they'll lament how underperforming again the Cowboys are. Of course, there'll be no reference to that 28th-ranking they prescribed a few months prior. You can throw it in their face, but they'll ignore you. PFT runs so many stories per minute, good luck ever finding that 24th ranking again.

Journalists often carry a chip because they don't feel properly compensated or worshipped for their self-acknowledged immense talents. They pour the scars of their youth into thinly-veiled vitriol and a disturbing love for poking bears in cages with sharp sticks. They care little anymore about doing right by their trade and name.

I believe we should call them on it at every turn. Thus, this rant. We should also largely ignore them, and not fall for the bloody meat they leave laying in our path. We won't, but we should.

And the worst part is, these are just the sports journalists. But that's another session for another forum and another day.

Erod this was a very insightful post and when it comes to the tabloid style media sports shows I will avoid them like the common plague.

 

[DallasEast]

Good post. I'm glad to someone else gets it. 95% here don't.

lol! 95%? I fear that percentage may be a TAD inflated.

 

[TwoDeep3]

One wonders if the old days or great journalism were due to better writers, or less demand for content.

I suspect the fact that even the beat writers during the season who dashed off one or two things a day had more to do with it than anything about lesser writers.

If you know the history of this profession, most of those guys ended up at a bar on Lovers Lane right off of Inwood in Dallas, drinking the afternoons away as they traded barbs, talked sports, and cavorted.

Maybe the more healthful America who drinks and smokes less is more responsible for lousy journalism.

 

[Rockport]

lol! 95%? I fear that percentage may be a TAD inflated.

Ok, 90%. Sure seems that way. Lots of SAS impersonators.

 

[DallasEast]

One wonders if the old days or great journalism were due to better writers, or less demand for content.

I suspect the fact that even the beat writers during the season who dashed off one or two things a day had more to do with it than anything about lesser writers.

If you know the history of this profession, most of those guys ended up at a bar on Lovers Lane right off of Inwood in Dallas, drinking the afternoons away as they traded barbs, talked sports, and cavorted.

Maybe the more healthful America who drinks and smokes less is more responsible for lousy journalism.

There are various reasons why overall journalism has declined over the past few decades. Among those reasons are:

• Lack of Restraint. Media serves the public but at what cost? Media runs roughshod over boundaries concerning privacy and respect. Paparazzi were once the black sheep of the media. Can anyone really tell the difference anymore?
• Verification. Getting the story published first has become the main objective. Verifying whether the story is accurate before publication has become a secondary concern.
• Fairness. Journalists should always be impartial to the story. Impartiality is a flaming joke now.
• Accountability. Used to be what was written or spoken about someone or something would have ramifications if what was being disseminated was partially or fully false. If a report is questionable now, its author rarely faces real refutation from his peers. Sometimes, he or she are even lauded for their efforts.
• Perceived independence. Reporters, writers, columnists, etc., are moreso now than at any earlier time seen as "cogs in the wheel" of a bigger machine. The corporate mantra is pushed over that of individual original investigative work. Speaking of originality...
• Originality. What originality? Articles? Forget about articles. Now, if someone tweets a story, it's replicated nationally and sometimes internationally within a short time. Basically, the name of the person re-transmitting the original tweet or story materializes into brand new "bylines."
• Transparency. This is one of my biggest peeves. In the past, journalists provided confidentially for sources breaking stories which had tangible impact on the lives of those providing the information AND the public receiving the information. That same tenet has expanded to include all stories, no matter how trivial. In effect, even the most mundane stories may be dubious in nature because the reader or viewer has no clue who is providing the information--a real source or the author of the story. Finally...
• Truth and statement. This is a journalistic blight which has infected the general public as well. It leans back to verification. News USED TO BE news. Once, it was "what has come to light" and "what will be accurately relayed." That is not necessarily the case anymore. At times now, it is "what the journalist THINKS is fact" and "what the public gets from that personal point of view." Opinion made fact. That may be the saddest failure of 21st century media's presentation of information to the public of them all.

/rant

 

[WPBCowboysFan]

Good post DallasEast!

The goal now is to get it out there and be first. Nothing else really matters. If it can be true and accurate thats just a bonus, but not at the top of the priority list.

 

[DallasEast]

Ok, 90%. Sure seems that way. Lots of SAS impersonators.

LOL! 90%.

Okay. Allow me to try this. I copied the following member names browsing the site just a few moments ago:

iceberg, Denim Chicken, CIWhitefish, surfernia, DallasEast, Silver Surfer, LittleD, bkight13, lostar2009, iRepDatStar, chetochico, TonyRomo17, ninja, WV Cowboy, jhamilton8, bysbox1, thetopcowboysfan, JohnsKey19, Airbag, CowboyStar88, TwoDeep3, gimmesix, Rhubarb, star23, adamknite, ekfs, the_h0wey, Mr Cowboy, DanManJ, toni33dors, Christiann, DanteEXT, AmericasTeam81, AmberBeer, jchap2k, windward, doomsday31, JDSTAR, Biggred, Gonhoz, Chuck 54, Idgit, bucks, WPBCowboysFan, Wayne02, WoodysGirl, CCBoy, Aceman15, Zimmy Lives, jazzcat22, dexternjack, panchucko, jubal, jaybird, Yakuza Rich, JAMESMHOLDEN, theSHOW, phong02, McLovin, CATCH17, TINGS21, Alexander, theogt, vta, Vtwin, cowboyeric8, dbonham, Western, iowast8rs, anava, Primetime42, PJTHEDOORS, cml750, Keifer, DMX690, slomoxn, EST_1986, NeonDeion21, NJ22, The Natural, deathreaver, Nation, yimyammer, Playmaker247, erod, wileedog, jobberone, Doomsday101, Bizwah, htownboyzfan, BadKarma, blindzebra, Muhast, Section444, 808CowboyFan, Coy, fishspill, mmohican29, silver, AshyLarry06, GimmeTheBall!, 0gr81, Joe Rod, victoriacowboy, BoysfanfromNY, Mansta54, wafflesyrup, Aikmaniac, p_tubbs, Future, Romo2Dez4six, Rj48, Nexx, Aggie87, jrumann59, woods74, doomsday_II, bounce, Ky31, Cowboys8, gloryofthis, Bill Wooten, BigSarj, Sportsbabe, viman96, cowboytillidie, adwar, illhurtya, coogrfan, DCDave, jday, RS12, romomania, boysfanindc, BrAinPaiNt, jens kuehne, EGG, noshame, da_whiz_kid, percyhoward, CboyFan, Smithy, poost, TheRomoSexual, Picksix, ABQCOWBOY, imbatman, quaigs, Az Lurker, Pokes12... and 25 more

This is typical. The site draws a lot of folks each day. Sometimes, there are an awful bunch more in that list. Let's apply this common occurrence to our topic and pretend for a moment. For the 90% allegation to be true, virtually everyone listed above would be saying exactly what you are alleging.

Allow my long-windedness to be brief. In your opinion, do you think virtually everyone is commenting in the fashion you are alleging? OR is it possible that a far smaller number of members are commenting exactly as you say they are BUT it seems like it is a lot more members making those comments because they are making large numbers of posts about exact same subject?

 

[TwoDeep3]

There are various reasons why overall journalism has declined over the past few decades. Among those reasons are:

• Lack of Restraint. Media serves the public but at what cost? Media runs roughshod over boundaries concerning privacy and respect. Paparazzi were once the black sheep of the media. Can anyone really tell the difference anymore?
• Verification. Getting the story published first has become the main objective. Verifying whether the story is accurate before publication has become a secondary concern.
• Fairness. Journalists should always be impartial to the story. Impartiality is a flaming joke now.
• Accountability. Used to be what was written or spoken about someone or something would have ramifications if what was being disseminated was partially or fully false. If a report is questionable now, its author rarely faces real refutation from his peers. Sometimes, he or she are even lauded for their efforts.
• Perceived independence. Reporters, writers, columnists, etc., are moreso now than at any earlier time seen as "cogs in the wheel" of a bigger machine. The corporate mantra is pushed over that of individual original investigative work. Speaking of originality...
• Originality. What originality? Articles? Forget about articles. Now, if someone tweets a story, it's replicated nationally and sometimes internationally within a short time. Basically, the name of the person re-transmitting the original tweet or story materializes into brand new "bylines."
• Transparency. This is one of my biggest peeves. In the past, journalists provided confidentially for sources breaking stories which had tangible impact on the lives of those providing the information AND the public receiving the information. That same tenet has expanded to include all stories, no matter how trivial. In effect, even the most mundane stories may be dubious in nature because the reader or viewer has no clue who is providing the information--a real source or the author of the story. Finally...
• Truth and statement. This is a journalistic blight which has infected the general public as well. It leans back to verification. News USED TO BE news. Once, it was "what has come to light" and "what will be accurately relayed." That is not necessarily the case anymore. At times now, it is "what the journalist THINKS is fact" and "what the public gets from that personal point of view." Opinion made fact. That may be the saddest failure of 21st century media's presentation of information to the public of them all.

/rant

Sorry, I was just trying to get a laugh.

 

[DallasEast]

Sorry, I was just trying to get a laugh.

lol. My bad.

 

[TwoDeep3]

lol. My bad.

You're fine DE. I may have overshot a bit.

 

[TheDude]

Fixed that for ya.

Because they see the total BS in most of it as it relates to the Cowboys. And then they see the lemmings, as evidenced by some who post here, who accept it all, swallow it all hook, line, and sinker, because it fits their own personal posting agendas.

And, because competent people generally find fault with incompetence, or incompetent people.

A lot of people bought the media selling the 2008 and 2010 teams as potential SB candidates. "I rememer tons of "1st team that will play a home game in the SB"

You can't champion one side of the story and ridicule the other when both can or were equally wrong