Posts Tagged hack journalism
We Return!
Posted by Pork Flu Ribs in Uncategorized on July 6th, 2009
First off, we apologize for our extended absence. We found a treasure map to Al Capone’s gold and decided spending weeks digging aimlessly in Illinois for hidden treasure would be more profitable than blogging. Although we found nothing, we were correct — futile searches for non-existant gold ARE still more profitable than blogging. However, it would be a shame to let this BR sponsorship go to waste just as The Hope is heating up. Thus, we return!
Abraham’s poor mastery of his profession beckons us always, however, particularly today in response to the umpires’ jobbing of the Yankees not once, not twice, but thrice!
It’s not going to do the Yankees any good, but it would seem that Foster and Bell will have to answer for their mistakes. No, they’re not going to be suspended or fined. But MLB does hold umpires far more accountable than in previous years.
It is characteristic of Pete’s hackery that he says something that at first glance sounds profound, even ominous, but which on a second reading is objectively absurd. Read the block quoted sentences again: The umpires screwed up. There will be no punishments meted out to them — no suspensions, no fines. However, despite the lack of consequences for their poor job performances, MLB “holds umpires more accountable than in previous years.” It sounds to me like they do nothing of the sort.
Expecting Pete to engage with the material beyond a superficial nostrum, however, is expecting too much of his milquetoast brand of non-challenging journalism.
Projecting Much?
Posted by Pork Flu Ribs in Uncategorized on June 4th, 2009
One of Pete’s charms is that, although he constantly claims to be busy with ‘newspaper work’ during games, he has no end of time to delete critical comments and to engage in spats with his commenters.
During today’s game against Texas, fans were making critical comments about Wang’s sub-par return to the starting rotation. And thus Pete vomited up this juicy morsel:
Peter Abraham's Self-Awareness: 0
Peter Abraham has spent almost the entirety of his three-year tenure as Yankees beat writer for the Journal-News mocking, badmouthing, and advocating the trade of Alex Rodriguez. No one with a voice as influential as Pete’s (except for that tool at WasWatching, if you want to call him ‘influential’) has spit so much vitriol at the Yankees’ third baseman.
He delights in A-Rod slander. He ruts in it. He rolls in it and covers himself in it like a protective coating from the sun. For reasons I’m sure Freud would be overjoyed to analyze, Peter Abraham has centered his career around shrinking A-Rod. As Potato Chowder pointed out in the post below, he is still trying to make the discredited claims of Selena Roberts stick. This man is allegedly a professional, yet he continues to treat his blog as a venue for his personal vendettas.
“You must have a sad life when you take pleasure in the problems of other people.” So, true, Pete. So true.
Math vs. A-Rod
Posted by Potato Chowder in Uncategorized on June 4th, 2009
Honestly, I don’t know where to start on this. After Selena Roberts’s claims that A-Rod was tipping pitches were discredited by every single reputable source, Abraham still carries it like an idiot torch.
Here he cites a former beat writer:
Miguel Tejada, then with Oakland, hit .350 overall against the Rangers, but jumped to .472 when the margin was at least five runs either way. He had nine homers in 36 at-bats when the margin was at least five. Rodriguez, who hit .284 against Oakland overall, hit .333 when the score was five or greater.
Seattle’s Carlos Guillen, a teammate of Rodriguez’s for three seasons with the Mariners, went from .307 to .318. in “out of hand” situations. Rodriguez, however, jumped from .264 to .391 against the Mariners in those situations.
First of all, 36 at-bats? Second, of course your average is going to go up in blowouts. That’s when scrub pitchers are in and hitters are teeing off. But most interestingly, you’re telling me that you can tell Carlos Guillen exactly what pitch is coming and his average only goes up 11 points?
I should also point out that, by this criteria, a serious investigation should be organized to find out if Josh Beckett is tipping his pitches to Derek Jeter (.341 vs carreer .316) and if domed stadiums are tipping pitches to Sal Fasano (.240 vs career .221).
It should be noted that Peter Abraham has an honorary degree in Predictive Analytics from the University of Phoenix.
Sweet Lou?
Posted by Green Cabbage in Uncategorized on May 18th, 2009
From the Pinstriped Bible Blog
• What if A-Rod just never gets his timing back? Remember when Lou Piniella, a guy who hit .300 six times, batted .196 over a full season? These things happen sometimes.
The same Lou Piniella who only played 74 games in 1975? The same player who didn’t qualify for the batting title played a “full season”? The Lou Piniella who OPS+ed 110, 138, 129 in the next 3 years (or since you’re on a BA kick .281, .330, .314)? That one?
I don’t know what Steven Goldman was thinking when he wrote this but pulling historical precedents out of your ass just to make a point and seem smart only works when the history you’re referring to is even tangentially related and doesn’t contradict your point.
There are no words
Posted by Green Cabbage in Uncategorized on May 17th, 2009
Man, what a shot. Yankees win, the Yankees win. Everybody goes home happy.
But did that moment give you pause, if only for a split second? Be honest. I’d be curious to hear what you think because I sure can’t come up with an answer.
…
Did anyone notice that he answered the question he posed?
Envy of the Enemy
Posted by EggFooYoung in Uncategorized on May 6th, 2009
Peter Abraham seems conflicted, caught between the worlds of the sports writer and the gossip columnist. Today’s post from P-Abe is titled “A-Rod’s final day in Florida?” and starts out rather predictably, noting that Alex has been coming closer to a return to the team by the day. The story then takes a darker turn, segueing into Madonna’s recent appearance at an NYC event, going after her fashion sense (at a party for the Costume Institute, no less) and then citing Wikipedia of all places as to a list of men that Madonna has dated.
Wow, Pete, project much?
This just smacks of jealousy to your humble reporter, and I’m guessing that Ham wasn’t the kind of guy who got the attention of the popular chicks in school. Or in college. Or professionally. Or anywhere the words “and extra cheese” aren’t commonly bandied about.
The right to bear claws?
Posted by Potato Chowder in Uncategorized on May 5th, 2009
Meanwhile, Girardi was jawing with Boston first base coach Tim Bogar in the top of the inning. Not sure what that is all about. Maybe Bogar is a fan of the First Amendment.
In two simple sentences, Abraham manages to attack Girardi, defend a fellow unscrupulous journalist (on the very day she was publicly clowned), and be eye-rolling, muted-trumpet unfunny.
The Professional
Posted by Pork Flu Ribs in Uncategorized on May 3rd, 2009
One thing that has always bothered me about professional journalism is the journalist’s refusal to take responsibility for the consequences of their stories. Guarded by liberal American libel laws and the unethical freedom to grant anonymity to anyone and everyone, journalists like Selena Roberts can publish any kind of lie, slander, and dirt about any target they want. Rumors and innuendo meld with fact to create distorted pictures of public figures. It is a very seedy way to make a living.
When Yankees manager Joe Girardi presents an impassioned defense of his third baseman, questioning the motives and timing of Selena Roberts, it is nothing more than an honest appraisal of a situation by a frustrated man.
Per Peter Abraham:
UPDATE, 12:29 p.m.: Here are some of Girardi’s comments:
“I don’t want this Alex thing to be a target. I have some issues with it. It’s interesting how the book (publication) date got moved up now. I get tired of answering these questions. I don’t understand why someone would write a book like this anyway. You know what, some people may not care to hear that, but I don’t understand it.
“Just going into someone’s life. I have three small kids and there are things in my life that I probably wish I could have a re-do on. I wouldn’t want those dragged through the mud and I’m sure you wouldn’t, either.
“I think sometimes, things are written about that none of us are proud of There are things in my life I’m not proud of that I’ve done. I wouldn’t want my kids to have to deal with that. I tell my kids that daddy makes mistakes, I do. And I apologize for them. I say, ‘Daddy’s not perfect.’
UPDATE, 12:28 p.m.: More from Girardi:
“From the excerpts that I have read, there are negative things about his lifestyle. I’m a firm believer that what we do off the field is our personal life. Some people aren’t going to agree with my faith. Some people aren’t going to agree with all the things I do with my life. But I don’t necessarily know why it has to be in a book. It’s something I’ve never understood, whether it’s a book about Alex or other people. Whether it’s a book about a president or a book about whoever. I just don’t understand it. Maybe that’s a short-sighting on my part, but I don’t understand.
“My parents always taught me that talk about the good. Be positive. That might be, you know, that might be me being somewhat short-sighted. But my Mom and Dad always taught me and I love them to death.”
Now, obviously, public figures are going to face scrutiny, cameras, and reporting from journalists. Their motives are not always ill-intentioned. But it is hardly off base to suggest that maybe, just maybe, the President ought to be held to a higher standard of journalistic observation than an athlete. One makes decisions daily that affects the lives and prosperity of millions; the other hits a ball with a bat. Abraham’s response to that?
But if Girardi actually believes what he is saying, it’s amazing that somebody so naive about how the world works these days is managing a team in New York. If somebody becomes the president or the best player in baseball, people are going to be interested in their lives. That’s just how it works. If you won’t want somebody to be interested in your life, don’t go into public life. It’s really not that complicated.
It is a stunning bit of hypocrisy here for Abraham to call Girardi naive when discussing the Selena Roberts book. Abraham, whose personal hatred of Alex Rodriguez has infected his reporting for years now, has accepted uncritically all of Roberts’s accusations. The drumbeat of a witchhunt sells far more copy than taciturn appraisal of a person’s motives, sources, and facts. Needless to say, the fact that Roberts was right about Rodriguez’s steroid usage does not necessarily prove that she is right about any of her other accusations. Unless you’re Peter Abraham.
He concludes with this gem:
However well-intentioned Girardi may have been today, his comments will only serve to continue the story.
Hack journalists like Peter Abraham always talk in the passive voice about reified concepts of a “story,” as if such a thing exists without journalists creating it, pushing it, and spinning it way out of control. Active in a story’s life, they pretend to be above it. The story “continues,” but not because anyone acts to continue it. This journalistic trope is the most poisonous one, as it removes from the reporter all responsibility for their words.
Abraham has been congratulatory of Girardi thus far for his improvements in handling the media. One suspects after this his stories of the Yankees manager will become rather more negative.