re: Snarky BR media - should they be muzzled?

quote:

---

they can't watch practice and he never gives any injury updates, what is being revealed from behind the curtain?

---

What's under the bikini?

quote:

---

they can't watch practice and he never gives any injury updates, what is being revealed from behind the curtain?

---

Did you not read the whole sentence or post? He gives just enough so that there is no real mystery and so little that it pisses the media off.

You simply copied my post. Do you have an answer for me about who should be "muzzling" the media? Serious question.

quote:

---

More importantly, media should monitor its tone before it bites the hand that feeds it.

---

Well, the truth is, LES is the one who created this effect. And here's why:

He provides VERY little access to reporters. They really don't have the pulse of the team as the season progresses and they certainly don't have specifics.

This is compounded by not only Les's bewildering style of verbal communications but by his need to keep the details close to the vest.

I think, quite naturally the media feels a little sheepish because they can offer their audience only the same re-treaded SPECULATION that the fans already know.

Les leaves himself without media allies because he doesn't offer them the "inside scoop" that the coaches with political saavy do. They might like him for his decency, his humanity, but he sure makes it hard for them to do THEIR job.

I think Les has poor instincts with the media. He should open the door a LOT more. This would be in HIS best interest. Remember when something goes wrong, it helps to have a reporter in your corner saying "But Les went over that at practice with JJ for an hour Wednesday" or "Les specifically addressed that issue with us last week " .

Listening to Hangriff, cauble, Ott etc it is obvious that there is a SIGNIFICANT "eyerolling" factor growing in the media, and that is seldom good for anyone.

being that I used an example of "caller #1" I thought most would be able to determine which media I was talking about.

quote:

---

In a small market, the lone broadcast medium is no different than Pravda or Xinhua (remember - WJBO changed their news source from CBS to Fox because the station manager did not like Dan Rather's coverage of President Bush). That should not be confused with this conversation or your ability to make a counter point. You read this post and chose to engage in it.

---

For one, Baton Rouge is not that small, espescially compared to the rest of the conference. Outside of Nashville, where college sports are clearly second, it's the biggest metro area in the SEC. And what do you define as the lone broadcast medium, talk radio? Have you limited your media beef to just talk radio now?

Again, who specifically should be muzzling the media?

quote:

---

Please be specific.

---

kryptonite to the rantard

quote:

---

Baton Rouge is not that small, espescially compared to the rest of the conference

---

True. But not large enough to sustain multiple newspapers and radio stations. In some instances Atlanta, Jacksonville, New Orleans etc could be considered secondary markets for some schools.

quote:

---

And what do you define as the lone broadcast medium, talk radio?

---

TV has its sports segment. Sports radio seems to dominate LSU sports from broadcasting perspective.

quote:

---

Have you limited your media beef to just talk radio now?

---

Print and TV journalists appear on segments on sports radio to promote their articles. In fact, they seem to be moderating influences on the tone and conversation.
In early 90s, Morning Advocate was perhaps the primary source for LSU football related journalism. Today sports radio has moved from the fringe to the center of attention. Perhaps, Internet will weigh in soon enough and tilt the balance.

quote:

---

who specifically should be muzzling the media?

---

The media itself. Whenever possible, should act as its own counterweight. Some of these organizations may have an ombudsman to monitor their drift.