Redskin4ever Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 Simms must've forgot he was offended. He said Redskins 4-5 times on Sirius radio last Thursday. Nah. He knew that Sirius is uncensored and he could say those words he can't say on TV. </sarcasm> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warskins65 Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 After viewing the results of the Poll I am no longer posting articles from these sources. ............................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronhobie Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 It's the only real weapon we have so I vote yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoBoCTiberius Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 You haven't read the Post's golden boy UnWise Mike have you? In his latest article he implied that all Virginians are homophobes and racists because they support the team name. He constantly labels all Redskins fans as racists on social media and blocks NDNs who support the name. Need proof? Ask ES member Huly who happens to be part Cherokee. This is a distinction I get kind of nitpicky about, having worked for newspapers and in journalism. An editiorial writer =/= a publication and vice versa. I know people who don't have that background think differently (and there's plenty of reason to) but with a paper as gigantic as the Post, they do not and cannot share the opinions of their more outlandish columnists, even if they do profit from publishing their work. It's kind of the nature of the beast in the industry. It actually makes the most sense for them to employ both sides of the issue in most cases, even if their editorial staff vehemently believes one side of it. That said, I completely understand why most of you wouldn't share my opinion on this, especially in a time where it seems like every major news outlet wants to take a personal stand against this fanbase as people just to win points with their readers, many of whom don't even follow football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins0721 Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 Simms must've forgot he was offended. He said Redskins 4-5 times on Sirius radio last Thursday. He was probably being interviewed and not being paid on Sirius. It's only days he gets paid that he takes a stance....and still collects his paycheck. I'll just refer to him as Eunuch Simms from now on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dallsux Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 I voted YES. I posted this to the WP facebook page yesterday: "To the Editor and UnWise Mike, I am increasingly disappointed in the lack of true journalism in today's media and especially in my home town. I am originally from the Washington Metro area, born and raised in Fairfax and Loudoun Counties, Virginia and born and raised a Die-Hard REDSKINS fan! Over the last decade or so, I have read numerous stories of the feud between the Post and the Washington REDSKINS Front Office, but mainly with the owner of the REDSKINS, Dan Snyder. And now I read that the Post is no longer going to print the name REDSKINS in joining this "fight in ignorance" against the Posts' home team, the Washington REDSKINS! What disappoints me more about this story is that the truth has been lost and buried for the sake of political correctness. Just because there are people crying about being offended by something doesn't mean that it is right, nor does it mean they are in the right. I am increasingly offended by things that I see on television as a Christian, but calling CBS, FOX, NBC and ABC because they allow things on their stations that I don't agree with is not only unreasonable, it's asinine. Sometimes, we just have to learn to live with disappointment. While I'm certain there are people who are truly offended by the name REDSKINS, I am equally certain that the majority of those offended at this time are only offended because they do not know the truth of it's origin or the truth of who is behind this name change lynch mob. The name REDSKINS was first brought about BY Native American chiefs and tribe leaders who were using the name to represent all of the Red Nation (something they still call themselves today). The "Red" comes from several places, but the main one was the herb they used as an insect repellent they would apply to their skin that turned their skin to a reddish hue. This is all in the REAL history, not made up, fantasy history that only recently came to light by those driving this PC bandwagon. The REDSKINS' logo was created BY a Native American chief in Montana & given to the REDSKINS to use in 1971 because the REDSKINS were a badge of honor, a name of pride and respect. And now, people like Ray Halbritter have tried to turn the name into a dirty, curse word. Like the "N" word, which is not even close to the same thing. The only similarity that "REDSKINS" and the "N" word have in common is that they are both words in the English language. As a REDSKINS fan, I want to know what you, the Editor and UnWise Mike, would say to the Red Mesa High School in Teec Nos Pos, Az. (a Native American High School, by the way) about how offensive their name is, being that they are Native Americans donning the name REDSKINS with pride, honor, & respect, just as the Washington REDSKINS do. I also would like to know what you would recommend as a new name for state the of "Oklahoma" since that word in Choctaw means "Red People"? I implore you to focus your attention on more important things in Native American culture. Such as the consistent trend of alcoholism among Native teens or poor education and health care that they receive from the Federal Govt. which is supposed to do more for them, rather than spending anymore effort or time focusing on whether the Washington REDSKINS are using the name properly & with honor. In all reality, today if you use the word REDSKIN, no one thinks "dirty Indian". Everyone's first thought is about football. Period. Even people who don't watch or care about football. I know this because I live in Mobile, Alabama at this time and people here don't care one way or the other about pro football. What they do care about is not hearing about this anymore. And quite frankly, I agree. However, as a REDSKINS fan, I will stand boldly for 2 names until my dying breath. Jesus Christ & the REDSKINS. And I am not alone in this. As a REDSKINS fan, we are many and we are turning in this fight and the passivity is passing and action is on the rise. As a REDSKINS fan and Washington Metro Native, I vow, that as long as the Washington Post refuses to use the name REDSKINS, I will not only NOT ever buy or subscribe to this publication, nor read a single article online that is posted by this publication, I will also refuse to refer to the Washington Post as such, but rather will only refer to it as "the paper in Washington". I will also be spreading the word to my many, many Washington REDSKINS fans friends & family whom I see have "liked" your page & will request they remove their "likes" and boycott this publication until the refusal to use the REDSKINS' name is removed and real journalism returns (which would have to include the removal of UnWise Mike who is no more than a hack journalist anyway). I am very disappointed as a Washington Metro Native in this publication and hope that you will see the truth and side with the truth rather than choosing to side with the vocal minority over this issue. Sincerely, The Stepp Family, a REDSKINS family" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dallsux Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 Ok, I guess I can't use his name properly here anymore. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemac9 Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 Just saw Haphazard's sticky post on the Breaking News section. Since I can't respond to his post I'm responding here. This is the wrong action to take. Not every person wearing a Redskins jersey disagrees that the name should be changed, if for the right reasons.I might get a 'love it or leave it' reaction from some skins for this but reasonably speaking if there is any truth out there that some native americans find the name and imagery offensive then it should be changed. I'm a DC sports fan, DC metro area is my hometown, born/bred skins fan 37 years now. If they change the name I'll still cheer just as hard, I don't give two ****s about it if its the right thing to do culturally speaking. I cheer hard for the goddamn wizards for ****s sake, worst name ever. Boycotting any newsworthy articles because the source doesn't agree with your side of a debate isn't the right response and diminishes the quality of this media/entertainment site for people with all sides of an opinion on the matter. Now PFT and Bleacher report, they suck ass so I'm not complaining because I want their specific media but this is a slippery slope man. Don't post their **** because they suck at writing articles, not over the name change debate. Let everyone hear the voices of dissent, even if they are just some biased-click seeking crap and let people see them for what they are or aren't for themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 Did you read the article? Direct quote: "We don’t believe that fans who are attached to the name have racist feeling or intent." I'm going to vote no, both because I don't believe in boycotting a source of information that is still going to have direct access to the games and be able to provide me insight to my team, and also because I agree with The Post, for the most part. That is an incongruent statement. If the team name is racist then by default all of the people who support the team name are racists. There were people who supported slavery but didn't own slaves. The Post can go on about how they don't want to hurt any feelings and how they don't think that people who support the name are racist. It isn't true and they know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoBoCTiberius Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 Supporting the team doesn't always equate to supporting the name. You can love something without loving every part of it and you can love something while still wanting it to be better. If that wasn't the case, a lot of us wouldn't be fans of this team. We've loved the team even though we've been praying for it to be better for more than a decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rexx1240 Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 There ya go lol...add UnWise Mike' name to the list as well. UnWise Mike has been added. Almost went with it being changed to "UnWise Mike sits to pee". **** UnWise Mike (Just wanted to give it a try) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsGuy Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 mikemac9 writes: Boycotting any newsworthy articles because the source doesn't agree with your side of a debate isn't the right response and diminishes the quality of this media/entertainment site for people with all sides of an opinion on the matter. Now PFT and Bleacher report, they suck ass so I'm not complaining because I want their specific media but this is a slippery slope man. Don't post their **** because they suck at writing articles, not over the name change debate. Let everyone hear the voices of dissent, even if they are just some biased-click seeking crap and let people see them for what they are or aren't for themselves. The Washington (Com)Post is down to the level of PFT and Bleacher Report in terms of quality. With their actions in the name change garbage, there is nothing to distinguish them from these other sites. All of print media has gone downhill in terms of quality and is completely agenda driven. Though, in this case, I don't believe the (Com)Post's editors had a sudden epiphany. This is really just another cheap swipe at Dan Snyder in their long-running feud with him. If the hometown paper is not going to support the hometown team (or at least stay neutral), then they have NO PLACE on the hometown team's website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 The Post is actually one of my clients. I'm considering boycotting them. Seriously, passing them to somebody else in my office because I don't really want to be associated with them in any way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulSkin Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 It's odd to me that people think that newspaper is even a good source of Redskins news anymore. There is nothing in that sports section that their writers provide about the team worth a hoot over what many, many other sources provide. There are plenty of pros, amateurs, and just plain fans out there who cover news about the team better, and in a more timely manner. Trust me, if Mike Jones breaks something, Rich Tandler or someone else will be reporting about it seconds later. I already quit reading long ago and unfollowed every one of their writers' accounts on twitter. I don't want to hear what Jason Reid doesn't like on a particular day. I don't care what passive aggressive, submitted without comment style of innuendo Dan Steinberg tweets out. Cindy Boren, Sally Jenkins, all the rest... what coverage do they provide that I can't get from better sources, with better actual content, and no hint of politic-ism and arrogance? Some writers/content providers there stay out of the fray, but it's an across-the-board thing for me. I'm over it, all of them, and that paper. I always try to avoid clicking on links for their content. I get suckered into it accidentally here and on twitter with the shortened urls. It actually makes me mad a little bit, because I make a conscious effort to not support them in any way I can. It's so easy to find so many better news sources. All that being said, that's my personal stance. I like the idea of just not linking to them and everyone making their own decision about a personal boycott. I think the same effect could be noticed without declaring it something. The letter writing idea could be great, and would also make the message clearer. I'm not sure what, if any, effect it would have other than to say screw you though. I know I'm never going back to reading the Post anyway. I'll always remember the way they have raked this team over the coals at every opportunity seemingly forever now. I will never forget that that is the paper that enabled and empowered UnWise Mike to gleefully participate in, and encourage his followers to antagonize, harass, and attack fans of this team and call them racists on a daily basis. It's unforgiveable, to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jflow78 Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 There ya go lol...add UnWise Mike' name to the list as well. Awe yeah! UnWise Mike needs to be on there. Can't stand that guy. Pompous *******. EDIT: hahaha, I like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jflow78 Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 I think the Post made a mistake, but I dislike censorship. Whether it's the censorship of a name or a newspaper. All ideas should be expressed and explored. So, I guess I'd oppose this boycott. Besides, it's dangerous to live in a vacuum where you only hear like minded thoughts. Don't want to start slipping down that slope. UGH! You have no clue how hard this is for me, but I whole heartedly agree with Burgold (that's not the difficult part). I ******* hate the WP, but I can't vote for censorship. I don't like their opinions, and I especially hate when people's opinions are reported as facts (as do most new agencies nowadays) but I'm not for a hard ban. **** this is hard to say, but I can't say "yes". It's just not something I believe in, regardless of how much I despise the individual or hate their opinions (and how ******* ignorant they are with their misguidedly self righteous bull ****). AHHHHH! **** you WP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 From WP site some info if anybody wants to spam some Nazi's: "Editorials represent the views of The Washington Post as an institution, as determined through debate among members of the editorial board. The board includes: Editorial Page Editor Fred Hiatt; Deputy Editorial Page Editor Jackson Diehl; Jo-Ann Armao, who specializes in education and District affairs; Jonathan Capehart, who focuses on national politics; Lee Hockstader, who writes about political and other issues affecting Virginia and Maryland; Charles Lane, who concentrates on economic policy, trade and globalization; Stephen Stromberg, who specializes in energy, the environment, public health and other federal policy; and editorial cartoonist Tom Toles." FYI, anybody can go to WP and not contribute to their ad revenue or gain any hits on anything even if you click on it. Just install Adblock Edge and block all their trackers with ghostery. I use these in firefox, not Chrome since Google has no interest in allowing you to block any of these things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 It's BEEN escalated. Ignoring it has gotten us dick. Time to wake up, and speak up. THIS Or we could just buckle to the slander and endless salvo's of negative one-sided press which is what they would love to happen...but that's not going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HapHaszard Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 Boycotting any newsworthy articles because the source doesn't agree with your side of a debate isn't the right response and diminishes the quality of this media/entertainment site for people with all sides of an opinion on the matter. Now PFT and Bleacher report, they suck ass so I'm not complaining because I want their specific media but this is a slippery slope man. Don't post their **** because they suck at writing articles, not over the name change debate. Let everyone hear the voices of dissent, even if they are just some biased-click seeking crap and let people see them for what they are or aren't for themselves. The washington Post sells advertisements on the click count they receive on their site. I just choose not to enhance their revenue stream at this time. I haven't posted any of UnWise Mike's articles in quite a while, I am just extending the concept. Feel free to click on their website and read their articles, I won't be offended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diesel Hog Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 Does anyone here subscribe to the Post, or even worse, pay for unlimited online access? If so, why? Stop now. This is the way to make your voice heard. Unsubscribe from this propaganda rag, and choose to spend your money elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
celticsalmon Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 So what you're saying is-refuse to listen to a point of view that differs from your own? really? Come on, man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diesel Hog Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 So what you're saying is-refuse to listen to a point of view that differs from your own? really? Come on, man! Are you serious? The Post or PFT is NOT a point of view. It's propaganda. I have read it, and been bombarded by their crap for well over a year now. Enough is enough, and I cancelled my subscription and do not visit their websites anymore. C'mon man, with that crap. YOU should know better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dub70s Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 Done. Did it! Deleted from Bookmarks! Cleared Cookies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 So what you're saying is-refuse to listen to a point of view that differs from your own? really? Come on, man! How long do you listen to it before you are allowed to make up your mind that you disagree with it, reject it and recognize that the continuing repetition of the same exact argument won't change your mind? Here's the flaw in your flabbergast. You assume that A/ those voting "yes" have close mindedly shut off an opinion they have heard ten zillion times. B/ that somehow their opposing viewpoint if repeated enough will have some sort of effect. well, B is correct. The repetition and escalation of the opposing viewpoint is having an effect, and the effect is that the people who oppose it are sick of hearing it, and have decided that the Post's decision to not even use the team name, much less listen to any other opposing viewpoint themselves, is enough. and so we have chosen based on their choices. That isn't censorship. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 How hard is it to get the same story from multiple other sources anymore? I could understand if this was the 80's and information only had a few outlets. Anyway, I'm all for the ban. Even uf the other sources feel same as WaPo... You never take sides against the family. I will never click WaPo site knowingly or buy its paper. Further, if a Redskin Nation ban happen to alter sales and they changed their position, it would clearly show the vested interest on their end. Snyder at very least has shown he cares deeply about issue. I doubt very much WaPo has nearly as much interest versus the flavor if the year... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.