FEEDBACK WANTED: Should ES adopt a boycott (ignore) policy for the WP?

[Boss_Hogg]

Just heard another radio advertisement from Sonny J about the Washington Post.

I guess moneys more important than what's "morally" right.

Same with UnWise Mike, why do you cover the team if you're so offended? Grow a pair and find some other team to cover.

[TD Riggo]

Ooooohhh THAT can be arranged much the same way that "Easter Egg" was done when you mention a certain  Dallas QB.  

 

 

I found that easter egg by accident last week. I spent twenty minutes trying to figure out how I typed Romo and trying to fix it.

 

Yes. I'm that slow.

[Hunter_R]

No reason to give them hits when they won't print the team name.

Would it be bad to just paste the entire article (maybe minus one sentence) and leave out the link when using them?

[Huly]

Those ads were probably taped awhile back and this was just announced yesterday. I hope the team starts boycotting them too. We all need to unite and fight back! Hit them where it hurts if we don't click share read subscribe or like they lose $$$

[Redskins3D]

For those of you who didn't see this,it's the old straw and camel's back thing.  

 

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/washington-post-editorials-will-no-longer-use-redskins-for-the-local-nfl-team/2014/08/22/1413db62-2940-11e4-958c-268a320a60ce_story.html?tid=pm_opinions_pop

 

 

 

*click link for more*

I want to point out, the LEAGUE did NOT honor his request...Mike Pereira did personally. He said he honored many request to not work certain cities or Teams, and the WAS NOT based on his support of the opinion. The league wasn't even made aware of it.

[Sikbug]

Just because you don't agree with them it shouldn't mean they should be boycotted imo, if anything it just spurs more conversations on their topics. 

[ZRagone]

Yes, in so much as stories from those sites shouldn't be posted to the official breaking news board. We shouldn't have this sight advocating web hits to any news agency that refuses to use our name, even if it's just a portion if said agency (wapo editorial board).

If posters link to it so be it, but in terms of official reposting of their links in the news section I'd say absolutely ban it.

[Diehard Otis]

Life has truly taken a turn for the surreal.

 

I voted no.  Here's why.

 

Two (of the many things) I always cherished about growing up in suburban Maryland was cheering for The Washington Redskins & enjoying The Washington Post.  Now the acrimony between two of my favorite things in life has come to THIS?  The whole thing is madness.

 

Believe me, since the name-controversy-thing has gone nuclear in the past year or so, its really taken a toll on me.  But now we're talking about banning America's Newspaper of record -- the one that incidentally covers the Skins as it's hometown team!  

 

If that isn't bizarre enough, I fear this proposed policy of banning any of the reporting that comes from The Post will alienate more fans like me: you know, the people that dare to cheer the hometown team AND read the hometown paper.

 

And if the appeal to emotion doesn't work, here's an appeal to logic.  The beat reporters will still cover the team.  Occasionally, a Post reporter may break a Skins-related story.  Is ES simply going to pretend that the paper doesn't exist?  That seems childish.  Honestly, one of the initial appeals about ExtremeSkins was that I knew exactly where to get all of my Skins news whenever I needed it.  That is a decidedly competitive advantage.  AND you guys could get me past that stupid WaPo pay wall.  Now I never did thank anyone, but I am saying Thank You now.  Because it definitely looks like those days are over.

 

Please.  I ask those folks that are in a position to do the choosing...Don't do this.  Let's de-escalate things, or at least try to put a simmer on some of this tension.  I am certain I'll catch heat for this, but this is my view.  

[SkinsFTW]

I could see their point if they could come up with a single reason why the name is racist or insulting but the fact is there is nothing.

 

If anything is insulting it's calling them INDIANS. That's like calling whites Chinese or calling blacks Brazilians just because somebody on a boat hundreds of years ago got lost.

 

I'm all for boycotting WP, they broadcast to the world that they are boycotting the team name so everybody should spread the word to boycot them as well. They know that 90% think the team name dispute is just PC BS but they won't stop their propaganda unless they start feeling the pain.

[sjinhan]

A very strong NO. You guys are free to choose to not to click in those links from PFT and WP.

IMHO I think a boycott from the official Redskins board does nothing but validates WP and PFT efforts of making an impact on this issue.

Also the boycott will hurt the ES members that come to ES as one stop source for all things Redskins...

[skinsmarydu]

I vote yes. Everyone knows you don't poop where you eat.

I second this post. Awesome parallel.

Hail!

[Veretax]

No I wouldn't boy cot them.  I want to know who's being a moron in the press, So if I see them on TV, I can flip the channel.

[warskins65]

Why is ok for the media to make so many negative blanket statements about our team name all the time without any recrimination?

 

I would love it if all this crap would just blow over, but it will not until we hold the fire to the feet of those who started all this.

 

So I vote YES to a ban of the WP, ban that casino in NY as well.

[kleese]

Life has truly taken a turn for the surreal.

I voted no. Here's why.

Two (of the many things) I always cherished about growing up in suburban Maryland was cheering for The Washington Redskins & enjoying The Washington Post. Now the acrimony between two of my favorite things in life has come to THIS? The whole thing is madness.

Believe me, since the name-controversy-thing has gone nuclear in the past year or so, its really taken a toll on me. But now we're talking about banning America's Newspaper of record -- the one that incidentally covers the Skins as it's hometown team!

If that isn't bizarre enough, I fear this proposed policy of banning any of the reporting that comes from The Post will alienate more fans like me: you know, the people that dare to cheer the hometown team AND read the hometown paper.

And if the appeal to emotion doesn't work, here's an appeal to logic. The beat reporters will still cover the team. Occasionally, a Post reporter may break a Skins-related story. Is ES simply going to pretend that the paper doesn't exist? That seems childish. Honestly, one of the initial appeals about ExtremeSkins was that I knew exactly where to get all of my Skins news whenever I needed it. That is a decidedly competitive advantage. AND you guys could get me past that stupid WaPo pay wall. Now I never did thank anyone, but I am saying Thank You now. Because it definitely looks like those days are over.

Please. I ask those folks that are in a position to do the choosing...Don't do this. Let's de-escalate things, or at least try to put a simmer on some of this tension. I am certain I'll catch heat for this, but this is my view.

Beautifully said. Overly dramatic response here and I believe it would be a huge mistake for ES to do this.

[Bang]

I say yes.

the Post is not the only place anyone can get redskins news. far from it.
they have no particular insight that makes them "must-read" and by not presenting their links here we will not miss a single iota of team news.

Ol' Hap might have to make one extra click to get the same story for us. 
(Thanks as always to HapsHazard for gathering all the news there is for us.)

The only thing their links here does do is allow them to be paid by the advertisers on their page.

A boycott is a financial attack, and while it may ultimately be unsuccessful if we do it here, at least the revenue they'd get from the thousands of clicks a story on these pages would generate would be disrupted somewhat.

 

they wrote back in 92 they thought it was offensive, and then in 99 when Dan Snyder bought the team, they slowly drifted awa from responsible journalism and into a personal pissing match

Snyder may be ultimately to blame for it by being a bit thin skinned about the criticism they heaped upon him and the team, and his fighting back made it worse. The post seemed very happy to do their best to sidetrack the team and damage Dan Snyder. over the years we on these pages have noticed a distinct bias in their reporting on the Redskins through their various beat reporters who would continue anti-Snyder narrative (Dan Snyder made little kids stop selling lemonade) often omitting facts that would go against their attacks. (Coca cola has a contract that they enforced on those kids selling lemonade)

They encouraged the media to make this team a national joke, which they often were, make no mistake, but again, when you omit positive to laugh at negative, you are not reporting facts. You are pushing agenda or writing commentary.

And, while many of the criticisms against how Snyder ran the team were warranted, the fact that it got in the way of actual news reporting became a problem.

Stories and columns that did nothing but smear the owner became normal. Why do football fans give a crap if Snyder cut down some trees? Why is that sports news?  What does it have to do with the game?

Ohh, nothing, they just want us to know he's a bad guy. 

 

Things escalate, and eventually Snyder cancels their tickets.

Post begins to really push the name change.

Coincidence?

 

I don't think so.

 

the fact they have allowed their columnists and writers to straight attack their readers is deplorable. UnWise Mike can have his opinions and he can write his opinions, but when he takes to twitter and personally attacks those who disagree with his crusade he has gone WAY too far.
No true news organization would ever allow such a thing.  (aside from the fact they are paying customers who can choose to spend their buck elsewhere, it goes entirely against journalistic integrity ..which should strive to be open to opposing viewpoints, 

the Post should NEVER allow their writers to attack readers like that.. no paper ever should. But they have allowed their judgment to be compromised by this feud with Snyder.

 

And it should cost them.

 

definitely boycott them. 

as fans of the team, citizens of the region and readers of their paper, we DESERVE unbiased and untainted reporting. That is why a person chooses to plunk quarters into their machine when there is a Times machine right next to it at the bus stop.

 

And they have decided to throw mud in our eye.

So F them. They have competitors. I bet they'd LOVE the thousands of clicks a link posted on this site generates.

 

~Bang

[MartinC]

I voted yes. I stopped reading the Post quite a while ago personally and I don't click on any link to a Post article.

[GibbsFactor]

I say yes, mostly because the pussies over there only used the editorial section and didn't go full bore with the news section as well.  Pansies.   Washington Times for me.   

 

I run an NFC East site that's dedicated to all four teams, any news I get to post will be from the Washington Times, not the post.    

[Aireskoi]

I say yes.

 

*Great Post*

 

~Bang

 

I look forward to your next show.

[Diehard Otis]

This is definitely a 5 STAR thread.  TK, you have outdone yourself!

 

I would also like to personally thank  HapsHazard for the outstanding work in culling all Skins related news (year round!).  

 

Bang, you make quite a strong argument.  In fact, there are a few posters that have also made compelling points, & I do consider them noteworthy also.  But on this issue, it seems that sjinhan says it best - short 'n sweet.

 

A very strong NO. You guys are free to choose to not to click in those links from PFT and WP.

IMHO I think a boycott from the official Redskins board does nothing but validates WP and PFT efforts of making an impact on this issue.

Also the boycott will hurt the ES members that come to ES as one stop source for all things Redskins...

 

And many thanks to Kleese for this

 

Beautifully said. Overly dramatic response here and I believe it would be a huge mistake for ES to do this.

 

I am flattered. (and sorry for getting all emotional) Thanks.

[Burgold]

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.

[bowhunter]

I voted "Yes" in favor of the boycott, but I think such a move would only increase their sense of martyrdom. 

[Diehard Otis]

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.

Yessir.  Well said, & I sincerely hope that ExtremeSkins doesn't go tit-for-tat.  That's not who we are.  

[grego]

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.

Posters can still post articles, so I wouldn't say this is censorship.

As for some calling for us not to escalate things, where do you think we are with this issue?

It's BEEN escalated. Ignoring it has gotten us dick.

Time to wake up, and speak up.

[RedskinsInFebruary]

They are not anti-Redskins. They just believe that the name is offensive.

There's the problem: we should expect better applications of literacy and logic from media/publication entities than reliance on "belief."  Redskins the NFL team has a different meaning from redskin the slur.

[Burgold]

Posters can still post articles, so I wouldn't say this is censorship.

Then maybe I don't understand the term boycott.

 

The idea has appeal, after all, hitting the WP and others in the wallet is the way to get their attention, but I still don't think it's the way to go. Mind you, being silent isn't either. If we wanted to generate a thousand letter campaign where ESers individually flood the Post and their website with letters of disgust... I'd be for that.