HR interview with Nunyo Demasio

[Tarhog]

I wasn't going to 'go there'....however.....

I have checked out Hail a couple times. I've had nice things to say about their site up to this point. When I heard they'd deleted the invite to participate in the Cerrato chat (and Akhorrus - you may believe it was something more akin to 'marketing', but you'd be wrong), I went back. I made one post. ONE post...simply explaining why we thought their members might have been interested in hearing what the rarely-heard-from Mr. Cerrato had to say. And I was banned. I'm still banned.

So you can justify it all you want, but I think it says a lot about who these guys are. Btw...they didn't even have the courtesy to notify me why I'd been banned, in fact, up until the moment I was banned, one of the owners was 'apologizing' to me via pm for closing the thread I'd posted in.

As for the staff here? You aren't going to find a classier, smarter, more tight-knit group of guys. Its not like we don't disagree occasionally behind the scenes, sometimes vigorously, but we treat each other with respect. If you really can't see the difference in how things are run here, and how we've been treated, I suggest you might be happier elsewhere. But thats just my personal feeling. If I were a Hail mod, you'd already be gone. I respectfully and tactfully disagreed with them, and I was gone a minute later. Thats the sad truth.

[zoony]

Well back to the topic at hand, I think that Nunyo has on occasion been railroaded somewhat unfairly.

For instance, he was bashed for changing his story on the Coles trade.

But you know what? I'd rather have the information ahead of time instead of having him wait until it is old news and he has all of his sources/details straight to publish the article.

I think overall Nunyo did a good job with the Coles story. I personally would rather him print those stories over no story at all if you know what I mean. But that is strictly my preference.

After all, before Nunyo's story ran in the post, I had NO idea Coles wanted out AT ALL... and I don't think most 'skins fans did either.

That being said, however... the WP, in my opinion, could also do a better job filling that position. After all, just about any sportswriter in the country would drop what they were doing in a second for a chance at his job. Puzzling.

[TK]

Someone missed the Art/E Dog Night thread from earlier.

[Art]

Zoony, as I listed elsewhere, I'll put here, just for consumption sake:

Please bear in mind that recently he has reported AT LEAST the following factual inaccuracies:

-- That the Redskins took a $9 million cap hit for trading Coles. We took a cap hit LARGER than $9 million.

-- That the Redskins signed Casey Rabach to a five-year contract. The Redskins signed him to a six-year deal with the last year being voidable.

-- That Mark Brunell could make up the difference he restructured in incentives that don't count against the cap. If Brunell makes up the difference through incentives, the money does count against the cap. Next year.

-- That the Redskins were tied for second in the NFC in sacks. The Redskins were tied for fourth.

-- That the Redskins had 14 (or 14.5 can't remember) sacks accounted for by defensive linemen. The Redskins had 18 sacks accounted for by defensive linemen with more from players lined up at defensive end -- Clemons as an example.

-- That the Redskins were considering releasing Coles. The team LOUDLY rejected that was ever a consideration, though, this is more a "who do you believe" thing than anything.

-- That Brown was scheduled to visit, then postponed his visit, to Redskins Park on Wednesday of last week. The schedule was Thursday all along.

-- That Dave Campo was the Jaguars defensive coordinator. Campo is the assistant head coach/secondary.

These are ALL errors of FACT JUST in MARCH.

We had spoken on this board during the year that Coles and Gardner were not pleased with the direction of the offense. It's not like his unhappiness was untouched upon. I simply struggle with the tremendously high number of factual errors in his work.

If those didn't exist, I could probably be more forgiving of the Coles story. But, that's me.

[PapaDRoc]

Originally posted by Art

Zoony, as I listed elsewhere, I'll put here, just for consumption sake:

Please bear in mind that recently he has reported AT LEAST the following factual inaccuracies:

-- That the Redskins took a $9 million cap hit for trading Coles. We took a cap hit LARGER than $9 million.

-- That the Redskins signed Casey Rabach to a five-year contract. The Redskins signed him to a six-year deal with the last year being voidable.

-- That Mark Brunell could make up the difference he restructured in incentives that don't count against the cap. If Brunell makes up the difference through incentives, the money does count against the cap. Next year.

-- That the Redskins were tied for second in the NFC in sacks. The Redskins were tied for fourth.

-- That the Redskins had 14 (or 14.5 can't remember) sacks accounted for by defensive linemen. The Redskins had 18 sacks accounted for by defensive linemen with more from players lined up at defensive end -- Clemons as an example.

-- That the Redskins were considering releasing Coles. The team LOUDLY rejected that was ever a consideration, though, this is more a "who do you believe" thing than anything.

-- That Brown was scheduled to visit, then postponed his visit, to Redskins Park on Wednesday of last week. The schedule was Thursday all along.

-- That Dave Campo was the Jaguars defensive coordinator. Campo is the assistant head coach/secondary.

These are ALL errors of FACT JUST in MARCH.

We had spoken on this board during the year that Coles and Gardner were not pleased with the direction of the offense. It's not like his unhappiness was untouched upon. I simply struggle with the tremendously high number of factual errors in his work.

If those didn't exist, I could probably be more forgiving of the Coles story. But, that's me.

Damn man you do your research. Good work, I hope it's worth it!!!

[Art]

Originally posted by PapaDRoc

Damn man you do your research. Good work, I hope it's worth it!!!

Here's the thing. ONLY checking the NFL.com for team stats required specific research and that was just because I didn't know the exact number. I knew the number reported was false. All of the information is second nature to a person who follows the game. It's clearly not second nature, at this point, to Nunyo right now, and the struggles he has with some of the basics are what cause most of us problems.

As the Redskins beat writer for the Washington Post, Nunyo should be as conversant about the league as a sharp fan is, and, to this point, more than a year into his coverage, he has yet to show any real GROWTH in the knowledge category that would allow him to prevent such errors which are a bad combination of laziness and ignorance.

They are easily fixed just by following J-school fundamentals. This is why I'm so concerned with his coverage. Being a reporter in the internet era is very simple. You can simply go to the Jags official site and look at the coaches link to get official titles. You don't need to make a call like you had to do in the past. But, even such simple efforts stump the beat reporter for the Washington Post and that is just not a satisfactory result for us, as fans.

[zoony]

Originally posted by Art

Zoony, as I listed elsewhere, I'll put here, just for consumption sake:

Please bear in mind that recently he has reported AT LEAST the following factual inaccuracies:

-- That the Redskins took a $9 million cap hit for trading Coles. We took a cap hit LARGER than $9 million.

-- That the Redskins signed Casey Rabach to a five-year contract. The Redskins signed him to a six-year deal with the last year being voidable.

-- That Mark Brunell could make up the difference he restructured in incentives that don't count against the cap. If Brunell makes up the difference through incentives, the money does count against the cap. Next year.

-- That the Redskins were tied for second in the NFC in sacks. The Redskins were tied for fourth.

-- That the Redskins had 14 (or 14.5 can't remember) sacks accounted for by defensive linemen. The Redskins had 18 sacks accounted for by defensive linemen with more from players lined up at defensive end -- Clemons as an example.

-- That the Redskins were considering releasing Coles. The team LOUDLY rejected that was ever a consideration, though, this is more a "who do you believe" thing than anything.

-- That Brown was scheduled to visit, then postponed his visit, to Redskins Park on Wednesday of last week. The schedule was Thursday all along.

-- That Dave Campo was the Jaguars defensive coordinator. Campo is the assistant head coach/secondary.

These are ALL errors of FACT JUST in MARCH.

We had spoken on this board during the year that Coles and Gardner were not pleased with the direction of the offense. It's not like his unhappiness was untouched upon. I simply struggle with the tremendously high number of factual errors in his work.

If those didn't exist, I could probably be more forgiving of the Coles story. But, that's me.

Well I honestly didn't think it was that bad. You're right and I don't disagree... I think the Post can do better.

But c'mon man... look me in the eye and tell me you knew Coles was unhappy and didn't want to be here before the Nunyo story broke Sure it had been discussed... I'd even touched on it myself. But I sure as heck didn't know .

But let me ask you a question, and answer honestly (not that you wouldn't of course)

If Nunyo reported tomorrow that Gardner was traded to Tampa for a 3rd round pick, would you believe it? If I ask myself that question, my answer is Yes... I would believe it with no doubt in my mind. Sure he might say that the coach of the Bucs is Tony Dungy :laugh: but overall he usually gets his story straight.

[SonnyandSam]

Originally posted by Art

And, AK, before you go too far defending these clowns, bear in mind the following.

So threatened by all this, one of their owners actually called me a f@cking p@ssy and threatened me to a fight. When I provided my e-mail address and a place to meet, suddenly, the offer was no longer available .

I mention this because THIS is the primary difference between the people running that site and those running this. When confronted there, they hide from their poor behavior by removing any reference to it.

When confronted here, we actually attempt to communicate with the members so there are no secrets or agendas behind what's going on.

You'll NEVER experience here what we've experienced there. You'll never be forbidden from asking your questions or defending those you think you know. I just suggest to you that you don't know these guys as well as you imagine.

You should verify such statements with your owner before making them. A thread I was involved in just a week or two ago was locked by your owner. A legitimate debate over the strengths and weaknesses of this site and hR was being discussed. Nobody was out of control; no name calling; just a discussion of strengths and weaknesses. But I guess Blade didn't like my pointing out reasons why I spent most of my time at hR and not here.

Seems to me a muzzle was put on my opinions about this site....and hR for that matter. I guess my opinions are only OK if they agree with those who operate this site.

[zoony]

Art:

I guess I kind of stick up for Nunyo because he has taken an approach to publish articles on the Skins that are cutting edge and risky.

Sure he butchers the facts on a lot of these occasions. But the overall jist is usually correct. And that is the inherent risk of publishing these stories on your own, and not just taking the ESPN approach and summarizing what some other local reporter is saying or what Gibbs said in a press conference.

And as a Redskin's fan, I'd rather have access to this type of info immediately, rather than waiting for it to break on ESPN two days later. I want to know NOW. Facts be damned. :laugh:

[zoony]

Originally posted by LaVarPA

You should verify such statements with your owner before making them. A thread I was involved in just a week or two ago was locked by your owner. A legitimate debate over the strengths and weaknesses of this site and hR was being discussed. Nobody was out of control; no name calling; just a discussion of strengths and weaknesses. But I guess Blade didn't like my pointing out reasons why I spent most of my time at hR and not here.

Seems to me a muzzle was put on my opinions about this site....and hR for that matter. I guess my opinions are only OK if they agree with those who operate this site.

Good Lord man, the horse is dead.

If you like HR so much carry your happy a$$ back over there. We get it. We've gotten it. Good?

....now back to your regularly scheduled Nunyo bashing :laugh:.

[PCS]

Originally posted by LaVarPA

You should verify such statements with your owner before making them. A thread I was involved in just a week or two ago was locked by your owner. A legitimate debate over the strengths and weaknesses of this site and hR was being discussed. Nobody was out of control; no name calling; just a discussion of strengths and weaknesses. But I guess Blade didn't like my pointing out reasons why I spent most of my time at hR and not here.

Seems to me a muzzle was put on my opinions about this site....and hR for that matter. I guess my opinions are only OK if they agree with those who operate this site.

The thread in question.

http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=91024&perpage=15&display=&pagenumber=6

Let's be real careful about misrepresenting here. And the ensuing accusations.

[Die Hard]

Originally posted by LaVarPA

You should verify such statements with your owner before making them. A thread I was involved in just a week or two ago was locked by your owner. A legitimate debate over the strengths and weaknesses of this site and hR was being discussed. Nobody was out of control; no name calling; just a discussion of strengths and weaknesses. But I guess Blade didn't like my pointing out reasons why I spent most of my time at hR and not here.

Seems to me a muzzle was put on my opinions about this site....and hR for that matter. I guess my opinions are only OK if they agree with those who operate this site.

Are you sure you really want to go there?

I'm pretty sure you weren't privy to the ongoing discussion among ExtremeSkins.com staff and HR.com staff about that particular thread:

Here it is:

http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=91024

You may not have understood the reasoning and motivation behind the decision. But there's nothing to hide But if you'd really like re-open that can of worms... just be forewarned... the gloves are going to come off and you're going to get hammered like your buddy Akhourus.

[Art]

Originally posted by LaVarPA

You should verify such statements with your owner before making them. A thread I was involved in just a week or two ago was locked by your owner. A legitimate debate over the strengths and weaknesses of this site and hR was being discussed. Nobody was out of control; no name calling; just a discussion of strengths and weaknesses. But I guess Blade didn't like my pointing out reasons why I spent most of my time at hR and not here.

Seems to me a muzzle was put on my opinions about this site....and hR for that matter. I guess my opinions are only OK if they agree with those who operate this site.

I'm aware of that thread, LaVar, and, in fact, it's been linked here in this very thread. The board owner DID lock it, after days of increasingly inane conversation as to color schemes. He sited that the thread had kind of gotten off the track of where it began and as we often do when threads seem to have no death, but, people speak dully about silly things and no one knows when to stop, we close the thread. We've done this with shorter threads and longer threads and threads in between.

The thread was not removed. And, as I said, it has been LINKED here, so, it's unlikely you'll make much headway with comments that you've been muzzled. Blade was responding to you for calling him out in a thread he wasn't really participating in, confusing him as you boys have done for some reason with Die Hard. And, Blade seemed pretty correct in siting the conversation had taken a turn toward the idiotic.

As Tarhog said, this is substantially different than treatment received by our members over there. Multiple threads were removed. Users who'd violated no rule of HR were immediately deleted. Accounts of members here were messed with by a software hack.

You boys are somewhat amusing attempting to draw correlation when all you do is further highlight the differences that make us a better board. Black background or no .

[Art]

Originally posted by zoony

Well I honestly didn't think it was that bad. You're right and I don't disagree... I think the Post can do better.

But c'mon man... look me in the eye and tell me you knew Coles was unhappy and didn't want to be here before the Nunyo story broke Sure it had been discussed... I'd even touched on it myself. But I sure as heck didn't know .

But let me ask you a question, and answer honestly (not that you wouldn't of course)

If Nunyo reported tomorrow that Gardner was traded to Tampa for a 3rd round pick, would you believe it? If I ask myself that question, my answer is Yes... I would believe it with no doubt in my mind. Sure he might say that the coach of the Bucs is Tony Dungy :laugh: but overall he usually gets his story straight.

It's a somewhat amusing defense you have here, but to answer your question, I would say, at this point, no I wouldn't believe Nunyo has it right if he reported what you state. Given the number of errors in his coverage and ability to jump into a phone booth and come out with new sources to alter a story seemingly by the hour to suit whatever winds are blowing, I'd say I'd doubt the story is true until it is verified elsewhere.

And, since I can't think of a story Nunyo broke of consequence that was verified in full elsewhere, he'll need to develop trust with me, as a reader, that he can sweat the details, because, if he can't sweat the details, he can't get the larger story right.

[zoony]

Originally posted by Art

It's a somewhat amusing defense you have here, but to answer your question, I would say, at this point, no I wouldn't believe Nunyo has it right if he reported what you state. Given the number of errors in his coverage and ability to jump into a phone booth and come out with new sources to alter a story seemingly by the hour to suit whatever winds are blowing, I'd say I'd doubt the story is true until it is verified elsewhere.

And, since I can't think of a story Nunyo broke of consequence that was verified in full elsewhere, he'll need to develop trust with me, as a reader, that he can sweat the details, because, if he can't sweat the details, he can't get the larger story right.

Fair enough.

Then I will say... if there are rational/respected Redskin's fans out there who simply not believing what Nunyo writes at all, then the Post needs to (at a minimum) acknowledge that there is a problem.

[Danny Montana]

Let me just say that I think this thread is just another example of why ES is the gold standard of sports fan sites.

Seeing the openness of this forum in comparison to a site like hR is striking. Sites of this type are built on the foundation of the free flow of information. And to see a site like hR taking such methods to curtail this is surprising and quite sad.

I too "shopped around" and lurked for a while at different sites before finally joining here. And after reading this thread, I'm again reminded why I should be thankful that I made the right decision.

Now about Nunyo,

Originally posted by FedUpField

Which, granted, I don’t mind reading when bouts of insomnia hit – but I honestly thought this thread was gonna be about passing around the stick to whack the Nunyo piñata!

- FUF

Who wants the first swing?

[Art]

Originally posted by zoony

Art:

I guess I kind of stick up for Nunyo because he has taken an approach to publish articles on the Skins that are cutting edge and risky.

Sure he butchers the facts on a lot of these occasions. But the overall jist is usually correct. And that is the inherent risk of publishing these stories on your own, and not just taking the ESPN approach and summarizing what some other local reporter is saying or what Gibbs said in a press conference.

And as a Redskin's fan, I'd rather have access to this type of info immediately, rather than waiting for it to break on ESPN two days later. I want to know NOW. Facts be damned. :laugh:

Maske, if you'll recall, broke the Gibbs story. Was that cutting edge and risky? How did Maske get that story? You can cover the team and get HUGE stories by actually developing internal sources with the team based on developing TRUST with those sources instead of threatening them that you'll run with the story you've got if they don't help you out.

This is how Nunyo seems to work his sources of consequence within the Park. Nunyo is counting on fans not to hold him accountable for being factual. He's relying on the fact you won't care if he's in the ballpark with his stories.

I care and I would imagine the HUGE majority of Redskin fans share that care in this matter. What Nunyo has effectively done by running wild with false stories like the Coles story is that the team will start upstaging him to be sure by giving good stories to other stories.

I want the story to be right, not first. You gain more trust getting it right.

[Art]

Originally posted by zoony

Fair enough.

Then I will say... if there are rational/respected Redskin's fans out there who simply not believing what Nunyo writes at all, then the Post needs to (at a minimum) acknowledge that there is a problem.

That would be about all one would ask.

Recognition of the problem. I have no way of knowing this, but, it seems to me the Post actually thinks this is GOOD coverage they are producing. They have turned a blind eye to the FIRST RULE of journalism -- which is to fact check everything -- and seem not to mind that their lead Redskin reporter is close, sometimes, on stories.

As a former journalist, I'd have done almost anything to work for a paper like the Washington Post -- even being a conservative . But, that was in an era where you could open the pages and not see freshman composition errors routinely.

Now, I'll stick to sites that require a higher level of accuracy. Like here .

[Die Hard]

Originally posted by Art

I want the story to be right, not first. You gain more trust getting it right.

Seriously.

Everyone should take that under advisement.

You think about the lack of trust and confidence Nunyo has now brought upon the source.

Think about all the emotions and discourse caused by mispresenting information.

All the while now, people are second-guessing. Redskins fans are now *waiting* for confirmation from MULTIPLE national websites before formulating an opinion... all because of the Posts' inability to get the story right.

Sure, he causes an initial stir breaking the news first... at the expense of accuracy.

But in the end, he's undermined something far more important.

The trust of his audience.

Buy hey, everyone catches on to things differently. Everybody has a different threshold. If this continues, maybe in a year's time you'll convert too

It's not of matter of "I told you so"... so much as "Hey, let's just get the story right the first time". That's more important.

Accuracy, honesty and integrity go hand in hand.

[zoony]

maybe so DH... I'm not at my breaking point with Nunyo yet but you all make good points as to why I should be.

I guess I have a higher BS threshold than most

Which brings up an interesting question... At what point does Nunyo's reporting reflect on the WP? So far it seems that most simply have a problem with Nunyo. I'm wondering how much more until 'Skins fans start calling out the WP for this.

I've heard grumblings from fans, sure... but most seems to be directed at Nunyo only.

[SonnyJ]

The thing I like about Maske is that his stories have no slant to them. His writings are straightforward w/o the editorial bent.

As pointed out, Nunyo seems to want to put some op-ed into his stories. The one today provided a classic example - really, why use the word ominous unless you're quoting someone?

I don't want that from a reporter. Just give the (legitimate) facts as currently understood. Leave the editorials and speculation to the columnists and the occasional lengthy analysis piece.

[Tarhog]

Originally posted by zoony

I guess I have a higher BS threshold than most

My wife claims to hold that honor

[Die Hard]

Originally posted by SonnyJ

The thing I like about Maske is that his stories have no slant to them. His writings are straightforward w/o the editorial bent.

As pointed out, Nunyo seems to want to put some op-ed into his stories. The one today provided a classic example - really, why use the word ominous unless you're quoting someone?

I don't want that from a reporter. Just give the (legitimate) facts as currently understood. Leave the editorials and speculation to the columnists and the occasional lengthy analysis piece.

A man who speaks for many

There's a time and place for editorials. But the Redskins need to establish a new source for information about the team.

Just about anybody can produce an editorial... and we have two of the best right now (Om and Art).

But those two also possess the ability to present factual information in an informative and creative way... without the slant.

I hope one day.. they get the opportunity. The Redskins would do well for themselves.

I'd put their ability to write above any of the local news media. Even Maske.

No lie.

[SonnyandSam]

Originally posted by zoony

Good Lord man, the horse is dead.

If you like HR so much carry your happy a$$ back over there. We get it. We've gotten it. Good?

....now back to your regularly scheduled Nunyo bashing :laugh:.

That was not my point. I regularly visit both sites as a Redskins fan. Both sites have their strengths and weaknesses IMHO. There is information I get here that I can't get at hR and vice versa. BOTH are invaluable to me.

I have no information about this latest pissin' match between the two site owners and mods. I certainly think both sites should be willing to carry each other's important interviews and analyses.

I was simply pointing out to Art that when I discussed ES and hR strengths and weaknesses, that thread got locked before people were finished with it. I didn't just dump on ES....I pointed out numerous strengths that made ES better than hR.

As for the Cerrato interview, I believe I was the first (perhaps after the ES mods and owners if what they say is true) to strongly encourage the hR members to stop by here and read the interview. It was a great read.

[PCS]

Originally posted by LaVarPA

I was simply pointing out to Art that when I discussed ES and hR strengths and weaknesses, that thread got locked before people were finished with it. I didn't just dump on ES....I pointed out numerous strengths that made ES better than hR.

Which was adressed in posts 87 and 88 of this thread by Die Hard and Art.