How do you prefer your news about the Redskins?

SkinsNatsFan · May 7, 2005

I keep hearing from the local tabloid, the Washington Post, that the Redskins fans will only get spin from the Redskins reporting at www.redskins.com. They imply that the fans won't get real news, without the Redskins' spin.

Personally, I've seen mainly interesting videos, quick and to the point interviews, tryouts, and factual information about the players and the team. I see some of what the players, coaches and front office are doing and planning to do, directly from them.

From the Post, I see conjecture, mistakes, and venom. It's useless tabloid crap, with a clear agenda and major spin.

As far as spin from the Redskins, what exactly is new about a professional sports team talking positive about themselves, and not making certain decisions public until they've actually been made and are final?

I've seen coaches and players talk before. I understand the type of things they want to say, and the fact that there are many things they won't say. I'd still rather hear it directly from them than interpreted by anyone, much less the unprofessional individuals that currently call themselves the sports media.

I'm interested in the team, the players and coaches. I have no interest in hearing rumors from "sources" that have little factual basis. Every team considers many possibilities. That's not newsworthy, it's an every day fact. I don't care about fictional controversies. It's nonsense.

I am currently enjoying the direction that redskins.com is going, and I'm totally losing interest in the direction that the sports media has headed.

Art · May 7, 2005

Obviously the Redskins won't report everything they know. They can't. There are things that are reported that can hurt the team if released too early. Take several of the Washington Post stories.

Had Nunyo been a good journalist, he'd have written the Coles story from a very OPEN position of, "He's unhappy and wants to leave, and the team is willing to make that occur." While THAT story would have been released sooner than either Coles or the team would have wished, it wouldn't have been as directly harmful to the team as what Nunyo DID write.

By writing the Redskins planned to release Coles -- having AGREED to it without talking to anyone on the team who'd know that -- other teams would see this and knowing what was written, use THAT as their initial view of what might happen, and therefore, what they may wish to do in response. Being, to wait until he's released .

Now, the underlying story of Coles being unhappy is one the Post should write. The team isn't going to. The story of McCants being so depressed he was apparently sitting in a McDonald's parking lot and had to be fetched up in Detroit, is a story, that if true and not just a rumor, should be looked at and written about.

There are TONS of good, legitimate news stories the Post will have available to them to cover as the Redskins will decide what they feel is harmful and NOT release such stories. And, the Redskins, as an organization with Gibbs at the head, will likely default to MOST things being somewhat iffy.

Like where fans would LOVE to see the simple example of the team's draft board, how players were ranked and the like, it is not something the team would release, possibly fearing if other teams saw the actual board, they'd start to figure out how the Redskins grade players and it could hurt them in some obscure way.

So, if the Post reporters were to sneak a camera in and get that shot, they'd have a legitimate story the team won't release, but that also serves their purpose of informing the fans and reporting on the team. Unfortunately, the Post, since Maske left, views the team as an adversary, so the reporting isn't what you'd like.

The Redskins are doing this VERY smartly and hopefully they continue ramping it up.

SkinsNut73 · May 7, 2005

Originally posted by SkinsNatsFan
I keep hearing from the local tabloid, the Washington Post, that the Redskins fans will only get spin from the Redskins reporting at www.redskins.com. They imply that the fans won't get real news, without the Redskins' spin.

I didn't get that little temper-tantrum from the Post either. It's obvious the Redskins feel the need to get the truth out to the fans, and in doing so they may put their own "spin" on things...but so what? Don't they put their own spin on things when they hold a press conference?

The Post can still report on "breaking news" anytime they want (like the fans sitting behind pillars) by using their 'sources' inside the organization...or their impeccable journalistic capabilities:rolleyes: .

...and it might be due to the fact I was tired when I read the Post article late last night...but I took it as a slight insult to fans...like we'd be too stupid to recognize when a team is "spinning" the news. But I'll go back and give it another read now...

iheartskins · May 7, 2005

SkinsNatsFan, good post. I tend to largely agree with you.

What I hope, although the likelihood of it taking place may be small, is that the Washington Post and the Washington Times shift their focus away from "breaking news" to other topics like history, player profiles, researching the other teams in the NFL, and other more research focused, as opposed to breaking, type reports.

The traditional print media just can't keep up with the other outlets, and the desparate grabs of the Washingon Post as well as the other print-focused media are the signs of a dying beast trying to retain some of its former glory.

The WP and WT just lack the capacity to compete effectively when the source of such stories is the team and the team has adapted its own media outlet to provide the most immediate release of "breaking news." The speed of the news to the consumer just can't be beat by this new arrangement.

Basically the onus has moved to the WP and WT Redskins Sports Section to either adapt or die out.

EDIT: Grammar mistakes including a split infinitive.

SkinsNatsFan · May 7, 2005

Originally posted by iheartskins
What I hope, although the likelihood of it taking place may be small, is that the Washington Post and the Washington Times shift their focus away from "breaking news" to other topics like history, player profiles, researching the other teams in the NFL, and other more research focused, as opposed to breaking, type reports.

Wouldn't that be nice? I'd love to see that.

BillyKilmer · May 7, 2005

I use Bubba-UPI for all my news

Jimbo · May 7, 2005

Unfortunately, the media world has changed since Gibbs last coached. It has become more cutthroat, competitive and slanted. While there are certain positives, mostly thanks to the Internet, the mediots still need to remember that their job is to report the news, not make it.

skinsfan12 · May 7, 2005

Originally posted by BillyKilmer
I use Bubba-UPI for all my news

There's no better method of receiving Skins related news than a daily dose of EXTREMESKINS. What's great about this site is you can rely on some serious newshounds (Bubba) to do a fantastic job of combing the net for tidbits and posting with extreme urgency. Now that we know the news (good, bad, ugly) is available here, we can count on immediate debate on reliability, accuracy, and impact to our individual perspective of the Skins' organization. Whether the news is biased towards the Skins (as may be the case if the source is redskins.com) or biased towards innuendo mixed with rumor (as may be the case from the WP), we know that through a discussion amongst true fans (us), we can usually ferret out the biases and draw our own conclusions. My experience typically tends to be a reaction from the original story leaning towards an 'Oh my gosh, the sky is falling', then that reaction is tempered through the excellent analysis provided by members of this board. In the end, I have a much clearer picture of the possible intent of the report and the true facts are revealed. I'd have a very difficult time illiciting this information without the knowledge of many members of EXTREMESKINS, to whom I'm very grateful.

One would expect that Larry Michaels would include a link to EXTREMESKINS on redskins.com for 'a fan based discussion of all things Redskins.' Just a thought.

.

Zuck · May 7, 2005

It will obviously be biased but it's not equatable to something like a president creating his own news outlet and trumping the media (not trying to single out any particular president).

It is just sports news. I like how the Post responded as if people would tune out of the Redskins reporting since it will be biased. Unlike politics, in sports fans like spin and hearing players and coaches talk. They like to hear from the team what was done and why.

I think it's a great idea on the Redskins part. They didn't like the way things were being reported in the local media and found several things to be inaccurate and harmful to the team so they're creating an outlet for information that they have more control over.

I'll still read the post to read some columns if I think someone has an interesting take. I hardly ever finish an entire Jenkins article ever because it's just total trash.

SkinsNut73 · May 7, 2005

Originally posted by BillyKilmer
I use Bubba-UPI for all my news

Bubba is simply the best....:notworthy

....another thing....The Post shouldn't fool themselves and think that fans fail to recognize the spin they put on Redskin news. I would not be mistaken as a member of the Dan Snyder fan club by any means (though he is making some pretty good strides in my eyes over the last 12-16 months)...but it's pretty obvious they take every effort to spin Snyder in a negative light any chance they get.

Utah · May 7, 2005

What I like is the freedom of press argument for Pro Football.

The fans have the right to know.

When it comes to what a fan would spend money on, sure I can see that and only fair.

To what actually the Redskins are doing behind closed doors? Kinda of defeats what Sport is all about if you ask me.

Next, they'll feel that we should at least be given glimpse of what the team plans on doing the next week.

Yeeesh.

bulldog · May 7, 2005

the Washington Post has little credibility with any audience in re the Skins.

critics from one side accused the paper of planting fluff pieces for Snyder when he first bought the team and the feud was running with the Times.

now, after the Post gets jilted after the Demasio articles on Coles, they go on the attack and are viewed by the other half of readers as having a bias against the team in its reporting going the other way.

the lesson for the Post is to be a credible news organization

If you are going to hold yourself out as a reporting organization and not a mouthpiece then report adverse news and events and don't flinch. At the same time don't be so hypocritical that you believe you are the ONLY sports reporters for Redskins fans.