Ethics and the NASCAR Citizen Journalists Media Corp

dpkimmel2001 said:
Sorry, I can't buy into that line of thought. I watched Pit Bull and I also listened to David Poole from the day he started on TMD to the day he died. He wasn't a NASCAR 'yes man' by any stretch of the imagination yet he was hired to be the morning host for NASCAR Radio. Even the day of his death he was lambasting NASCAR for the events the preceding weekend @ Talladega. Do I think NASCAR is happy about bad press, obviously not. Do I think that they had anything to do with the firing of Bowles, not at all.
Click to expand...

C'mon dp, you should've known the black helicopters would've started flying at some point of time.;)
 
dpkimmel2001 said:
Sorry, I can't buy into that line of thought. I watched Pit Bull and I also listened to David Poole from the day he started on TMD to the day he died. He wasn't a NASCAR 'yes man' by any stretch of the imagination yet he was hired to be the morning host for NASCAR Radio. Even the day of his death he was lambasting NASCAR for the events the preceding weekend @ Talladega. Do I think NASCAR is happy about bad press, obviously not. Do I think that they had anything to do with the firing of Bowles, not at all.
Click to expand...

I liked David Poole, too.
 
not sure i accurately remember all the details, but i seem to recall the aformentioned Matt McLaughlin used to be involved in a nascar sponsored website and forum (RacingOne?) until his opinions got in the way of the france family business' propaganda.

then poof! he was gone.
 
dpkimmel2001 said:
Sorry, I can't buy into that line of thought. I watched Pit Bull and I also listened to David Poole from the day he started on TMD to the day he died. He wasn't a NASCAR 'yes man' by any stretch of the imagination yet he was hired to be the morning host for NASCAR Radio. Even the day of his death he was lambasting NASCAR for the events the preceding weekend @ Talladega. Do I think NASCAR is happy about bad press, obviously not. Do I think that they had anything to do with the firing of Bowles, not at all.
Click to expand...
I see your line of thinking and, of course, I stated only my personal opinion. But, let's look at SIRIUS for a second, OK?

First, I was on the road when SIRIUS began its designated NASCAR channel. Before that NA__AR was covered only by Moody on his p.m. show, right? They initially pair David with Marty Snyder, who admittedly had no history of covering motor sports and has a basketball reporter before he got on with Poole. Also the show which followed the morning NA__AR show was a pretty good one hosted by...? Jack Cern? I forget his name but he was a kinder, gentler version of Poole. Plus they had an evening show after Moody which was a good listen. Then in...? 2006 or 2007 SIRIUS affiliated with MRN and with the exception of Poole they axed most of the objective hosts and replaced them with the likes of Steve Post. Snyder was replaced by Mike Bagley (No big change except Bagley actually knew a little about racing!)
Then, when her contract expired at XM they picked up the ultimate in NA__AR shills, Clare B. Lang. Moody would on rare occasions push the envelope but he knew who paid him (MRN/ISC so he never crossed the line and became too controversial.

No, David Poole was no "Company man," as far s NA__AR goes, and I remember him saying more than once he didn't know how he kept his position at SIRIUS. He was an anomaly. But, after he passed you will notice that they replaced him with another NA__AR toady (Pistone, wasn't it?) and now the mantra is, as is song in Home On the Range, "Never is heard, A discouraging word, And the skies are not cloudy all day."

I will stand by my opinion and you can yours. Both are correct in our individual minds. Did NA__AR have a direct hand in Bowles ouster? Not a chance because he didn't work for them. But, I believe that it was made apparent to SI that NA__AR was less than thrilled about some of Tom's affiliations and associations, and being on NA__AR side had certain benefits. Remember, was in 2005 when NA__AR pulled the Daytona press creds of seven writers who had been critical of the recently devised playoff system (a.k.a. Chase)? I think Bowles firing was a sign to others to be more subjective in their coverage. Looking at the articles at jayski.com, I'd say the lesson was understood and learned.
 
klemmabyna said:
he worked nascar for espn during the 90's. pit reporter and rpm2nite host
Click to expand...

I know this.

All I'm saying is the series he covers (NHRA Full Throttle Drag Racing Series), he's around a bunch of people who have not one positive thing to say about roundy-round racing. You find me someone in the NHRA control tower, press box or paddock who has something positive to say about NASCAR and I'll be shocked.

It's a totally different world over there and that's where he's living.



And quite honestly, John Kernan and Bob Jenkins both don't have much positive things to say about NASCAR. I like them both, but it's better they stay in NHRA and IndyCar respectively.
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
I know this.

All I'm saying is the series he covers (NHRA Full Throttle Drag Racing Series), he's around a bunch of people who have not one positive thing to say about roundy-round racing. You find me someone in the NHRA control tower, press box or paddock who has something positive to say about NASCAR and I'll be shocked.

It's a totally different world over there and that's where he's living.



And quite honestly, John Kernan and Bob Jenkins both don't have much positive things to say about NASCAR. I like them both, but it's better they stay in NHRA and IndyCar respectively.
Click to expand...
Pretty Much. I think the Coughlin's are the only guys that really don't hate roundy-rounds, but that's only because it's one of their incomes.
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
And quite honestly, John Kernan and Bob Jenkins both don't have much positive things to say about NASCAR. I like them both, but it's better they stay in NHRA and IndyCar respectively.
Click to expand...
That's pretty much what the synopsis of Larry Mac's lecture during this year's Press Dog&Pony Show in Charlotte. If you don't like what NA__AR's doing, just keep your mouth shut. (Stay where you can be appreciative) Don't be objective; be subjective and don't make waves and say only nice things about what NA__AR produces. DO NOT be critical or questioning.
 
John Galt said:
That's pretty much what the synopsis of Larry Mac's lecture during this year's Press Dog&Pony Show in Charlotte. If you don't like what NA__AR's doing, just keep your mouth shut. (Stay where you can be appreciative) Don't be objective; be subjective and don't make waves and say only nice things about what NA__AR produces. DO NOT be critical or questioning.
Click to expand...

It's one thing to be objective and criticize (David Poole did it quite eloquently). It's another to go around and say you hate NASCAR and talk crap about NASCAR all the time and say "I like (this series) because it's better than NASCAR and I never liked NASCAR". If they hate NASCAR that much, then they're best where they're at. I haven't heard anything constructive from Jenkins or Kernan in years regarding NASCAR... just comments about how everything else is better than NASCAR.
 
AndyMarquisLive said:
And quite honestly, John Kernan and Bob Jenkins both don't have much positive things to say about NASCAR. I like them both, but it's better they stay in NHRA and IndyCar respectively.
Click to expand...

They aren't going to say many nice things because they lost their jobs when NASCAR decided not to go back to ESPN in the 2000 TV deal. So their opinions are a bit jaded.

I have heard that Bowles was already in some trouble with SI before the clapping story took place, that just happened to be the final straw for him.
 
MRM said:
They aren't going to say many nice things because they lost their jobs when NASCAR decided not to go back to ESPN in the 2000 TV deal. So their opinions are a bit jaded.

I have heard that Bowles was already in some trouble with SI before the clapping story took place, that just happened to be the final straw for him.
Click to expand...

Yep. First he reported that Mark Martin would be going to Red Bull (from my understanding he never contact Mark's PR reps, Hendrick or Red Bull Racing to get a verification or denial). Then when it was reported Mark would be staying, he reported Kasey Kahne was going to Phoenix Racing at a time where the team was destined to close up shop.
 
TexasRaceLady said:
I like Monte Dutton's article ---

http://www.gastongazette.com/sports/ethics-55581-professional-column.html
Click to expand...
Totally agree (but then I admit to having a pro-Monte Dutton bias), and Monte's final statement is especially germane.

I still content that Tom was a "Dead man walking" insofar as SI goes. I also stand by my reasoning for such in my first post in this thread, the tone of some of his articles and especially his associations put the cross-hairs squarely on his back. They were just looking for a reason to can his butt and he gave it to them.
 
Andy, if you ever get a chance and see Stan Creekmore, chat with him on this subject. You might have your eyes opened for a change and will see your own biases.
 
Just read Bob Pockrass' article about this at Scene Daily. I wanted to comment on the site, but don't care to register so I can't comment. But I can comment on his article here and will do so.

First off he says, as have others here, that a journalist shouldn't root for a driver in the press box. He says that a journalist can't show bias in his or her reporting. He says a journalist doesn't have to be a fan of NASCAR to report on it, just a passion for his work and his readers.

Well to that, I say BS. First off, it doesn't matter who you are, your biases will be included in your work, even if you try to hide them. All one has to do is read an article about any sport from a "journalist" that has a passion for another sport, but is asked to write about something he or she doesn't care about. We've seen this in various publications from Rolling Stone to Time magazines. The author's opinions are clear in the way the article is written. Yes, the article is written to a certain demography, but nonetheless, the biases are clear. We here in the Podium argue about what media outlet is more credible, yet that is all in the eyes of the beholder. Keeping that in mind, it's clear that the journalist will show his approval of certain drivers depending on where he, the journalist is from. You can bet that when any race has a Hispanic driver competing, the journalists from Mexico and below the US will show more passion for those Hispanic drivers. It's that way all over the world, and is that way in this country, depending on who, when and where. Passion, bias and opinions will always be a part of reporting. The reporters are human, not robots.
 
buckaroo said:
Andy, if you ever get a chance and see Stan Creekmore, chat with him on this subject. You might have your eyes opened for a change and will see your own biases.
Click to expand...
I like Stan, I got to talk to him for a day. I saw the "Competition Plus" bumper sticker on his laptop, and we sat there talking for awhile about pretty much everything. He's been the only reporter covering Kurt Busch's drag racing story.
 
buckaroo said:
Just read Bob Pockrass' article about this at Scene Daily. I wanted to comment on the site, but don't care to register so I can't comment. But I can comment on his article here and will do so.

First off he says, as have others here, that a journalist shouldn't root for a driver in the press box. He says that a journalist can't show bias in his or her reporting. He says a journalist doesn't have to be a fan of NASCAR to report on it, just a passion for his work and his readers.

Well to that, I say BS. First off, it doesn't matter who you are, your biases will be included in your work, even if you try to hide them. All one has to do is read an article about any sport from a "journalist" that has a passion for another sport, but is asked to write about something he or she doesn't care about. We've seen this in various publications from Rolling Stone to Time magazines. The author's opinions are clear in the way the article is written. Yes, the article is written to a certain demography, but nonetheless, the biases are clear. We here in the Podium argue about what media outlet is more credible, yet that is all in the eyes of the beholder. Keeping that in mind, it's clear that the journalist will show his approval of certain drivers depending on where he, the journalist is from. You can bet that when any race has a Hispanic driver competing, the journalists from Mexico and below the US will show more passion for those Hispanic drivers. It's that way all over the world, and is that way in this country, depending on who, when and where. Passion, bias and opinions will always be a part of reporting. The reporters are human, not robots.
Click to expand...

The key there is not show any biases you have. As soon as you do, you will be discredited.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom