The Coles Story and a Drive to Florida: An Interview with New York Times NFL Writer Karen Crouse
Media Interviews March 6th. 2008, 1:21pm
Two interesting nuggets before you dive into this week’s interview with New York Times NFL writer Karen Crouse: 1) It’s the first interview we’ve done with anyone from the NYT since Dec. of 2006, and 2) It’s the first interview we’ve done with a female sportswriter since Oct. of 2006. Crouse’s circuitous journey to the Times really is astonishing, as is the tale of how she landed the Laveranues Coles story. What’s disappointing is to hear the way her NFL colleagues refer to her writing. We couldn’t, however, get her to bite on our report from October that she was in talks with Sports Illustrated.
Q: In an industry where there aren’t many females, you have risen to a coveted beat (NFL) at the most prestigious paper in the country (NYT). Can you chronicle your rise from post-college to the Gray Lady?
The Times is the ninth paper I’ve worked for. When I told that to a group of young journalists recently, a few of them gasped. I think there’s this notion out there that there is an express train to the Times and if you miss it in your 20s, too bad, you’re out of luck. I’m proof that that isn’t the case.
When Tom Jolly, the sports editor at the Times, called me in February 2005 to ask if I’d be interested in interviewing for an N.F.L. beat at the paper, I was really surprised. I spent almost 20 years working in L.A. for other papers in what was essentially a one-paper market. That left me feeling as if I was flying so far under the radar I was practically invisible. I’ve never been a shouter or a self-promoter, and in a profession rife with both, I thought that being conscientious and doing good work would only get me so far, that to ascend any higher required politicking or some secret handshake or both.
When I interviewed at the Times, it didn’t even matter if I got the job. It felt like a huge victory just to be in the mix - like the wallflower getting asked to the prom by the most popular boy in school.
I’ve survived just enough turbulence in my professional life to really, really appreciate where I am now. In 1988 I accepted a position over the phone to work at a paper in Florida because it seemed like a better option than the part-time job I had at an afternoon paper in northern California. The editor asked me how quickly I could start. I found out later he was trying to squeeze me in through a window of opportunity that was closing fast. I packed my worldly belongings and drove straight through to Florida, making it in two-and-a-half days.
When I arrived, the editor was red-faced and apologetic. He told me a hiring freeze had taken effect the previous day, just as he had feared. I’ll never forget the subsequent meeting I had with this editor and his boss, who said it was my problem that I drove all the way to Florida “in the hopes†of being offered a job. Apparently the editor who hired me, in order to save his hide, denied having ever hired me. It was his word against mine.
I was unemployed for four long months, and during that time I seriously questioned whether I was cut out for this profession. I applied to be a Club Med swim instructor and received my Club Med placement and an offer to work part-time in sports at the Riverside Press-Enterprise on the same day. It sounds funny now but I thought long and hard before choosing the Press-Enterprise over Club Med.
During that time I was between jobs, I put together a clip package and met with the man who was then the dean of journalism at my alma mater, U.S.C. I asked him if he had any advice to offer. He told me my “problem†was that I had “wasted†all my summers in college swimming when I could have been doing internships. I left his office knowing one thing for sure - if he thought the years I spent swimming competitively were a waste of time, then he didn’t understand the value of sports at all.
I accepted a full-time gig covering high schools at the Los Angeles Herald-Examiner in the summer of 1988 and I was there, in 1989 when the paper stopped publishing. It felt like the end of the world at the time but I was lucky; the climate was different then than now, when good journalists are losing jobs left and right. I only thought I’d never land another journalism job. In fact, I found a safe landing within a month at the Orange County Register, where I spent the next seven years covering the UCLA beat, the Mighty Ducks and the Olympics.
In 1997 I was hired to write a column for the Los Angeles Daily News. I probably would have stayed there until Dean Singleton axed my job if Tim Burke hadn’t come along and rescued me, a damsel who didn’t even know she was in distress. Tim was then the sports editor at the Palm Beach Post - he’s now an assistant managing editor at the paper — and he shared my enthusiasm for looking at sports coverage as much more than statistics and games. He offered me a column job in the summer of 2001. I tried to talk myself out of it because at the end of the day I loved L.A., enjoyed the people and teams I was covering and had carved out a niche as a columnist there.
But the Daily News’s then-executive editor, Dave Butler, bless him, made it impossible for me to stay. When I told him about the job at the Palm Beach Post - more money, more high-profile assignments — and asked why I should stay, he might have said because I was valued at the paper or had connected with the readers. If he had, I probably could have somehow rationalized staying. But his answer cut me to the core. “L.A. market,†he said.
I lived 65 miles from the office and I remember crying the whole way home because I really, really didn’t want to leave Southern California. But I owe Dave a huge debt of gratitude because the Palm Beach Post was a great move. The Post restored my love of journalism by returning it in kind. For the first time in a long while, my love for writing was not unrequited.
The work I did at the Post is what put me on the Times’s radar. After I accepted the Jets job, I heard from people who took me to task for giving up a column when there are so few women sports columnists to begin with. I understood completely where they were coming from. Nobody knew better than I what a privilege it was to occupy that prime piece of real estate. I had worked so hard to reach that place, it was very difficult to give it up to go back on a beat.
But I’ve always felt like the only way you grow as a person is to push yourself beyond your comfort zone and moving to New York to cover the Jets was really, really removed from my comfort zone.
Q: Favorite part of covering the beat? Least favorite?
The worst part was having to spend every Monday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday in that press room, which was everything I was told to expect - and then some. My favorite part was the interaction with the players. The players were my salvation. They treated me with kindness and respect and entrusted me with their stories and, boy, did some of them have some amazing stories.
Q: The Laveranues Coles story has to be one of the most memorable NFL stories in recent years. Can you walk us through how you handled such a delicate subject?
The piece I wrote about Laveranues being abused as a child meant a lot to me. The transition to New York had been difficult, as most transitions are, but after that I sort of felt like Mary Richards at WJM: you know, you’re going to make it after all. To this day I don’t know what led Laveranues to entrust me with his story. I’m pretty sure he didn’t wake up the morning of our interview thinking this was going to be the day he shared his secret with the world.
We were barely into the first month of the regular season and I hadn’t said much to him to that point beyond hello. But he agreed to sit down with me, and for whatever reason we sort of hit it off in that first interview. We talked for nearly an hour and in that time Laveranues went over the well-worn terrain of his past without a hint of what was to come. I was actually wrapping things up when I asked the question that led him to reveal that he had been sexually abused as a child.
Over the next week-and-a-half, I continued to write some daily Jets stories but I also went back to Laveranues four more times to draw out more details of his story. It wasn’t easy, and every time I approached him I was sure he was going to say, “You know what, I’ve had time to think about this and I’ve changed my mind and I don’t want you to print what I told you,†I was prepared for that, absolutely. I would have been okay with whatever he decided because at the end of the day it was Laveranues’s story, not mine. He was the one who had to live with the repercussions. But in the meantime, I had to keep asking the questions. I felt a huge responsibility to make sure the reporting was thorough and that I got the story right.
I didn’t sleep at all the three nights before it ran. I was so worried that Laveranues would face a backlash from his peers and fans after the story was published and come to regret that he had told me what had happened. But it was quite the opposite - the publication of the story seemed to help Laveranues come out of his shell. His personal transformation the past two seasons was remarkable, a real joy to behold. He went from being someone who avoided reporters like the plague to being voted this year as the team’s most accessible and quotable player. Very cool.
Q: With the way the NFL has been cracking down on access to locker rooms, and seeing how MLB appears intent on doing the same thing, how soon are we to an era when athletes do most of their communicating with fans and the media through their own blogs or websites?
I don’t think we’re ever going to become irrelevant, if that’s what you’re asking. [Ed. It wasn't.] Every player has a story but we’re the ones trained to pull it out of him or her. Athletes are conditioned not to be introspective, introspection being the enemy of performance. Athletes can keep a blog or maintain their own Web site, but how many are going to use that forum to share something that may be awkward to bring up but is deeply affecting - like David Barrett’s story of having a mother who has been a missing person for 28 years or Erik Coleman’s story of having a mom who spent time in jail or Nick Mangold’s story of having a younger sister who looks up to him so much she plays on the offensive line of her high-school team?
Q: From all you’ve heard and you’ve read about the rabid, overzealous, demanding NYC media and having now been a part of the inner circle, is all that stuff overhyped or can it really get nasty with one another?
Well, I spent a few days covering the Mets recently and all the beat writers were as nice as can be. But I guess that’s not what you’re asking. It has gotten back to me that some of my esteemed colleagues on the Jets beat referred to my writing as the “Lifetime Channel†coverage, the “Oprah treatment,†and such. To which I can only say, Thank-you and God bless.
The sportswriters I grew up admiring - Jim Murray, Frank Deford, Craig Neff, Mike Downey - all displayed a deft human touch. When I interviewed for the job, I told Tom that if he was looking for someone to cover the beat the same old way, I wasn’t his person. I wanted to take the beat somewhere else, go beyond the Xs and Os and humanize the players, paint them with a different brush, give readers a picture of who these people are behind their helmets and their padding and all of football’s macho posturing.
I had a nice talk recently with someone who said Tom Jolly deserves a lot of credit for giving me the leeway to cover the beat the way I did. I couldn’t agree more. There are editors who would rather see their beat writers deliver the same story as everybody else than go off in another direction. To each his own. My take on it is this: There are plenty of news sources for fans wanting to learn the intricacies of the 3-4 defense or track the latest rumors from unidentified sources.
On an uneventful news day, if it comes down to talking to a player’s agent for a story or a player’s relative, I’m inclined to go with the relative. Nine times out of 10, the mother/father/brother/sister is going to give you a more interesting, more nuanced story.
Q: Is there an encounter with an athlete you’d rather forget?
I can’t think of any off-hand. I have a genuine respect and affection for athletes, having once been one at a fairly high level. I was a swimming walk-on at U.S.C., in the 1980s, a nobody on a team with world-record holders and Olympic medalists (I’m pretty sure they kept me to raise the team G.P.A.!) In high school and college I hung around enough world-caliber athletes to know that winning isn’t always healthy and that an awful lot of work goes into making an athletic performance look effortless.
I saw plenty of extremely talented athletes and really hard workers never get their star turns and I became sort of fascinated by the psychological component of success. Why do some people rise to the occasion while others stumble? What makes people perform the way they do under pressure? What drives people to excel? I’ve spent my entire working life asking those questions in one form or another. [Ed. Great Gladwell piece on this topic.]
Q: What do you feel is the single-largest impediment slowing the progress of women in sports journalism today? How can this hurdle be cleared?
More women in management positions would certainly help, but how do we keep women in the business long enough to achieve that? It’s a real conundrum. When I’m in press boxes these days, I look around and invariably find myself wondering, Where have all the women gone? There seem to be fewer now - especially at “major†events like the World Series and Super Bowl — than 20 years ago when I was starting out. I don’t know how to explain it, except to say there are some papers - including a few I’ve worked for - where if they have one woman on the writing staff, they feel no need to hire another.
Maybe young women look at the unbalanced lives so many of us lead and think, forget that — I want children, I want weekends off, I want to make decent money! But seriously, I marvel at people like Linda Robertson, Paola Boivin, Michelle Kaufman, Tammy Nunez, Michelle Hiskey, Susan Degnan Miller, Kristin Huckshorn and Sandy Keenan who are juggling child-rearing and writing or editing and doing a great job at both. I have no earthly idea how they do it. They definitely make it look a lot easier than it is.
Perhaps there aren’t more women in sports journalism today because the pool of Superwomen is not that deep. Writing can be such a time-swallowing occupation if you let it. I know I struggle mightily to carve out nicely crafted stories AND a life. If my husband had a dollar for every time we’ve had dinner plans and I’ve told him, “I’m almost done, just a few more minutes,” only to emerge an hour later, he’d be Donald Trump.
77 Responses to “The Coles Story and a Drive to Florida: An Interview with New York Times NFL Writer Karen Crouse”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.

March 6th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
the part about the Laverneus Coles story was pretty interesting. you always think about what its like for an athlete to deal with things being written about them, but you rarely think of what it’s like for the writer to cope with exposing someone like that.
March 6th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Saw the photo, immediately skipped to the bottom of the page to put in a snarky comment, then saw TBL’s warning. Fine, I’ll move along.
March 6th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
It’s a sad commentary on the newspaper business when the NYT is considered the “most prestigious” paper in the country.
March 6th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
I was apparently either too fast or the cause of the warning or both. No more snarky comments from me on this post.
March 6th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
@Mike: What is wrong with the NYT?
March 6th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
@ Mike NYC:
Why? Because they cover everything in the world, and well? What is your pick for the most prestigious paper in the country?
March 6th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
Great interview. That Coles story was one of the very few GREAT pieces of journalism I’ve read in the last 5+ years. For LC to publicly admit that he had was a survivor of sexual abuse is infinitely more courageous than anything he has done or will ever do on the football field. The cultural environment he works in is so over-the-top masculine and aggressive you never know how people are going to treat you or what they will say about you.
Prior to that piece, I only knew LC as “troub” and thought he was just another FSU football miscreant. The story gave me a new understanding and a respect for him.
Karen’s piece on LC was riveting. Sports journalism at its finest.
March 6th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Well said Rabid
March 6th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
This was a cool interview. I’d be interested in any more detail you have on this point from the intro:
Any examples?
March 6th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
broseph…there you go.
March 6th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
I’m waiting for TBL to interview a journalist from that upstanding news organization, Al Jazeera.
/not a fan of the “Old Gray Lady”
March 6th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
@ spencer
Thanks. Me not so good with the words reading.
March 6th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
it ok, neither is i
March 6th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
It leans too far to the right.
/
March 6th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Here is my Thing with the Times…I still think their news gathering and investigative reporting is tops…Washington Post is on its level…a lot of people associate the op-ed portion of the paper to the actual news portion (its the price you pay when you make your opinions known)…sometimes its easy to connect the dots and sometimes people connect the dots because they are looking to justify something they don’t want to hear…as for the Times sports section…it is not the first place I would go to get the information first but they do go out and get some in depth stuff that other papers don’t have room for or want to tell.
March 6th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
brospeh: “…some of my esteemed colleagues on the Jets beat referred to my writing as the “Lifetime Channel†coverage, the “Oprah treatment,†and such.
March 6th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Yeah, keep it clean here. This isn’t the withleather.com
withleather is cleaner than this site KC
March 6th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Has Ufford ever interviewed a journalist on his site? No, scratch that…has Ufford ever actually read a newspaper?
March 6th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Can’t believe you secured an interview with Ric Bucher. Very interesting.
March 6th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
Fellas…
March 6th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
+1 Nick … still laughing
March 6th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Cue TBL’s ‘I can’t have anything nice!’ post in three…two…one…
March 6th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
Great interview TBL. It seems her time as an athlete at USC helped her become a better journalist. Kudos to you Karen.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
Love these journalist Q&As TBL. Keep up the good work.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
I echo what others say–love the interviews. Good job, TBL. I also like when AJC writers are mentioned in these as quality writers. Sometimes I get spoiled with them. The AJC columnists suck, but the beat writers and feature writers are top notch. Not that anyone outside of Atlanta cares…
March 6th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Isn’t it a bit hypocritical to allow endless comments about hot chicks only to censor comments about ugly chicks (I can’t see the image, btw) simply because they participate in an interview with you? Objectifying women is cool until you say it’s not? That seems anything but “stubbornly unbeholden.”
I’m a big fan of the site, but that’s a weak move, imo.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Rock Strongo, my thoughts exactly.
I refrained per TBL’s request but I found it pretty ironic.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Rock - Never said anything about objectifying women. Think of it this way - a classroom where we do slide shows all the time, watch movies, talk smack, and anything goes. But when we have a guest lecture series, not anything goes.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
rock- couldnt agree with you more. i guess #2 and #3 were okay by what TBl thinks
March 6th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Rock Strongo, beat me to it. People rip to shreds and scrutinize any pic of a woman posted here, be it positively (most of the time) or negatively. Yet this one is off limits? Just cause you interviewed her? Either don’t post her pic, or let the comments commence as usual. People will make the jokes and it will die out soon enough. I’m sure the commentators enjoyed the interview and you’ll get plenty of comments on that too.
Since when is TBL censoring its comments? If you don’t like the inevitable jokes about a woman’s appearance, maybe you should think about doing something about the entire culture of commenting on blogs. But that’s a topic for another time.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
That was a fantastic article! I must admit I am close minded in the sense that I can not stand most woman in a Men’s professional sports setting, e.g. Suzyn Waldman. But truth be told, Coles could not have picked a better writer to tell his story! Fantastic story Karen Crouse!
March 6th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
I’m with TBL here, gang. It’s one thing to break each others’ balls and make crude comments about the Jenn Stergers and Kim K’s of the world, but when someone is kind enough to grant TBL an interview some decorum is in order.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
I don’t seem to recall a similar order to refrain from the fat jokes re: Brian Windhorst.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
“Attention customers: Testicles. That is all.”
March 6th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
You might not of said anything about objectification, but you do it all the time. The Reggie Look Out for that Caboose post is a perfect example.
I just don’t think you can have it both ways. If you want to post pictures of that pole vaulting girl and discuss her hotness ad nauseum, I’ve got no problem with that. But then to say that sometimes you’re not going to allow those comments is hypocritical. There’s no two ways around it.
All I’m saying is that you should pick a standard and own it. If the way people (especially women) look is going to be a topic of discussion, go with it. But if you find those comments unsavory enough to preclude them in some situations, then make a change. You’re obviously aware that comments objectifying women can be hurtful and embarrassing, as you’re disallowing those comments in this instance for that very reason, so why pick and choose when you’re going to allow that? Run with it or don’t.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Great interview. Great journalist.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Rock - There’s a chasm of difference between talking about a celebrity and a female journalist. Surely you understand that. When it gets to matters of non-famous people (ie Pole Vaulter) you’re reaching more of a gray area.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
My 2 cents. As a frequent reader, I want more interviews like this, and I don’t want posters standing in the way of getting top-flight journalists to come here and share their stories.
Don’t turn this into a federal case.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
who would name their son karen?
March 6th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
thats right im a rebel. and how would you like your comments section tblfiltered or unfiltered? i believe you asked me the same question when you ran that story about cornhusker women’s volleyball and i found it kinda lame.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
If you’re going to consider Berman & Simmons etc to be “celebrities” (which is how seems to Leitch justifies his posts), then the same standard should apply to NYT writers as well.
At the same time, I agree w/ 412 - a little decency never hurt anyone.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
TBL is on a slippery slope but I do agree with his intentions and overall stance…with that said @ mrejr8234 thats effing funny!
March 6th, 2008 at 3:52 pm
I see both sides of the argument so basically this is a Kobe/LeBron debate.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:52 pm
“which is how seems to Leitch justifies” = which is how Leitch seems to justify
/I’m an idiot
March 6th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
I’m with TBL here also, and I’d echo the guest lecturer comment.
No need to get into semantics. But if I were going to get into semantics, I’d suggest that a lot of people don’t understand the nuanced definition of the word hypocrite, and it gets used incorrectly way too often.
For example, like when Rock Strongo uses it above.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
well if comment for one woman are off limits then no more comments for any other women. plain and simple.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
TBL:
Comments on pole vaulter could be just as embarrassing and offensive to said pole vaulter as potential ones in this post can be to the journalist. How do you know pole vaulter wasn’t reading your site at the time, considering that blogs pretty much made her popular, and yours is one of the most famous around? Agree with Strongo on all counts: either allow them or not.
jasonwhitlock:
I like the interviews as much as the next guy, and if you think journalists will refrain from giving interviews to TBL because of some of the posters’ remarks (I kinda agree with that sentiment actually), then it’s up to TBL to clean it up.
Can’t have us be clowns saying whatever we want the other 28 days of the month and once every two weeks expect us to hold back and be civil. I personally wouldn’t mind being more civil on a regular basis, but such is the nature of the beast.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
@ Risk: “Nunanced” definition? Please expound further on the use of the word “nuanced”…
March 6th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
So is Erin Andrews not a journalist?
I also don’t have any interest in making a federal case, but I don’t believe there is a difference. If Crouse agreed to do the interview, I imagine that she’s at least glanced at the site a few times. If that’s the case, I can only assume that she’s read some of the discussions about women that frequently grace these digital pages. To follow this logic out, if she’s
a) read the site
b) agreed to do an interview
Then …
c) she must not have much of an issue with the discussion.
It’s your site and you should do with it what you please, all I’m saying is that your stance is hypocritical.
By the way, it’s also a bit ironic that you ask about the lack of female sports journalists. It’s obviously a multi-faceted issue, but perhaps it could have something to do with the way that we male fans treat women on things like … sports blogs?
March 6th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
hypocrite: 1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
I just dont see how a definiton of a word can be nuanced? Especially a word like hypocrite
March 6th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
if the journalists dont like what is said about them by people who should have no relevance to them then i suggest they go to the wizard of oz and get them a heart. your a public person now ..dont be surprised when people either dont like you or make fun of you. i mean she has to know that the hair cut makes her look like a dude. is that what she was going for? and also she should have came to the tbl website and seen how the commentors comment on things. if she doesnt like it then so what? and as has been stated before censoring comments on a person that tbl interviewed because they talked to you isnt exactly stubbornly uncorrupted and unbeholden is it?
March 6th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
As far as I can tell, TBL has stated to refrain from making inane comments about “guests” of the blog. And he has refrained from doing so himself. So in that sense, he’s not being a hypocrite. (He is saving the inane comments for public figures/non-guests of the blog).
I believe that’s what RISK was getting at, though again, I can see both sides.
March 6th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
The non-sensical guest lecturer analogy would make a lot more sense if every day that there wasn’t an interview we were learning about journalism and how to conduct interviews instead of making dick jokes and quoting movies. There shouldn’t be a huge backlash to the posts here when 100% of the other posts with women in them, whether they be celebrities, quasi-celebrities, journalists, or presidential candidates contain dick jokes and remarks about their relative attactiveness/non-attractiveness.
March 6th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
If you guys get my name then its obvious I listen to Howard Stern ( a lot) and you can bet the house if he ever got a Hillary Clinton to do his show, he would not allow one caller through with a lesbian comment or cankle comment…
March 6th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
thats because hillary would have them tracked down and killed
March 6th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
That is direct interaction with the person in question. This is reaction to posted information. If Stern had Clinton on and then posted a transcript on his blog (if he had/has one) and then he became upset when some people called her a raging lesbian, wouldn’t it seem a bit odd?
March 6th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Erin Andrews? You mean the woman who is uploaded onto You Tube on a nightly basis? The one who poses for photos with kids and fans? The one who is on TV 2-3 nights a week?
Guys - come on. Be serious. You can’t tell the difference between “famous” and non-famous? Who is inbounds and out of bounds?
March 6th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
@O Qua: What about when Wayne Campbell had the owner of Noah’s Arcade on his show? He wrote horrible things about the man on his cue cards, and I didn’t see TBL outcry against that.
March 6th, 2008 at 4:29 pm
I don’t think I understand what you’re getting at TBL. It’s fine to comments on what famous people look like, but not ok to comment on what not-famous people look like? That seems specious at best. Making a distinction between television and print media in order to determine which are fair game when it comes to discussing apperance seems odd.
Censoring comments in this instance doesn’t really have anything to do with being famous or not. You understandably don’t want to upset someone who was kind enough to give you a great interview, so you’re changing your standard of decorum. It is what it is.
I guess the question I would ask is: If Erin Andrews agreed to do an interview with you, would you allow any and all comments?
March 6th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
unbeholden - adjective - free of moral obligation.
March 6th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
Wait, so it’s only OK to comment on famous peoples’ appearance now?
March 6th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
that “unbeholden” line stopped applying a long time ago guys. Things change when you blow up.
March 6th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
the reason at least for me anyways that people come to this site is because we can comment any way we want and wont be censored. when comments start being censored this site will just be another site. if i want to be censored on my comments then i will go to espn.com. go with what works tbl. and censoring comment about people isnt what works for this site.
March 6th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
Since when has the chick who played Webster’s mom been writing about sports?
March 6th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
@Nick P. : Im not aware of that incident and Im not sure we could compare Wayne Campbell to Howard Stern though…
March 6th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
+1 Nick…thats good stuff!!
March 6th, 2008 at 5:20 pm
Elitist NYT reactionary liberal, boy that’s a unique viewpoint.
March 6th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
I’m with TBL on encouraging decorum, but not necessarily on deleting comments (at least in this post).
If the goal is to have meaningful discussion about the post topic, then a moderated chat or having a specific post with the disclaimer that the comments will be monitored for relevance might be your option. Basically, for a couple posts a week you have to say, “Let’s get serious, guys”– so if you had a post about race in the sports media and discussed SAS, you wouldn’t end up with 100 “Cheez Doodles” comments in a row. That said, I propose the first of these moderated forums focus on Cheryl Cole’s horrible taste in body art.
March 6th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
Rock - I respect some of your points, but this is one subjective argument we will disagree with.
We have always held the policy - no different from many other blogs/message boards - that personal attacks against private people will not be tolerated (nor will racism and other issues). We had to repeatedly delete comments of one poster in the past because of this, and eventually, he left.
If you want to debate whether or not a journalist is a private/public person, feel free. You can take them on a case by case basis. This has nothing to do with anyone who gives an interview to this website. As others have said, decorum is a word that fits.
Despite a high-profile NFL job at the top paper in the country, Crouse a) is not on TV, b) does not have her mugshot in the paper, c) all over google image. If you disagree with her points, fine. Make a case.
March 6th, 2008 at 6:20 pm
TBL, your argument is flawed. She is not a private person because she has, and I quote, “…a high-profile NFL job at the top paper in the country…” and that makes her famous, and that makes her subject to the same rules as all the other people we mock on this site.
What difference should it make if her picture has been up a lot before or whether or not she’s been on TV as to whether or not she is open to mocking? As long as I’m not on TV you cannot mock me, but if I am on TV, then I’m fair game? That makes zero sense.
I’ll leave the logical end to my argument as to why you have so throughly defended this particular object of our mockery in the e-mail that I sent you during our discourse today, but you know what I’m talking about.
March 6th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
Then we agree to disagree. I apologize if some of my comments have come off as ball-busting. These are just the kind of issues that I like to debate.
I don’t have any problem with anything she states. And I agree about decorum, though I would argue that it’s necessary all the time, not just when it behooves you. This gets back to what I was saying a few days ago regarding male sports fans being pandered to re: scantily clad women talking about fantasy sports. I think we should try to be aspire as sports fans to be something better than horny, knuckle-dragging chauvinists.
I’m also guessing that if people had said nice things about Mrs. Crouse’s appearance you wouldn’t have minded, but that’s just a guess.
And the more I think about it, the more I think you’re doing a disservice to Mrs. Crouse by not letting people comment as they see fit. You’ve allowed comments regarding appearance when you’ve conducted these interviews with male sports writers. But when it’s a woman you decide that she has to be shielded from the same criticism? Though I’m sure Crouse wouldn’t relish people making fun of her appearance, I imagine she would ultimately prefer to be treated the same way as her male counterparts.
So when that Erin Andrews interview comes to fruition, can Irish comment on her Godzilla biscuits?
March 6th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
I’m sorry TBL, and i’m with you in most of the things you said and i think this comments should have a little more “taste” because it’s a “guest”, but your argument about not making comments about “non-famous” people is a little strange because you posted the “Pole-Vaulter” a couple of days ago. Is this girl famous, just because bloggers tend to stare at her picture? She’s not more famous than Karen Crouse…a NYT writer…
March 6th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
I dont think any of the comments here should be censored anymore than the comments on the other posts. Karen is a great journalist who was a top-notch athlete and has dealt with guys with gargantuan balls and wallets. I would be disappointed if she were hurt or offended by anything some ugly loser-poster said here. Trust me clowns, all of these insulting posts were expected and, objectively speaking, none were particularly creative or funny. Seriously. They just illustrate precisely how dull you really are.
How about this. Post your pics online and let us make comments about you. Geezus, can you imagine the response that would get?
March 6th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
@rabid: I thought my comparison to Ric Bucher was particularly creative, but what do I know — I’m just an ugly loser-poster.
March 6th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
rabid: I would post my pic, but I’m a private, non-famous person, so personal attacks on me will not be tolerated per TBL’s rules.
March 6th, 2008 at 8:29 pm
Rabid? Speak for yourslf dude…If you are butt ugly and aware of it ……Well, that’s you.
Many times I’ve come here and seen women treated like things in the comment section. I have been VERY close to condemning everyone here for the PIGS you are….Then I realized, hey, TBL allows it…in fact they pander to it so I either leave or roll with it.
Therefore am with Rock on this 100%….We may come here and support you, but we are not beholden to you…..You can’t ask people to stop doing what they’ve been doing just because you like someone or feel the need to to protect them as guest. Every person that is commented on here has friends, admirers, family or peers who may come here…..If you are fine with the way posters behave then…Then you should be fine with it here. Otherwise clean up the damn site.
March 6th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
I know it’s easier to sleep at night when you’re not confronted with the fact that quite a bit of your audience, and the vast majority of your regular commenters, are the scum of the Earth, but if you’re going to stick to this whole sports blogging thing, you might want to check ebay for refurbished MiB gear.