Writer Suspended for Comments About Rival Paper
Uncategorized December 7th. 2007, 12:35pm
Surprising news out of DC – we’ve got it on good authority that John Mitchell of the Washington Times, who has dominated the Wizards beat for the last few years, has been suspended by his paper for one game (tonight’s Suns-Wizards tilt) for comments he made last week about a Washington Post column on Sean Taylor. After Washington Post writer Len Shapiro penned this vitriolic column about just-deceased Taylor, Mitchell went on WOL-AM radio said the column was “bigoted, racist garbage.” He then called Shapiro “a racist conniving dog of a skunk” and went on to say, “Everything he writes … is inaccurate. No research, it’s just lazy. When’s the last time Leonard Shapiro broke anything? He’s just an old white guy hanging on.”
After reading the column, these criticisms seem fair, right?
Except that the Washington Times is a neo-conservative paper, and the executive editor is rumored to have a large photo of Robert E. Lee and other confederate generals hanging on the wall of his office. What’s even worse about this silly suspension is that Washington Post writers knew about it before Mitchell.
17 Responses to “Writer Suspended for Comments About Rival Paper”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
December 7th, 2007 at 12:37 PM
Defined as?
December 7th, 2007 at 12:42 PM
Karl “MC” Rove is a huge fan of Nick Young.
December 7th, 2007 at 12:47 PM
as a right-learning person, i can tell you the washington times is conservative… and a friggin’ rag.
the washington post is the best paper in the nation.
December 7th, 2007 at 12:58 PM
I don’t know, TBL–a one-game suspension is essentially ceremonial. Sounds more to me like the WaPo complained to the Times about it behind the scenes, and the Washington Times decided to give Mitchell the one-game suspension just to shut up the WaPo. I mean, you’d figure if they were really upset, they would have suspended him for a week or more, right?
December 7th, 2007 at 1:03 PM
“a racist conniving dog of a skunk”
That’s an interesting string of words. Not sure what it means, but what the hell? It’s good reading.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:09 PM
I live in DC and am a subscriber of the Post. Every time I hear something about the times, I am always amazed that they even are still afloat. It is such a shitty biased paper and usually read only by people who think that Bush is a great president.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:13 PM
Bush Co, Christian Right, NeoCon, Liberal Jews, Left wing loonies……. Seriously, how annoying, and utterly lazy is it to paint a broad brush when you have no mind of your own. It’s sickening to me when people write, or use any of the above descriptions to talk about someone, or some institutions personal opinions.
All are personal attacks, and glib cheap shots that cause divisional gaps in beliefs that we dont need as a country divided.
Personally I think the suspension was without warrant, and should have been lobbied in the opposite direction. Mitchell was spot on with his description of Shapiro, and Shapiro should be shunned for his attack on Sean Taylor.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:27 PM
I just read the article by Shapiro, and really, I thought it was fair. I didn’t care for the title, I think that was a little too strong, but I didn’t get the feeling that the column was “bigoted, racist garbage.” Many talk shows and other columnists have essentially said the same thing… that Taylor’s past was likely to blame for his untimely demise.
It was well-known that Taylor played football at Miami, which doesn’t exactly have a squeaky clean rep, he ran with a bad crowd at one time, he was known for rough and dirty hits on the field.
How exactly is it racist to assume that his death was the result of his troubled past? By believing that theory, does that make me bigoted a racist? I should hope not because I’m not. But, if you have a history of drugs, using and dealing, and then 5 years later you are found shot dead in your house, is it or is it not fair to first assume this was a drug deal gone bad?
December 7th, 2007 at 1:37 PM
I guess Wilbon and Whitlock are racist, conniving, dogs of skunks or skunks of dogs too.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:42 PM
“Except that the Washington Times is a neo-conservative paper…”
And? How does that work into the story, other than to float your prejudices — in this case justified, but so what — about the political nature of the paper? All conservatives of any kind are all about the same, eh? Lazy thinking and writing. Your site usually is better than this.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:29 PM
pkiguy, what’s your point?
The Washington Post is a liberal paper, all newspapers have political leanings, with most of them being liberal.
Sounds like pot calling the kettle black to me
December 7th, 2007 at 2:55 PM
While I will not disagree with you on the fact that the post does tend to lean a little left, it still does TRY to be neutral. For lack of a better example, the times can be compared to Fox News. We all know that it is biased towards the right, but they still call themselves “fair and balanced”. The Times doesn’t even try. This paper has an agenda and it does not even pretend to be balanced. It has a target audience and it panders to them.
Anyone who says that this is “lazy”, should read the times for one week straight. It is a shoddy newspaper with terrible editors and a biased agenda. I don’t know how many times I have read an article out of that paper and found at least 3 or 4 spelling errors. I know that the average newspaper reads at a 4th grade level, but the Times takes that to a whole new level.
Blast me if you will, but that is just my opinion.
December 7th, 2007 at 3:20 PM
And the Robert E. Lee reference pertains to….?
You do realize the Civil War was fought over State’s rights…
I guess I better take down the Bonnie Blue flag in my office if ever I decide to write for a newspaper, etc.
December 7th, 2007 at 3:45 PM
I always turn to The Moonies for credible, responsible journalism.
December 7th, 2007 at 5:03 PM
For what it’s worth, I’ve talked to people who work in the sports and arts sections who say that they’ve never been pressured to slant any of their writing to fit the paper’s political leanings.
December 7th, 2007 at 9:51 PM
You do realize the Civil War was fought over State’s rights…
Sure it was. Just like WWII was about the geo-political sovereignty of European nations.
December 8th, 2007 at 1:22 AM
Just because Shapiro’s comments weren’t politically correct doesn’t make them wrong. I’m not saying Sean Taylor deserved what he got – nobody deserves that – but when you live that lifestyle, I would think the odds of dying in that manner are much greater.