Who can find all of the logical fallacies in Howard’s mental diarrhea?

As usual, I think the media are asking the wrong question/ reaching the wrong conclusion.

Simmons, Cox, McCowan, Berger et al aren’t widely read/listened to because of their perspective, insight or abilities.

They’re widely followed because they cover the Leafs and are in an extremely fortunate position to have access to the most popular sports franchise in the country.

Put them on the highschool sports beat and see what numbers they deliver.

With Cox and Berger on vacation who is become Chief Crazy Writer in TO? Simmons can’t do it with one brutal article a week can he?

the point that I found most glaringly omited is that while McCowan calls the Leaf fans stupid, and what not, he doesn’t flip flop all the time and take the side of the argument that is winning today

Seems to me like a self-obsessive reactionary rant to an identity crises, where one’s worst (best) qualities are what they’re (ashamed of) famous for.
Reminds me of an excellent post (by MF37) and discussion in the comments from about a month ago.

Strangely, I don’t really think that the media types are all that different from market to market. Moreso they (eventually) figure out what will get them the biggest readership, and follow accordingly. Leaf fans don’t need someone telling them the team is great to get worked up about it. We know the team isn’t great. Hasn’t been great for a long, long time. Telling us the straight facts won’t boost circulation, so going extra negative to incur wrath and rancor (and get the contrarians on their side, you know, the guys from Toronto who actively post on hockey boards with such insights as “THE LAFFS SUCK LOL”) seem to be the ticket.

In Vancouver, the hockey writers are definitely no more clever or skilled than the ones in Toronto, yet they know if they go negative the fans will just get complete disheartened and walk away from the team completely. Thus, they rely on the pumping up of the various figures (Luongo = God, Naslund = was a damn fine captain etc) and glossing over any of the terrible shortcomings of the team (goals go where, exactly?).

If I recall correctly from my time in Ottawa and Calgary, the media was more quiet determination that things aren’t that bad (Iginla! Alfredsson!) with players such as Yashin getting a pretty soft ride up until their unceremonious departure. Rarely were GM moves scrutinized or critiqued by the press. Course I was in both markets when they were pretty woeful.

You know, I actually like negative coverage when its warranted. We’re dealing with a last place team here, they should be ripped for their screwups. The alternative is what we get up here in Ottawa: non-stop pom pom waving from guys like Bruce Garrioch. It gets old in a hurry (although Sens fans generally lap it up).

My problem with Cox, and to a lesser extent Berger and Simmons, is that it’s the same script every time. You know what Cox is going to write before you pick up the paper. It’s paint-by-numbers at this point. The “blame the dumb fans” schtick has been done so many times that people have stopped noticing that it doesn’t even make sense (stop buying tickets so there will be empty seats? There’s an 18-year wating list for pete’s sake!). It’s the same column with a few words changed, like a lazy sportswriter’s version of mad-libs.

The one area where I’ll give Berger credit is that, unlike Cox and some others, I never feel like his rants are based on his personal preferences for the players. Cox clearly has his favorites (Sundin, Kaberle) and his targets (Fletcher, Tucker, Domi, anyone else who fights, anyone else who ducks out of a single interview) based on his past interactions, and he will carry those grudges into the ground with him when he dies. Howard doesn’t seem to hate anyone except those dumb fans.

I guess he’s just got one of those unfortunate jobs from the old joke: it would be great work if we could only get rid of all those darn paying customers.

I went on a tour of the Star earlier this year and spoke to their media relations, PR staff member about inaccuracies and potential for libel in the newspaper world. Unless I heard incorrectly, which I don’t think so since I asked the question, syndicated columns that Simmons, Cox, Berger, et al. have are not subject to the same libel rules as feature stories, front page news, etc. They can essentially write whatever they want because their columns are basically opinion.

Simmons’ rants (scribbles) at the back page, Cox’s columns + blogs (who am I kidding, they’re the same thing), and Berger’s “musings” (since we’ve already seen Berger issue an apology over the Avery-Blake matter when he actually has to report) are pretty much off-limits for courts because they’re not presented as the truth. They’re just one person’s interpretation. Thus, is it to anyone’s surprise the lack of accountability with not only the sports content, but the media in general?

Unfortunately, the onus is on the reader to know that these columns are not all factually-based articles that represent the entire truth. So, fans are idiots for not knowing that these reporters who have the greatest media access to the Leafs and subsequently write about them can’t be taken at face value? Seems logical to me.

I am not saying anything since I am far removed from Toronto media and I do not read any of these guys. Good thing, I suppose since it may make me even more stabby than usual idoits.