Vancouver's Hockey "Media"

[wienerdog]

Agreement on the general state of the media. And, I applaud those who reject the dreck (1040 in particular), but my question is whether these outlets undermine the psychology of the team.

Does the media "undermine the psychology" of the public at large? IMO, it couldn't be more detrimental, and only the blind fools, small childen and blissfully ignorant idiots wouldn't understand that.

So, if it does in fact affect the team, that's a failed responsibility of the management, and - more directly - of the player themself.

The media is fucked, and it's not even up for debate, as far as I'm concerned. But it's also not the media's job to fluff the team either, Mondi, even were they doing a decent job. That is as ludicrious as any other slanted approach that the "journalists" should be avoiding.

It is, however, the players' responsibilty to allow media access (to sell the product) while ignoring the shit they are slinging.

It's like asking if a given actor's swollen head is the responsibilty of the celeb machine that fuels their carrer. Is the media to blame for Lindsay Lohan, or Britney Spears, or Mel Gibson, or Charlie Sheen? If you put your head in the guillotine, it may get cut off.

People are fucking adults with brain power that they should start using one of these days. Responsibility is the purview of the individual.

Fucking period.

[Mondi]

Does the media "undermine the psychology" of the public at large? IMO, it couldn't be more detrimental, and only the blind fools, small childen and blissfully ignorant idiots wouldn't understand that.

So, if it does in fact affect the team, that's a failed responsibility of the management, and - more directly - of the player themself.

The media is fucked, and it's not even up for debate, as far as I'm concerned. But it's also not the media's job to fluff the team either, Mondi, even were they doing a decent job. That is as ludicrious as any other slanted approach that the "journalists" should be avoiding.

It is, however, the players' responsibilty to allow media access (to sell the product) while ignoring the shit they are slinging.

It's like asking if a given actor's swollen head is the responsibilty of the celeb machine that fuels their carrer. Is the media to blame for Lindsay Lohan, or Britney Spears, or Mel Gibson, or Charlie Sheen? If you put your head in the guillotine, it may get cut off.

People are fucking adults with brain power that they should start using one of these days. Responsibility is the purview of the individual.

Fucking period.

I suppose you're a libertarian at heart. You just raised the intensity of this thread about 4 notches.

In my view, there is more to life than individual autonomy. Systemic issues are real. Hence my argument that SNP is part of the problem even if they provide reasonable coverage.

With that being said, some responsibility lies on the players and management to tune out the hacks. But, I can't agree that it is merely a choice as to whether duplicitous suggestion can undermine your confidence.

Furthermore, hockey media aren't exactly Pulitzer material, I'm completely fine with a reasonable standard of professionalism and respect for the craft mixed with a small dose of support for the home team. I'd call it: mature journalism.

[dbr]

I don't think weinerdog is talking about "the way it should be" though, I think he is talking about the way it is and he is spot on IMO.

Unless the Canucks organization wants to go to war with the media in this town or unless the fans organize and boycott, they are not going to change; they sell enough papers/ad time/whatever to get by on their routine right now so changing is likely not in the cards.

Instead it is on the people consuming said media to think for themselves and to believe (or disbelieve) what they choose.

It simply can't be any other way.

[BCReefer]

Worked late and on the way home tonight I heard the replay of the afternoon shits with Jim Robinson (sp). Like many we grew up with the guy and what I found out today was that

a) the stars came from Imperial oil who used to sponsor hockey and they had 3 stars in the emblem.
b) at one time MANY years back they used to get the ticker tape about a baseball game and then Jim would do play by play with sound affects and listeners thought it was live.

link http://hockey-blog-in-canada.blogspot.com/2011/07/tbc-boys-of-saturday-night.html to the write up as I cannot find the actual picture to post.

Too bad they didn't spend a lot of time with him.

[Sticky]

I'm curious what posters around here think about the power of suggestion. Or the psychological impact redundant and insidious questions can have on human beings.

You could insert repetitive in there as well... And for the record, I think that common logic would tell us that the impact level is proportional to the "listening" level.

If the team could truly and fully tune out the BS... Then there should be no effect. In reality, as Ferraro mentioned the other morning, the players DO pay some attention to what is written and talked about. I would think that there is some level of impact on the teams performance.

I found myself listening to 1040, just in time to hear Jeff "constantly auditioning for the Music Express DJ job at the PNE" Patterson gloat about the media always getting the last word, and that Burke should have known it was a battle he couldn't win. Talk about a chickenshit attitude... Hiding behind a microphone. They know that they can say (insinuate) whatever they want, and apparently, don't feel much pressure of accountability.

[wienerdog]

I suppose you're a libertarian at heart. You just raised the intensity of this thread about 4 notches.

In my view, there is more to life than individual autonomy. Systemic issues are real. Hence my argument that SNP is part of the problem even if they provide reasonable coverage.

With that being said, some responsibility lies on the players and management to tune out the hacks. But, I can't agree that it is merely a choice as to whether duplicitous suggestion can undermine your confidence.

Furthermore, hockey media aren't exactly Pulitzer material, I'm completely fine with a reasonable standard of professionalism and respect for the craft mixed with a small dose of support for the home team. I'd call it: mature journalism.

IMO, the intensity of the general conversation surrounding this issue can't be high enough. It comes from a burning disdain towards the general level of acceptance re: the media machine, Mondi.

I'm not a libertarian of any stripe that you're thinking of - I'm simply a proponent of good old fashioned free thought.

Free thinking is an active endeavour, and the majority are getting lazy. That's resulted in an epic greasy slide right down into the swamplands for most information outlets, because they know they won't get challenged on anything.

I bolded what I did above because you're right - they are real. But the real question is - what is going to be done about this problem? How is it going to change? Until the consumers demand something different, the answer is: it won't.

In case there's a misunderstanding: I'm not upset with you or your suggestions. I understand what your point is, and I even agree with most of it in principle. I think I even agree that it likely affects the performance of the team in some immeasurable sort of metric. But the concerns you're raising just won't be heard anymore, because these hawks don't care. They're not concerned in the slightest about the aspirations you're addressing here.

I suppose we can't forget that players are for the most part still young and impressionable, and mangement needs to ensure that the players are enlightened, but if there's anything an NHL'er of any brain capacity can understand, it's motivation.

In a market like this one, it's critical that they grasp that "media" is a highly calculated precison apparatus that is motivated by money and power, and has had nearly every ounce of humanism and integrity sucked out of it long ago; the age of whatever journalism you're looking for - mature or otherwise - is nowhere to be seen in mainstream mediums, Mondi. I don't think we'll see such a thing in our lifetime.

[RoyalDude]

but my question is whether these outlets undermine the psychology of the team.

The answer is no. They exaggerate it to create ratings, cause honestly, how much interesting local sporting news is there on a daily basis to keep us interested enough to tune in to keep them an economy? They are the stock promoters of journalism, fleecing the listener creating a false journalistic economy and therefor they are doing nothing more than bottom-feeding us pond sum.

[Vpete]

I think it would surprise a lot of you how 'managed' the media are by the PR people of teams. Look at the length some TO media have gone to get stories on the Leafs this season. Vancouver may be heading in that direction but it's still a long way off.

If you want time with a player you better not embarrass the coach when he is on the podium. You want access to the GM make sure you play by the team's rules in the scrums. It's so freaking political and personal in many cases that 'hard hitting' is done. Then look at the space writers are given. Advertisers who get in with the Canucks are often in the same dailies so don't piss them off. I don't see it as much as a problem with the writers as much as it is the control and $$ that surrounds them.

[Mondi]

I found myself listening to 1040, just in time to hear Jeff "constantly auditioning for the Music Express DJ job at the PNE" Patterson gloat about the media always getting the last word, and that Burke should have known it was a battle he couldn't win. Talk about a chickenshit attitude... Hiding behind a microphone. They know that they can say (insinuate) whatever they want, and apparently, don't feel much pressure of accountability.

I heard that too, and that exemplifies my argument. What is Jeff's point? That the GM should say what the media wants? Or give acceptable answers? Or not criticize the media because the media can 'get the last word'?

What does he think this is? An 8th grade school yard?

If I was Burke I'd have a private press conference and start insulting media member's for their grammar, spelling, punctuation. If they used the passive voice perhaps... I'd never take another question from a guy like Patterson again. Maybe show him who gets the last word. Particularly when a guy like Patterson is replaceable overnight, not so with Burkie.

I cannot emphasize enough that the media is not the story. The media does not create the story. The media's role is to cover the story.

[nucksin7]

So... I open The Province sports page today, and a Tony Gallagher puff piece catches my eye!

I dont know if anybody from this thread read it or not - http://www.theprovince.com/sports/Lose+ ... story.html - But as im reading it I cant help but wonder if maybe he was cruising CanucksCorner.Com and saw he was being ripped up on this thread lol.

I have to say, he finally got it right for a change haha.

[Mondi]

I read it, I found it curious seeing that he is about the most cynical guy in the media (outside of Botch and Sekeres).

I agree with him. Though I don't see the Twins as retiring "soon". I mean if you consider 5 to 6 years soon, then perhaps yes.

What I also took note of was that after a few rough games the "Canucks need a tough guy" articles start to pop up. Of course they have won 9 of 10, so they have to drum up some sort of controversy.

Nice to see the goalie BS fading, though not completely, into the background noise.

[ESQ]

I cannot emphasize enough that the media is not the story. The media does not create the story. The media's role is to cover the story.

Agree 100% - this is what gets lost when the media's ego and sense of self-importance becomes over-inflated. There is nothing that pisses me off more than listening to the media talk about "The Media". I first noticed it as a problem a couple years ago when Gillis put Botchford on blast for a totally asinine article he wrote - might have been proposing a Bieksa trade or something like that. The Media then had a solid 3 days of navel-gazing before concluding that, in fact, they were totally in the right to literally make up a trade proposal and write/discuss it.

As for what is to be done about the systemic problems with the media, I think its happening in this thread. Consumers are taking back the media, forming our own opinions, doing our own research to back them up, and questioning the conventional "wisdom" being published. When the TEAM and the Province start losing listeners/members because fans are fed up with the terrible coverage and find alternatives like this site, the media product will change.

Of course, I think we all agree that media improvement = media coverage shrinking dramatically.

[ESQ]

Has anybody been checking out www.prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com ? Since the new NHL deal its become my favourite news source, its very frequently updated with solid articles, plus they now have Jason Brough writing there.

[dbr]

Halford is there too, that's what happened to the Kurtenblog.

I actually post in the comments section there from time to time, I'd say it's a solid site for 'around the league' type stuff.

[nuckster]

Our local media is beset with it's own particular kind of biases, slants, `flavours', and perspectives, that I can tolerate usually (although Tony Gallagher tends to get under my skin more than the others). As bad as it may be at times, it's nothing like what we find on the national stage - the eastern media is atrocious; especially when it comes to their anti-Canuck sentiment. It never stops and it's perpetuated by CBC as much as any other entity.

I remember going back to '94 when the Canucks played TO in the western final, I could hardly watch the game with the volume on, cause the commentators were so biased (and that includes Harry Neale for shit sakes). Unfortunately, the legacy has continued. As someone pointed out, there again was Ron McClean bringing up Burrows again (what a frikin asshole) on account of Burrows last year calling into question a particular referee's judgement and the referee then admitted to his slanted view - at least to Burrows). But it goes on and on. Not sure who the CBC commentator was on Saturday, who stated, as Kesler is on his knees during a play, "oh yes well it is really quite ok for Foligno to body-check Kesler when Kesler is on his knees". WTF!!? How does common-sense fly out of the window like that? OK.. i digress...

It is quite satisfying for a long-suffering Canuck fan to hear talk of appreciating the here and now, since yes, it may well be that we are in our glory days right now... and just maybe, if they can somehow make it back to the final, just maybe, they can find a way to over-come the loaded deck that manifests itself in the eastern slant and the corresponding 'flip-flop' officiating??

By the way, I'm quite convinced that our local sports writers cruise our boards. There have been numerous times in the past on CC when we've been in engaged in discussing different themes, only find lo and behold, that the same topic is now mysteriously being written about in a local paper. As bad as our local writers may be at times, nothing could ever be as bad as being exposed to sportsnet's Paul McClean and Kasparitis on a regular basis... good gawd they're nauseating.