Blogging late today; have been out of town since Saturday.
As several posters have noted, The CHB's recap of the Super Bowl was notable only for its utter lack of redeeming value. He did manage to spot an otherwise invisible Terry Bradshaw, however, claiming the absent Steeler "generated the loudest ovations." Someone please tell me this did not run on A1 of the Globe today.
Hope you enjoyed the Hockeytown Cafe, Dan. Be sure to have a drink on us before you leave town.
Error-prone. As noted, The CHB blew the Bradshaw bit. That wasn't his only goof this weekend, however. I'm not going to begin to take credit for knowing (or noticing) this, but Shaughnessy's Saturday column included the claim that Matt Hasselbeck was MVP of the state high school football championship game. (As sportswriter Jeff Sullivan points out, the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association does not and never has named an MVP.)
Here's the sentence in question; you decide whether this is poor prose or an error of fact: "There was no trip to Disneyland for the 1992 MIAA Division 1-A Super Bowl MVP."
Dan not only needs an editor, he could use a fact-checker to boot. Recall that on Dec. 6 he wrote "Of the 17 players (who've been on the ballot) boasting at least 350 homers and a .290 average, all are in Cooperstown -- except for Rice and Dick Allen" only to state on Jan. 11: "Among 18 players who've been on the ballot with 350 homers and an average of .290, all are in the Hall except for Rice and Dick Allen."
No correction was run.
Wonder how objectivebruce will defend this.
6 comments:
Any of us could have written that "column" after a night of binge-drinking and picking facts off the front page of the Detroit Free Press inside the newspaper vending kiosk we knocked over as we stumbled back to the hotel.
Seriously, was he on a space limit or something? This is how you end a story?
"That was it. Minutes later, Antwaan Randle El took a handoff on a reverse play and completed a 43-yard touchdown pass to Ward for a 21-10 lead with 8:56 left. The hometown crowd loved it."
Did he just leave the stadium at that point? A seventh grade English teacher would mark this "Needs resolution" in red ink on the bottom of his paper.
Hatred and jealousy now obscure even the simple ability to read.
The Globe washout who says "In his column Sunday, Boston Globe columnist Dan Shaughnessy cites Matt Hasselbeck as the MIAA Division 1-A Super Bowl MVP" needs a crash course in remedial reading. The column does not say Hasselbeck was the Super Bowl MVP; the reference to MVP simply drew a distinction between the hype and glamor of the NFL Super Bowl and the realities of a high school championship game and the fact that Hasselbeck didn't perform all that well in that long-ago high school game. The MVP comment must be read in the context of the paragraph in which it appears -- with references to no milk-mustache advertisements or Roman numerals in the name also being part of the reality of the high school championship game -- to which he is comparing Super Bowl XL. He no more says Hasselbeck was the MIAA Super Bowl MVP than he claims high school kids are paid for milk-mustache advertisements.
That being said, the paragraph in question could have been reworked to get the point across without confusing those who move their lips as they read
Hey Bruce, first off, I have to admit that Globe washout jab was priceless. I've heard many an insult but that ranks right there. I actually enjoyed its originality.
Few quick questions for you, though:
1) How do you defend not running corrections for Bradshaw not being introduced, Dwayne Saab not being mentioned as UNH alum that played in a Super Bowl and the fact there's no MIAA Super Bowl MVP award.
2) Honestly, I know you either love Dan, are related to Dan or are Dan, but admit it, that Hasselbeck column wasn't easy to follow in that aforementioned graph. I wasn't alone in misreading the supposed intent. You are likely correct that Dan didn't mean what I thought he did, but come on, he's suppose to be the top columnist for the top sports section in the country.
bruce, if you're still in Detroit, please be sure to say "hi" to Terry Bradshaw for me.
Something worth noting: If you ever look at the actual corrections that run in the Globe sports page, sometimes it seems like 90 percent of them are about minor errors made by college co-ops in high school pieces.
So if if some college kid says "Pentucket beat Georgetown 3-2" when it was 3-1, or "Joe Blow finished 4th in the 400 meters" when it was the 800, they'll trip over themselves to correct it, as they should.
But by doing this, they can say "look at that: we run 10 corrections per week! Of course we're diligent!" And that way they can keep turning a blind eye when Shaughnessy or Borges make mistake after mistake after mistake.
I'm guessing objectivebruce is also someone on the inside at the Globe. His response threw mud at Sully while not acknowledging any of the mistakes Shaughnessy made. That's the Globe management way.
Bruce, you forgot his (simple) (in)ability to close a column with anything approaching an effort to tie things together. Or the Bradshaw bit.
You offer no appreciable defense of the man's merits. Honestly, I'd like to read your thoughts on the matter. Are you a true fan of his, or are you just playing the contrarian? Sometimes you make valid points about the criticism (sorry, Chief, but that poster that advocated picking your spots was right) but most of the time you fall back on ad-hominem attacks, which just are worthless.
Please, respond, and tell us where we've all gone wrong, and how we misunderstand the guy.
Post a Comment