TheFunPolice Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 "A couple of bad trees" is a Marroneism Hi Doug!
vegas55 Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 I might agree with you but to be fair it's not a morning show radio host's job to investigate team news. Well I was actually talking about ANYBODY in the WNY media - not just a morning show host. Mehta scooped everyone. Jerry Sullivan, Bucky Gleason et al - they have tons of opinions but zero sources. Their job is to develop sources, not just throw out their uninformed opinions. Mannish Mehta writes for the NY Daily News, not the NY Times. Totally different animal. A distinction/correction without a difference. Got it. But the point is the same, regardless of which paper he writes for
bobobonators Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 Well I was actually talking about ANYBODY in the WNY media - not just a morning show host. Mehta scooped everyone. Jerry Sullivan, Bucky Gleason et al - they have tons of opinions but zero sources. Their job is to develop sources, not just throw out their uninformed opinions. A distinction/correction without a difference. Got it. But the point is the same, regardless of which paper he writes for The difference between the ny daily news and the ny times is like the difference between the new england patriots and your local HS team. But i get what youre saying.
Mark80 Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 Well I was actually talking about ANYBODY in the WNY media - not just a morning show host. Mehta scooped everyone. Jerry Sullivan, Bucky Gleason et al - they have tons of opinions but zero sources. Their job is to develop sources, not just throw out their uninformed opinions. A distinction/correction without a difference. Got it. But the point is the same, regardless of which paper he writes for Actually it's a huge difference. The Daily would quote a janitor as an unnamed source in the Bills organization. The Times has the utmost of standards.
Mr. WEO Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 Actually it's a huge difference. The Daily would quote a janitor as an unnamed source in the Bills organization. The Times has the utmost of standards. Yeah, just ask Jayson Blair
Coach Tuesday Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 Well I was actually talking about ANYBODY in the WNY media - not just a morning show host. Mehta scooped everyone. Jerry Sullivan, Bucky Gleason et al - they have tons of opinions but zero sources. Their job is to develop sources, not just throw out their uninformed opinions. A distinction/correction without a difference. Got it. But the point is the same, regardless of which paper he writes for I think you mean "irregardless."
Kelly the Dog Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 Yeah, just ask Jayson Blair Well if you asked Jayson Blair he would tell you that the Time does have high standards and I lied to them and screwed them over and i got caught and embarrassed myself and the Times.
Buffaloed in Pa Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 N.Y. I want him, I want him. ......... I hate him. Ha
RayFinkle Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 The WNY media was reporting this as far back as last February. Tim Graham has been all over it. WGR always talked about a rift between Marrone and others at OBD...Not sure what you're reading or listening to.
Maury Ballstein Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 At least 90% of the criticism of him is total crap. Marrone didn't let the Bills down. They let him down. funny stuff, keep it coming.
YoloinOhio Posted January 4, 2015 Author Posted January 4, 2015 (edited) This seems like foreshadowing ...http://bills.buffalonews.com/2014/09/06/whaley-took-the-risk-marrone-will-take-the-fall/ Warning: Sully Edited January 5, 2015 by YoloinOhio
timekills17 Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 I think you mean "irregardless." I hope you're kidding and that whatever joke you were trying to make went over my head. Obviously.
Mr. WEO Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 (edited) Well if you asked Jayson Blair he would tell you that the Time does have high standards and I lied to them and screwed them over and i got caught and embarrassed myself and the Times. Obviously no editor payed close attention to the stuff he was submitting. The NYT didn't "catch" him either....an editor from another newspaper busted him. In fact his editor at the Times said he was only hired because he was black. Edited January 4, 2015 by Mr. WEO
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 Actually that's debatable Irregardless is a word commonly used in place of regardless or irrespective, which has caused controversy since the early twentieth century, though the word appeared in print as early as 1795.[1] Most dictionaries list it as "nonstandard" or "incorrect" usage, and recommend that "regardless" should be used instead I think you mean "irregardless."
vegas55 Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 The WNY media was reporting this as far back as last February. Tim Graham has been all over it. WGR always talked about a rift between Marrone and others at OBD...Not sure what you're reading or listening to. Have you EVEN read Mehta's article. He doesn't even cover the Bills, and he had more information and more inside sources than the entire WNY media. Read his article, compare it to the entire universe of the inside info you get from the likes of WGR, and then post your praises of WGR and the rest of WNY media
Coach Tuesday Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 Actually that's debatable Irregardless is a word commonly used in place of regardless or irrespective, which has caused controversy since the early twentieth century, though the word appeared in print as early as 1795.[1] Most dictionaries list it as "nonstandard" or "incorrect" usage, and recommend that "regardless" should be used instead I know, I was using the Daily News version...
Mark80 Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 Yeah, just ask Jayson Blair Way to bring up something that happened over 10 years ago. Congrats.
Kelly the Dog Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 Obviously no editor payed close attention to the stuff he was submitting. The NYT didn't "catch" him either....an editor from another newspaper busted him. In fact his editor at the Times said he was only hired because he was black. Obviously no editor payed close attention to the stuff he was submitting. The NYT didn't "catch" him either....an editor from another newspaper busted him. In fact his editor at the Times said he was only hired because he was black. None of that has anything to do with standards. An editor is not going to know or suspect that his writer is plagiarizing a paragraph in this article or that one. It doesn't matter at all they didn't catch him. His editor saying he was black was probably covering his own ass. The fact is it was Blair's fault and not the Times low standards. The Times has very high standards. They do make mistakes of course, like everyone. And they have a clear, relentless political slant, especially their editorials. But they probably have as high a standard as any newspaper in the world.
The Big Cat Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 The Daily News is a gossip rag that pulls no punches in their sleazy tactics. I don't care what your politics are, the Daily News, strictly from a journalism standpoint, doesn't even belong in the same conversation as the NYT. Why the distinction? Because if Mehta's article HAD appeared in the NYT it would DEFINITELY mean something. But it didn't. It was in the Daily News. So, like everything written in that sensationalist tabloid, it should be taken with a grain of salt. There's simply no disputing this, sorry.
Kelly the Dog Posted January 4, 2015 Posted January 4, 2015 The Daily News is a gossip rag that pulls no punches in their sleazy tactics. I don't care what your politics are, the Daily News, strictly from a journalism standpoint, doesn't even belong in the same conversation as the NYT. Why the distinction? Because if Mehta's article HAD appeared in the NYT it would DEFINITELY mean something. But it didn't. It was in the Daily News. So, like everything written in that sensationalist tabloid, it should be taken with a grain of salt. There's simply no disputing this, sorry. Yup. All around.
Recommended Posts