Shots Fired! Tim Graham calls out Vic Carruci for Posing with The Biscuit

[K-9]

  On 6/6/2018 at 1:14 PM, Commonsense said:

I get the point with Bennett not being a star anymore but I could see how a guy like TG would feel annoyed with the fan base and lash out a bit. I’m not saying it’s correct or appropriate, it’s just how I interpreted his initial comment and then his follow up. 

Expand  

Definitely easy to see how TG would be annoyed with the fan base. After all, he routinely shows contempt for it. Unless I misunderstand the phrase "go hump a fist" and it's really a term of endearment. 

[PromoTheRobot]

  On 6/6/2018 at 12:15 PM, Commonsense said:

 

Expand  

 

You are using the Jedi mind trick to deflect the issue. 

 

  On 6/6/2018 at 12:15 PM, Commonsense said:

When he followed it up with the “woke” comment it became apparent he wasn’t going at Vic or Bennett but the fans.

 

The same fans who moaned and groaned and even asked for JS and BG to be replaced don’t even know what type of people they are cheering for or turn a blind eye towards it. 

 

You hate the people you get the news from but you don’t even care/know how foul some of your own hero’s are. Let’s focus on the media though.

 

 

Expand  

 

So why did Graham delete such a "noble" tweet?

Edited June 6, 2018 by PromoTheRobot

[CommonCents]

  On 6/6/2018 at 1:29 PM, PromoTheRobot said:

 

You are using the Jedi mind trick to deflect the issue. 

Expand  

Deflect what? If you take issue with the timing and place of his comments take that up with him. 

[DrDawkinstein]

  On 6/6/2018 at 1:29 PM, PromoTheRobot said:

 

You are using the Jedi mind trick to deflect the issue. 

 

 

So why did Graham delete such a "noble" tweet?

Expand  

 

I dont think anyone is saying it was a noble tweet. Actually, quite the opposite. It was a jerk move any way you slice it, hence why he deleted it. We're just trying to clarify what he meant since he did such a poor job of making any real point.

[LabattBlue]

Why does anyone even follow the BN writers on twitter?...when you come right down to it...why follow anyone on twitter?

[26CornerBlitz]

  On 6/6/2018 at 1:54 PM, LabattBlue said:

Why does anyone even follow the BN writers on twitter?...when you come right down to it...why follow anyone on twitter?

Expand  

 

That is how information and news is disseminated today which is part of the reason why print media as an industry is struggling.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

  On 6/6/2018 at 1:59 PM, 26CornerBlitz said:

That is how information and news is disseminated today which is part of the reason why print media as an industry is struggling.

Expand  

 

Oh, there you go, making a valid and logical point just when I was ready to go all righteously Codger "ALL YOU KIDS GET OFF MY LAWN!"

You're correct in a practical sense, and also in a practical sense - it's a problem, because 140 characters (or whatever it is now) don't exactly lend themselves to nuance, balanced reporting, or fact-checking.

 

Fundamentally, I think sound news gathering and "sound bites" don't match.

[26CornerBlitz]

  On 6/6/2018 at 2:03 PM, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Oh, there you go, making a valid and logical point just when I was ready to go all righteously Codger "ALL YOU KIDS GET OFF MY LAWN!"

You're correct in a practical sense, and also in a practical sense - it's a problem, because 140 characters (or whatever it is now) don't exactly lend themselves to nuance, balanced reporting, or fact-checking.

 

Fundamentally, I think sound news gathering and "sound bites" don't match.

Expand  

 

Quite often there's a follow up piece to fill in details and provide analysis and context to provide a more robust understanding. 

[K-9]

  On 6/6/2018 at 1:59 PM, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

That is how information and news is disseminated today which is part of the reason why print media as an industry is struggling.

Expand  

Especially disinformation and fake news.

 

IMO, one of the other reasons print media is struggling is that it's held to certain legal and ethical standards whereas twitter and facebook aren't held to any standard at all. And it's hard to compete against that when people have grown so comfortable with just hearing what they want to hear. 

[26CornerBlitz]

  On 6/6/2018 at 2:08 PM, K-9 said:

Especially disinformation and fake news.

 

IMO, one of the other reasons print media is struggling is that it's held to certain legal and ethical standards whereas twitter and facebook aren't held to any standard at all. And it's hard to compete against that when people have grown so comfortable with just hearing what they want to hear. 

Expand  

 

Totally depends on the source regardless of the platform.  Nothing new in what you're saying.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

  On 6/6/2018 at 2:05 PM, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Quite often there's a follow up piece to fill in details and provide analysis and context to provide a more robust understanding. 

Expand  

 

There can be, yes.  But increasingly I see this pattern, and I think it's a problem:

1) "tweets" are used because they aren't held to the same standard of multiple sources/verification as actual articles

2) journalists use tweets to "break" news and claim kudos, in part because of 1)

3) other media then actually cite the tweets as sources and propagate them, just placing padding around them

 

It's a real problem IMO and has to make it hard for journalists to do a serious, credible job. 

  On 6/6/2018 at 2:09 PM, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Totally depends on the source regardless of the platform.  Nothing new in what you're saying.

Expand  

 

Nothing new perhaps, but the point remains: when Platform A has standards, and Platform B does not, it makes it hard for Platform A to compete.

[K-9]

  On 6/6/2018 at 2:09 PM, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Totally depends on the source regardless of the platform.  Nothing new in what you're saying.

Expand  

No, nothing new indeed. 

 

The platform makes a difference though. It is easier to manipulate, hide, and even create totally bogus sources on social media platforms. Which in turn makes it easier to cater to what people want to hear. We all need to be more diligent in identifying sources.

[26CornerBlitz]

  On 6/6/2018 at 2:18 PM, K-9 said:

No, nothing new indeed. 

 

The platform makes a difference though. It is easier to manipulate, hide, and even create totally bogus sources on social media platforms. Which in turn makes it easier to cater to what people want to hear. We all need to be more diligent in identifying sources.

Expand  

 

Choose your sources carefully is all I can say.  I certainly do. 

[plenzmd1]

  On 6/6/2018 at 2:11 PM, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

There can be, yes.  But increasingly I see this pattern, and I think it's a problem:

1) "tweets" are used because they aren't held to the same standard of multiple sources/verification as actual articles

2) journalists use tweets to "break" news and claim kudos, in part because of 1)

3) other media then actually cite the tweets as sources and propagate them, just placing padding around them

 

It's a real problem IMO and has to make it hard for journalists to do a serious, credible job. 

 

Nothing new perhaps, but the point remains: when Platform A has standards, and Platform B does not, it makes it hard for Platform A to compete.

Expand  

1

Platforms do not have standards..writers, editors, etc have standards.JW does not spew garbage just cause it is on twitter(outside of his music taste)

  On 6/6/2018 at 2:18 PM, K-9 said:

No, nothing new indeed. 

 

The platform makes a difference though. It is easier to manipulate, hide, and even create totally bogus sources on social media platforms. Which in turn makes it easier to cater to what people want to hear. We all need to be more diligent in identifying sources.

Expand  

See above..credible journalists are credible journalists..plain and simple.Platform means squadoosh. 

[PromoTheRobot]

  On 6/6/2018 at 1:34 PM, Commonsense said:

Deflect what? If you take issue with the timing and place of his comments take that up with him. 

Expand  

 

  On 6/6/2018 at 1:49 PM, DrDawkinstein said:

 

I dont think anyone is saying it was a noble tweet. Actually, quite the opposite. It was a jerk move any way you slice it, hence why he deleted it. We're just trying to clarify what he meant since he did such a poor job of making any real point.

Expand  

 

Some 20 years after the fact, Bennett's assault history becomes a thing just when he shows up at a charity event attended by a BN colleague of Graham's. So did Graham suddenly decide he had to make an issue of Bennett that exact moment, or was it something else? And why was the tweet deleted if it only was meant to focus a harsh light on an ex-Bill for his reprehensible behavior in the time of #MeToo?

 

If you ask me, Graham intended to shame Carucci with it, caught flack, and is now backpedaling, claiming he was calling out Bennett.

Edited June 6, 2018 by PromoTheRobot

[BringBackOrton]

  On 6/6/2018 at 2:34 PM, PromoTheRobot said:

 

 

Some 20 years after the fact, Bennett's assault history becomes a thing just when he shows up at a charity event attended by a BN colleague of Graham's. So did Graham suddenly decide he had to make an issue of Bennett that exact moment, or was it something else? And why was the tweet deleted if it only was meant to focus a harsh light on an exhibition Bill for his reprehensible behaviour be time of #MeToo?

 

If you ask me, Graham intended to shame Carucci with it, caught flack, and is now backpedaling, claiming he was calling out Bennett.

Expand  

Tim Graham acting like an ass and not getting the response he intended?  Are you sure you have the right guy?

[Coach Tuesday]

Meh.  I don't know about the rest of you, but I've lost interest in this topic.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

  On 6/6/2018 at 2:25 PM, plenzmd1 said:

Platforms do not have standards..writers, editors, etc have standards.JW does not spew garbage just cause it is on twitter(outside of his music taste)

See above..credible journalists are credible journalists..plain and simple.Platform means squadoosh. 

Expand  

 

You have a point.  Certainly some writers have standards regardless of platform and jw would be a good example of this.

(I think some employers have standards for their writers social media behavior - AP may be one - but nevertheless)

 

I disagree that therefore platform means "squadoosh".  Seems to me that platforms without standards enable people without standards.

  On 6/6/2018 at 2:45 PM, Coach Tuesday said:

Meh.  I don't know about the rest of you, but I've lost interest in this topic.

Expand  

 

There is a thing you can do when that happens....wait, wait, it'll come to me....

[K-9]

  On 6/6/2018 at 2:25 PM, plenzmd1 said:

Platforms do not have standards..writers, editors, etc have standards.JW does not spew garbage just cause it is on twitter(outside of his music taste)

See above..credible journalists are credible journalists..plain and simple.Platform means squadoosh. 

Expand  

Totally agree that credible journalists are credible journalists, no argument there. But imo, to say platform isn’t important contradicts that because social media platforms don’t always employ journalists, credible or otherwise. Fake news items can be fabricated and planted by fake organizations and shared by a million users accepting it as gospel truth.

 

There are four main components to comminication: the sender, the receiver, the message, and the media (platform) used for delivery.  When an unregulated platform not held to legal and ethical standards can be so easily manipulated it’s important. Very important.

[BringBackOrton]

  On 6/6/2018 at 2:45 PM, Coach Tuesday said:

Meh.  I don't know about the rest of you, but I've lost interest in this topic.

Expand  

Alright guys, show's over.  Coach Tuesday has lost interest. You know what that means.

 

@PromoTheRobot , get out of here, and go to the next UB topic.

 

@DrDawkinstein, I think somebody is defending Russ Brandon somewhere, go get 'em.

 

@BADOLBILZ, Shady's radio show starts at 11 am sharp, start preparing

 

@Hapless Bills Fan, I'm POSITIVE some other topic needs moderating.

 

I think that's it.  Or, wait.  Maybe we can keep talking about a topic that Coach Tuesday has lost interest in.  Does anyone know if that's allowed?  Can someone check the TOS?