Clarissa Thompson admits to fabricating sideline reports.

[nedboy7]

1 hour ago, stuvian said:

Most MSM is bs, no surprise 

 

That's why I get all my news from TikTok and FB. 

[1st&ten]

Simple solution, do away with the sideline reporting & replace it with commercials so maybe we could have a few less during the game.

 

[Just in Atlanta]

“We have to play complimentary football”

 

I can invent quotes too.

[eball]

Interesting responses in this thread.  Taken for the specific situation involved — it’s meaningless.  Halftime reports are one big nothing burger.

 

More important bigger picture — women lose credibility as journalists in an arena in which they have struggled and fought to gain a foothold.

 

She didn’t do women journalists any favors.

 

[Behindenemylines]

7 hours ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

This one of the dumbest stories ever. She was on PArdon My Take and was having fun. People have to find things to get angry now. Lay off my ex. She’s a great person. 

So she’s good at faking other things too😁

[oldmanfan]

Career suicide

[PBF81]

7 hours ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

I guess I just don’t care haha. I’m a guy who doesn’t care what the commentators (it’s insane what they pay those guys because they are all the same to me) or sideline reporters say. They offer nothing to me. In fact, I would enjoy made up fact more (“Sean McDermott said he had a stressful week because he buried 3 people in his basement but is looking forward to the game today”),

 

Ya know, I was wondering whether anyone would make that comment.  

 

Am I the only one that often turns those idiotic game announcers off, as in mute the game, just to be able to watch the game in peace while drawing my own conclusions.  

 

95%, if not more, of what they say is obvious.  The officials tell you want the penalties are.  

 

Years ago, I think it was John Madden commentating, he blathered on about how that was one of the strengths of the team.  A little later on in the game something happened, or didn't, and he completely contradicted himself and made the comment about how the exact same thing was a weakness and something that they were trying to correct.  

 

Anyway, if it's a deep throw to [insert name of receiver] for a reception, I think that we can pretty much deterimine that for ourselves.  LOL  

The officials signal what the penalties are.  You don't even need sound for that.  

 

 

[WhoTom]

An insider's view of sideline reporters:

 

 

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

22 hours ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

This one of the dumbest stories ever. She was on PArdon My Take and was having fun. People have to find things to get angry now. Lay off my ex. She’s a great person. 

 

14 hours ago, Behindenemylines said:

So she’s good at faking other things too😁

Updated score:

Behindenemylines:          1

C.Biscuit97:                     0

[Mr. WEO]

15 hours ago, eball said:

Interesting responses in this thread.  Taken for the specific situation involved — it’s meaningless.  Halftime reports are one big nothing burger.

 

More important bigger picture — women lose credibility as journalists in an arena in which they have struggled and fought to gain a foothold.

 

She didn’t do women journalists any favors.

 

 

Another woman journalist, commenting on this woman journalist has already conceded that NFL women journalists have been relegated to being "eye candy" i.e. "sideline reporters".   

 

All Clarissa Thompson has done is point out how phony this all is.  A token female prop tasked with eliciting inane BS form NFL HC's during games occasionally does not want to be bothered by the network's nod to the ladies who may be watching and refuses to talk, so the sideline reporter simply fills in the blanks on the HC's interview script.

 

again, good for her.  This is all just network cynicism being exposed.  Give these women  something real to do as reporters or spare us all this goofy display. 

[eball]

2 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Another woman journalist, commenting on this woman journalist has already conceded that NFL women journalists have been relegated to being "eye candy" i.e. "sideline reporters".   

 

All Clarissa Thompson has done is point out how phony this all is.  A token female prop tasked with eliciting inane BS form NFL HC's during games occasionally does not want to be bothered by the network's nod to the ladies who may be watching and refuses to talk, so the sideline reporter simply fills in the blanks on the HC's interview script.

 

again, good for her.  This is all just network cynicism being exposed.  Give these women  something real to do as reporters or spare us all this goofy display. 

I don’t disagree with you but she should have presented it that way rather than boasting how she made up reports. Use the forum she has to talk about needed change. 
 

[H2o]

[Nextmanup]

23 hours ago, BuffaloBillyG said:

You mean those stereotypical cliches that come out of an off camera "coach interview" at the half can be fabricated? Shocked. 

 

They can do away with those mid game on screen coaches interviews as well. 

The entire concept of the "sideline reporter" should be done away with...unless it's an actual journalist who is only gathering real information relevant to the game.   Usually this comes down to giving updates on injured players who have left the game.

 

The rest is garbage and part of the garbage way sports is televised in the USA.

 

 

[Mr. WEO]

8 minutes ago, eball said:

I don’t disagree with you but she should have presented it that way rather than boasting how she made up reports. Use the forum she has to talk about needed change. 
 

 

You think she's going to get on Pardon My Take to  complain that the networks only give lip service to women in journalism by dolling them up as sideline reporters to give 30 second spots of annoyed coaches saying nothing interesting?

 

yeah, I guess she could have done that instead.......

 

Here's a nugget for you and all those whining over this:

 

Thompson explained that she “made up a report” at the time (back in 2008):

 

“I was covering every Lions game because I was a baby reporter and got all the s— games and it was the year they were 0–16 and [Detroit coach] Rod Marinelli at halftime, I was like, ‘Oh Coach, what adjustments are you gonna make at halftime?’ He goes, ‘That’s a great perfume you’re wearing,'” Thompson said at the time. “I was like, ‘Oh f—, this isn’t gonna work.’ I’m not kidding; I made up a report.”

 

stop clutching the pearls, this woman is trying to teach you something...

Edited November 18, 2023 by Mr. WEO

[Doc]

Yes…

[BuffaloBillyG]

12 minutes ago, Nextmanup said:

The entire concept of the "sideline reporter" should be done away with...unless it's an actual journalist who is only gathering real information relevant to the game.   Usually this comes down to giving updates on injured players who have left the game.

 

The rest is garbage and part of the garbage way sports is televised in the USA.

 

 

Originally, the sideline reporter concept was excellent. It was what you described and more. Most of the time it was former players that could give some insight to different aspects in real time. Injuries and such. Siragusa was excellent at it. Even Jay Feely was good...providing things we wouldn't fully get from a kickers POV (turf conditions, wind ect). Even back in the day, OJ was good at it. There really was a solid place for them.

 

I really hate to sound a certain way, however it seemed over time those positions were taken by unqualified "pretty faces" and it became more of a fluff piece position. 

[hondo in seattle]

When I was an officer in the army, I took an oath: "I will not lie, cheat, or steal; nor tolerate those who do."  

 

I had some reservations about taking that oath because I often lied when convenient.  I lied to my parents about why I was out late.  I lied to my college professors about why my term papers were late.  I had a weird personal rule that I would never lie to my inner circle of friends, but I'd lie to outsiders regularly without compunction.  

 

But I got to thinking that the world would be a better place if everyone practiced the Honor Code.  So I took the oath and, while I practice it imperfectly, I do take it seriously.

 

I don't care if Clarissa lies to her friends and family.  We're all flawed, and we all have our own code of ethics.  I won't judge.  But I do judge when she lies to me as a reporter I'm trusting to deliver the facts, not made up BS.  It's not okay.  

 

[SinceThe70s]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Another woman journalist, commenting on this woman journalist has already conceded that NFL women journalists have been relegated to being "eye candy" i.e. "sideline reporters".   

 

All Clarissa Thompson has done is point out how phony this all is.  A token female prop tasked with eliciting inane BS form NFL HC's during games occasionally does not want to be bothered by the network's nod to the ladies who may be watching and refuses to talk, so the sideline reporter simply fills in the blanks on the HC's interview script.

 

again, good for her.  This is all just network cynicism being exposed.  Give these women  something real to do as reporters or spare us all this goofy display. 

 

So bring back Phyliis George?

[Saxum]

2 hours ago, hondo in seattle said:

When I was an officer in the army, I took an oath: "I will not lie, cheat, or steal; nor tolerate those who do."  

 

I had some reservations about taking that oath because I often lied when convenient.  I lied to my parents about why I was out late.  I lied to my college professors about why my term papers were late.  I had a weird personal rule that I would never lie to my inner circle of friends, but I'd lie to outsiders regularly without compunction.  

 

But I got to thinking that the world would be a better place if everyone practiced the Honor Code.  So I took the oath and, while I practice it imperfectly, I do take it seriously.

 

I don't care if Clarissa lies to her friends and family.  We're all flawed, and we all have our own code of ethics.  I won't judge.  But I do judge when she lies to me as a reporter I'm trusting to deliver the facts, not made up BS.  It's not okay.  

 

 

On a previous TS/SCI job I was instructed to lie where I worked for it was declared location and agency was classified.  The location was a known government facility and nothing prevented someone from observing cars driving into facility and recording license plates (there was a report on number of vehicles entering/leaving on a day by county agency and government denied all those people worked there).  We were instructed to lie where we worked to all but our family and the hundreds of people who worked for my company were supposed to be working at a small office several miles away.  We worked with other companies who had their own cover stories which were different.  

 

I had a friend from outside work who said lets meet for lunch for we work nearby each other but each time he asked I made a excuse for there was not enough time for me to leave facility, get to car, leave facility and get to restaurant and then after lunch return and find parking spot and go thru gates, etc to get back to work.  Work did not allow me to have a long lunch.   Eventually he told me "I know you are lying" and stopped calling me.

 

Later on I discovered reason for lie I was instructed to tell - it is because it saved the government money.  In lieu of taxes normally paid government did contribution to local jurisdiction based on number of declared people working there.  Because the companies working there had much smaller offices they also paid to jurisdiction lower property taxes.

 

I stopped telling people official lie and just told them I work at multiple locations locally and remotely.  This was something that not liked and I told them the lie were instructed to tell was full of holes.     Ironically when position was terminated I received a letter from agency in open mail thanking me for my service - an agency which was supposed to be secret.

[WhoTom]

23 minutes ago, Limeaid said:

I received a letter from agency in open mail thanking me for my service - an agency which was supposed to be secret.

 

So now that you've told us, do you have to kill us?