RF23 Commentary: Steroids, Race and Sports Media Bias
RF 23 Commentary: Steroids, Race and Sports Media Bias
Steroid Usage: Inject, ingest, snort, mail order whatever the means. In today's sports section of your local dwindling circulated newspaper. Its being reported that athlete A is either suspected of or tied to some allegation of steroid use. Just yesterday, Marion Jones, admitted to using a cream based steroid after lying about even taking it for two years. Today, a heavyweight fight between Sam Peter and Jameel McCline is under review before the fight happens tomorrow because of a report that McCline received more than $12,000 worth of steroids and HGH for the past two years.
Where does it end? The witch hunt that is. It seems that those watching and reporting on athletes are interested in the National Enquirer aspect of the athlete than the games we like to watch. The media chooses and picks which athletes are the good guys and which ones are the bad guys, based off their interaction with a certain athlete or in Jim Brown's case...too much intellect...They don't get Jim Brown and where he's coming from and even if Brown spotted them a few advanced thoughts, they would still be lost. Which brings me to, Barry Bonds, media most hated enemy number one. Well, for one, Barry in his prime and going back two or three years had huge game. The man received seven, "we hate 'em-but we gotta give him" MVP awards, multiple golden gloves, holds the official all time home run record and has received more walks to start his own, "Walkin' with Barry Bonds" exercise DVD. Yet, the media ostracizes him to no end and all Barry does is take it and remain quiet against my chagrin. I want him to reply with the same ventriole he receives and not use his son as a shield when the media, and they will, fires back. But I want him to man up and tell them the media to kiss his ass and to go to hell. Maybe he'll do it in five years. What better forum to do it. Instead when steroids are brought up, it's all about Barry, like he's selling and breaking drug dealer rule number one, using his own product.
But again where does it end? and as a fan do you really care? One of the few times I agree with Al Sharpton is in regard to his op/ed he scribbled in the San Francisco Chronicle in February. Sharpton criticized professional sports team of taking the little man, the blue collar man and his family from sporting events due to the high prices of the game and the fact that low income families that enjoy sports can't watch the games on regular televison because the games are on cable networks. I agree, but if I'm one of those lucky enough to get to a game, I don't care what the athlete is amped on. What I care about is getting the best entertainment for my dollar. So if a steroid ridden guy is at the plate and on the mound in the battle of who got the best product. I don't care! What will piss me off is a guy on the mound on steroids and compounding his advantage by using vaseline or other methods of cheating. That means that I would be subject to this guys pitching effort in form of one to nothing game. That's boring! I've always maintained, especially in baseball that I need to see big home runs, like football fans wanna see big offensive plays from it's quarterback in form of fifty or sixty yard bomb to a diva like wide receiver. I've yet to hear anyone say, wow I can't wait to see Adam Vinateri kick four or five field goals.
Another thing about this steroid business, is the type of people who are getting caught as actual users. With the exception of Marion Jones, think about it. McCline, a boxer is 38-7 with only 23 knockouts and theres no "Former" champion attached to his name. Wow! steroids really worked for him! and what about the baseball players, all of them are scrubs, they're sorry on the professional level! So what advantage does this drug have. Maybe the criteria should be this for sports media writers, if they sucked earlier in their professional careers and all of sudden become all stars over night...they're using. I can give you a bunch of examples, Eric Gagne comes to mind.
Maybe the sports media should go back to focusing on the games and quit being big brother to athletes. As a fan, I don't care what hotel Alex Rodriquez goes into with a woman who's not his wife. But I do care about is why this guy can't perform in the playoffs. You see that's a sports story related to baseball.
And Speaking of the media:
How can you take the sports media serious? on what stories they print or talk about. Need an example? Well I got one. While driving to the train station the clowns on Fox Sports Radio reported a good story about an athlete, the athlete was Allen Iverson. Apparently Iverson and his crew stopped and gave aid to a woman who was in an auto accident and turned over. Iverson stopped, made sure the woman was okay, and waited until help arrived. This happened in August. Yesterday, plastered on the sports web, it was reported that Iverson is being sued for not showing up to a basketball camp. That incident happened on Monday, this week, this month and every sports news media reported it. Yet we're not supposed to believe that there is no media bias. No wonder athletes feel they are more scrutinized....and since I mentioned scrutinized, I was going to stay away from this subject, cause, well, it's Donovan McNabb. Two weeks ago, McNabb said that black quarterbacks are more scrutinized than whites. The sports media ate it up and broke out thei tissues and wept along with McNabb and wanted to know why that is. No one did their homework and found a report by David Niven, not the actor, but a professor, who did a study and found that both white and black quarterbacks were scrutinized equally. That's equally! Now if these guys would have done their homework, someone should have hit Dovovan with that report and see what his response was going to be. Let me help you, I'll play both the media and McNabb:
Media: Donovan your remarks on " Real Sports" was profounding and I would like to know if you heard of a report by Prof. David Niven, not the actor, that says both black and white quarterbacks were scrutinized by us, the media equally?
McNabb: No, I haven't. But I'm talking about me, I'm sure that professor didn't talk to me.
Media: But Donovan, he didn't need too, you said that black qb's are more scrutinized than whites, the report says differently. what do you say?
McNabb: I can't talk for other qb's. I was just talking about me. and all I went through with the Rush Limbaugh thing.
Media: But you didn't say you..you said black qb's. and if you're using Limbaugh as a scrutinizer, you forgot to mention the NAACP President in Philedelphia. As a matter of fact his comments were stronger Limbaugh's.
McNabb: Well, I dont' know what to tell you, I spoke my mind, and right now all I'm concentrating on the Philedelphia Eagles.
You see, in a nutshell that would have been McNabb's Q&A. The object of a non-objective and non-biased media member is too get more out of the athlete. Make him or her prove up their idiotic statements. Although Donovan may have had a good issue and something for the media to talk about. The problem is that the conversation is way too late, lets say 25 years late and hundred of millions of dollars in African- American Donovan McNabb wallet.
Related Articles (Paste or click):
Heavyweight Fight being reviewed: http://msn.foxsports.com/boxing/story/7298316?MSNHPHMA
Marion Jones admits to doping: http://msn.foxsports.com/olympics/story/7298242?MSNHPHMA
McNabb's assertion of black qb scrutiny: http://media.www.dailytexanonline.com/media/storage/paper410/news/2007/09/25/Sports/Mcnabb.Missed.The.Point.All.Qbs.Face.Increased.Scrutiny-2989301.shtml
Media Bias:
http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=7bdd1b2e86a02f4c6af67470af3d3ee9&docnum=5&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVzz-zSkAz&_md5=099729fcfdbdb4e9dc8d647dd8018171&focBudTerms=&focBudSel=all
Steroid Usage: Inject, ingest, snort, mail order whatever the means. In today's sports section of your local dwindling circulated newspaper. Its being reported that athlete A is either suspected of or tied to some allegation of steroid use. Just yesterday, Marion Jones, admitted to using a cream based steroid after lying about even taking it for two years. Today, a heavyweight fight between Sam Peter and Jameel McCline is under review before the fight happens tomorrow because of a report that McCline received more than $12,000 worth of steroids and HGH for the past two years.
Where does it end? The witch hunt that is. It seems that those watching and reporting on athletes are interested in the National Enquirer aspect of the athlete than the games we like to watch. The media chooses and picks which athletes are the good guys and which ones are the bad guys, based off their interaction with a certain athlete or in Jim Brown's case...too much intellect...They don't get Jim Brown and where he's coming from and even if Brown spotted them a few advanced thoughts, they would still be lost. Which brings me to, Barry Bonds, media most hated enemy number one. Well, for one, Barry in his prime and going back two or three years had huge game. The man received seven, "we hate 'em-but we gotta give him" MVP awards, multiple golden gloves, holds the official all time home run record and has received more walks to start his own, "Walkin' with Barry Bonds" exercise DVD. Yet, the media ostracizes him to no end and all Barry does is take it and remain quiet against my chagrin. I want him to reply with the same ventriole he receives and not use his son as a shield when the media, and they will, fires back. But I want him to man up and tell them the media to kiss his ass and to go to hell. Maybe he'll do it in five years. What better forum to do it. Instead when steroids are brought up, it's all about Barry, like he's selling and breaking drug dealer rule number one, using his own product.
But again where does it end? and as a fan do you really care? One of the few times I agree with Al Sharpton is in regard to his op/ed he scribbled in the San Francisco Chronicle in February. Sharpton criticized professional sports team of taking the little man, the blue collar man and his family from sporting events due to the high prices of the game and the fact that low income families that enjoy sports can't watch the games on regular televison because the games are on cable networks. I agree, but if I'm one of those lucky enough to get to a game, I don't care what the athlete is amped on. What I care about is getting the best entertainment for my dollar. So if a steroid ridden guy is at the plate and on the mound in the battle of who got the best product. I don't care! What will piss me off is a guy on the mound on steroids and compounding his advantage by using vaseline or other methods of cheating. That means that I would be subject to this guys pitching effort in form of one to nothing game. That's boring! I've always maintained, especially in baseball that I need to see big home runs, like football fans wanna see big offensive plays from it's quarterback in form of fifty or sixty yard bomb to a diva like wide receiver. I've yet to hear anyone say, wow I can't wait to see Adam Vinateri kick four or five field goals.
Another thing about this steroid business, is the type of people who are getting caught as actual users. With the exception of Marion Jones, think about it. McCline, a boxer is 38-7 with only 23 knockouts and theres no "Former" champion attached to his name. Wow! steroids really worked for him! and what about the baseball players, all of them are scrubs, they're sorry on the professional level! So what advantage does this drug have. Maybe the criteria should be this for sports media writers, if they sucked earlier in their professional careers and all of sudden become all stars over night...they're using. I can give you a bunch of examples, Eric Gagne comes to mind.
Maybe the sports media should go back to focusing on the games and quit being big brother to athletes. As a fan, I don't care what hotel Alex Rodriquez goes into with a woman who's not his wife. But I do care about is why this guy can't perform in the playoffs. You see that's a sports story related to baseball.
And Speaking of the media:
How can you take the sports media serious? on what stories they print or talk about. Need an example? Well I got one. While driving to the train station the clowns on Fox Sports Radio reported a good story about an athlete, the athlete was Allen Iverson. Apparently Iverson and his crew stopped and gave aid to a woman who was in an auto accident and turned over. Iverson stopped, made sure the woman was okay, and waited until help arrived. This happened in August. Yesterday, plastered on the sports web, it was reported that Iverson is being sued for not showing up to a basketball camp. That incident happened on Monday, this week, this month and every sports news media reported it. Yet we're not supposed to believe that there is no media bias. No wonder athletes feel they are more scrutinized....and since I mentioned scrutinized, I was going to stay away from this subject, cause, well, it's Donovan McNabb. Two weeks ago, McNabb said that black quarterbacks are more scrutinized than whites. The sports media ate it up and broke out thei tissues and wept along with McNabb and wanted to know why that is. No one did their homework and found a report by David Niven, not the actor, but a professor, who did a study and found that both white and black quarterbacks were scrutinized equally. That's equally! Now if these guys would have done their homework, someone should have hit Dovovan with that report and see what his response was going to be. Let me help you, I'll play both the media and McNabb:
Media: Donovan your remarks on " Real Sports" was profounding and I would like to know if you heard of a report by Prof. David Niven, not the actor, that says both black and white quarterbacks were scrutinized by us, the media equally?
McNabb: No, I haven't. But I'm talking about me, I'm sure that professor didn't talk to me.
Media: But Donovan, he didn't need too, you said that black qb's are more scrutinized than whites, the report says differently. what do you say?
McNabb: I can't talk for other qb's. I was just talking about me. and all I went through with the Rush Limbaugh thing.
Media: But you didn't say you..you said black qb's. and if you're using Limbaugh as a scrutinizer, you forgot to mention the NAACP President in Philedelphia. As a matter of fact his comments were stronger Limbaugh's.
McNabb: Well, I dont' know what to tell you, I spoke my mind, and right now all I'm concentrating on the Philedelphia Eagles.
You see, in a nutshell that would have been McNabb's Q&A. The object of a non-objective and non-biased media member is too get more out of the athlete. Make him or her prove up their idiotic statements. Although Donovan may have had a good issue and something for the media to talk about. The problem is that the conversation is way too late, lets say 25 years late and hundred of millions of dollars in African- American Donovan McNabb wallet.
Related Articles (Paste or click):
Heavyweight Fight being reviewed: http://msn.foxsports.com/boxing/story/7298316?MSNHPHMA
Marion Jones admits to doping: http://msn.foxsports.com/olympics/story/7298242?MSNHPHMA
McNabb's assertion of black qb scrutiny: http://media.www.dailytexanonline.com/media/storage/paper410/news/2007/09/25/Sports/Mcnabb.Missed.The.Point.All.Qbs.Face.Increased.Scrutiny-2989301.shtml
Media Bias:
http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=7bdd1b2e86a02f4c6af67470af3d3ee9&docnum=5&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVzz-zSkAz&_md5=099729fcfdbdb4e9dc8d647dd8018171&focBudTerms=&focBudSel=all
posted by J.C. "Fanz23" Lewis, Jr | 9:47 PM
<< Home