Jump to content

Oh come on, why was the JW thread deleted?


Lv-Bills

Recommended Posts

I think it's fair to say that the journalists/media scribes/bloggers who regularly contribute to TSW are not sandbagging on their responsibilities to their professions just for the sake of appeasing us on the message boards.

 

I would confirm what Lori has already stated: it does take some time to transcribe a 9-minute media availability on its own, not to mention other availabilities (Eric Wood) to cover. JW was probably consuming all the info from each interview as best he could and then going back to transcribe what he heard/recorded, after finding a quiet location to decipher sound bites which may come from someone who doesn't enunciate eloquently or in a room that may not be as quiet as a library (they still have librarys around, don't t hey?).

 

I worked for eight years in TV news- that does not make me an expert on the situation (by no means am I the SKOOBY of TV news!), but maybe it helps provide some insight from my experiences.

 

Just my ¢¢

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

John, you're out of your league here. The guy stood around and watched other people write at the Pittsburgh Trib Review. He's clearly qualified to criticize your ability.

Thank you for ruining my perfectly good notebook with the ginger ale I snorted reading this. Made my day. :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not that big a deal, but I am a little disappointed the OP deleted his own thread. Kind of chickened out a bit.

 

Its amazing that reporters are so thin skinned when they get criticized. After all, the paper lives on critiquing everything that goes on in the world, yet get all worked up when someone critiques them. Maybe, not really JW,but maybe a lot of them would do better to listen to critiques once in awhile.

 

It is a profession that has gotten worse in the internet age. It is also a struggling business in some ways. But yet, there is always an excuse for their own flaws. Weak.

 

Sorry to cause a stir, that wasn't really my intention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, you're out of your league here. The guy stood around and watched other people write at the Pittsburgh Trib Review. He's clearly qualified to criticize your ability.

 

:thumbsup:

 

 

I think it's fair to say that the journalists/media scribes/bloggers who regularly contribute to TSW are not sandbagging on their responsibilities to their professions just for the sake of appeasing us on the message boards.

 

I would confirm what Lori has already stated: it does take some time to transcribe a 9-minute media availability on its own, not to mention other availabilities (Eric Wood) to cover. JW was probably consuming all the info from each interview as best he could and then going back to transcribe what he heard/recorded, after finding a quiet location to decipher sound bites which may come from someone who doesn't enunciate eloquently or in a room that may not be as quiet as a library (they still have librarys around, don't t hey?).

 

I worked for eight years in TV news- that does not make me an expert on the situation (by no means am I the SKOOBY of TV news!), but maybe it helps provide some insight from my experiences.

Just my ¢¢

 

When you've logged some time at the Pittsburgh Tribune watching the writers come back. :thumbsup:

 

 

This thread is proof that you can't un-ring the bell...

 

Very old joke; What's the difference between a pregnant woman and a light bulb? You can unscrew a light bulb. :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is proof that you can't un-ring the bell...

Eh. You asked a legitimate question, even if the way you presented it made me a little grumpy. (Apologies for the snarl). And a few people learned how The AP functions, the difference between a newsflash and a writethrough, and John's schedule for today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not that big a deal, but I am a little disappointed the OP deleted his own thread. Kind of chickened out a bit.

 

Its amazing that reporters are so thin skinned when they get criticized. After all, the paper lives on critiquing everything that goes on in the world, yet get all worked up when someone critiques them. Maybe, not really JW,but maybe a lot of them would do better to listen to critiques once in awhile.

 

It is a profession that has gotten worse in the internet age. It is also a struggling business in some ways. But yet, there is always an excuse for their own flaws. Weak.

 

Sorry to cause a stir, that wasn't really my intention.

And yet there you STILL sit with your swizzle stick. Jabbing at the OP and the reporter.

 

Think about this...how many are on your side?

 

Weak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is proof that you can't un-ring the bell...

don't worry, Coach. i'm fine.

i can appreciate what might have been your concerns, but it's been a long drawn out day with lots of availabilities and many bites and bits to get through. as we in the AP serve a vast array of media outlets -- newspapers, tv, radio, internet, telephone thingies -- we have many responsibilities, and me, i'm just one guy workin'.

 

in an ideal world, it would've been best to get the Edwards writethru out as soon as possible. i sometimes don't live in an ideal world.

 

and out of respect, i'll leave the agate desk comment alone.

 

jw

 

ADD: oh, and i'm done by the way. Edwards Part II in for editing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure, but I would think a story could be written in three hours. I mean, I can do much much more at my job in three hours, than write a story on trent Edwards speaking for nine minutes. And yes, I worked for the Pittsburgh Trib Review growing up. Mostly agate, never wrote anything, but cmon.

 

 

I was in the business for years and you have no clue what you're talking about. You have no idea what his editors wanted or how many times they changed gears on him or what else was on his plate. Hey JW, don't let these spoiled fan-brats keep you from letting us know what's going on. We appreciate you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My personal best is 2.3 minutes. :thumbsup: I am a fast listener.

 

I can do it in about twelve. Really. But I type seriously fast.

 

That's a straight transcript, though. Not writing an article for a wire service - that would take me a little longer. Maybe 45 minutes.

 

And a few people learned how The AP functions, the difference between a newsflash and a writethrough, and John's schedule for today.

 

I'd have thought such things were obvious, myself. Isn't everyone's job like that - too much to do, not enough time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, now that we've clearly established that this thread is mistitled, and that Mr. Wawrow spent the day working instead of playing Solitaire on his computer, let's move on.

 

The Wood story:

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/article/20...training-camp-0

 

ORCHARD PARK, N.Y. -- Eric Wood laughs as he recalls being laid up in a Jacksonville hospital in November, when he and his surgeon repeatedly watched a video posted on YouTube showing how the Buffalo Bills guard broke two bones in his left leg.

 

"Yeah, I've seen it a few times," Wood said Tuesday, explaining how his leg was so swollen that his doctor reviewed the video to ensure Wood also didn't hurt his ankle. "It's funny when you go to YouTube to get your medical analysis. But, I guess, that's our day and age."

 

Wood might also be something of a medical marvel.

 

Drafted 28th overall out of Louisville last year, Wood's walking without a limp and confident his leg will be fully recovered by the start of training camp this summer. That's great progress for a player who initially feared he might not play again after being hurt during an 18-15 loss at Jacksonville on Nov. 22.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...