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

[K-9]

5 minutes ago, 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. 

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]

1 hour ago, Commonsense said:

 

 

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

 

1 hour ago, 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.

 

 

 

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

Edited June 6, 2018 by PromoTheRobot

[CommonCents]

3 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

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

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

[DrDawkinstein]

19 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

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

 

 

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

 

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]

1 minute ago, LabattBlue said:

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

 

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]

Just now, 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.

 

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]

Just now, 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.

 

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]

5 minutes ago, 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.

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]

Just now, 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. 

 

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

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 minute ago, 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. 

 

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. 

2 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

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

 

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]

3 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

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

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]

2 minutes ago, 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.

 

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

[plenzmd1]

9 minutes ago, 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.

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)

3 minutes ago, 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.

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

[PromoTheRobot]

4 hours ago, Commonsense said:

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

 

4 hours ago, 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.

 

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]

7 minutes ago, 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.

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]

16 minutes ago, 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. 

 

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.

Just now, Coach Tuesday said:

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

 

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

[K-9]

11 minutes ago, 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. 

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]

1 minute ago, Coach Tuesday said:

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

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?

[Coach Tuesday]

3 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

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

 

Announce it?

3 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said:

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?

 

This thread is the equivalent of a practice fight.  We need the pads to go on and we need to start hitting other teams.  This is booooooring stuff.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

7 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:

Announce it?

 

No, no that wasn't it.....it'll come to me....I GOT IT!  You could set us a great example by ceasing to read and contribute to it yourself!

[Coach Tuesday]

21 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

No, no that wasn't it.....it'll come to me....I GOT IT!  You could set us a great example by ceasing to read and contribute to it yourself!

 

Eh, that's not my style.  I'll drive 50 miles just to vote "undecided."

[SouthNYfan]

1 hour ago, 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.

 

It's been (sadly) a staple for a long time that it's better to be the first to break news, regardless of fact vs fiction.

The instant information era has only magnified the problem.

[LabattBlue]

2 hours ago, 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.

Then I have no idea how I stay informed since I'm not on twitter. 

[26CornerBlitz]

Just now, LabattBlue said:

Then I have no idea how I stay informed since I'm not on twitter. 

 

Good luck to you. 

[4merper4mer]

9 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Not convicted of rape.

 

But convicted and a rapist, so...yes.

So if your hero Tom Brady has been convicted of a traffic violation then he is a convicted douche bag cheater?  Because he would be convicted, a douche bag, and a cheater.

 

Look, I'm sorry to use your favorite team to illustrate but words have meanings.  TG did not call CB "convicted and a rapist". He called him a "convicted rapist".  Regardless of how vile CB and his actions were, TG was wrong and opened himself up to being sued.  Maybe he should have just mocked VCs looks or golf game if he wanted to publicly douche it up.  He chose poorly.

[TBBills Fan]

On 6/4/2018 at 11:12 PM, Jay_Fixit said:

I’d say I’m a poor mans jayryp80.

 

 

thats being generous......

[purple haze]

7 hours ago, 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. 

There is truth to that.  But social media has links to reputable sources of information  as well.  You just have to know who they are.   The issue with that is those sources who are not reputable spend a lot of their time attempting to cast legit sources as untrue to muddy the water.

Edited June 6, 2018 by purple haze

[K-9]

8 minutes ago, purple haze said:

There is truth to that.  But social media has links to reputable sources of information  as well.  You just have to know who they are.   The issue with that is those sources who are not reputable spend a lot of their time attempting to cast legit sources as untrue to muddy the water.

All true. Saw a great and dangerous example of that today when an "anonymous twitter source" tweeted about the phrase "oconus sources" (intelligence operations) used in texts between Strzok and Page of the FBI. Fox news then jumped on this, reported it as "operatives" in the Trump campaign and The Donald then wasted no time tweeting about "spies" in his campaign. A non-reputable source offers a tweet of half truths, it's picked up by a major outlet and reported as facts, and our own president tweets it to millions. These are dangerous times. 

[3rdand12]

6 hours ago, Coach Tuesday said:

 

Eh, that's not my style.  I'll drive 50 miles just to vote "undecided."

okay I laughed pretty hard right here

16 minutes ago, K-9 said:

All true. Saw a great and dangerous example of that today when an "anonymous twitter source" tweeted about the phrase "oconus sources" (intelligence operations) used in texts between Strzok and Page of the FBI. Fox news then jumped on this, reported it as "operatives" in the Trump campaign and The Donald then wasted no time tweeting about "spies" in his campaign. A non-reputable source offers a tweet of half truths, it's picked up by a major outlet and reported as facts, and our own president tweets it to millions. These are dangerous times. 

some do not see it quite as clearly. The equation as it can and does occur.
Without turning this into a history lesson that repeats itself. This is a proven dangerous series of events to influence the broader audiences perspective.
This event has also been described as  "propaganda " some folks are immune to that reality.

 Folks need to be disciplined in how they filter the barrage is the best we can do.

 

[purple haze]

5 hours ago, K-9 said:

All true. Saw a great and dangerous example of that today when an "anonymous twitter source" tweeted about the phrase "oconus sources" (intelligence operations) used in texts between Strzok and Page of the FBI. Fox news then jumped on this, reported it as "operatives" in the Trump campaign and The Donald then wasted no time tweeting about "spies" in his campaign. A non-reputable source offers a tweet of half truths, it's picked up by a major outlet and reported as facts, and our own president tweets it to millions. These are dangerous times. 

Of course they did...  Which brings me to the other part of source vetting.  Some folks just don't care and are willing to be purposely misled.  People make mistakes.  Journalists can get info wrong at times.  That's different than a "news" outlet intentionally spreading misinformation.   We are definitely in dangerous times and that includes those who   buy into the propaganda machine out of petulance or other reasons.  Eventually that machine, unchecked, will eat them too.

[mob16151]

23 hours ago, LabattBlue said:

Then I have no idea how I stay informed since I'm not on twitter. 

 

 

Not woke?

[Hapless Bills Fan]

On 6/6/2018 at 11:52 AM, LabattBlue said:

Then I have no idea how I stay informed since I'm not on twitter. 

 

I'll tell you my secret.  Our neighbor keeps parrots. 

 

I go read her birdcages. 

 

?

[Rob's House]

I don't want to get all political here, but WTF is "The Biscuit?"

[teef]

29 minutes ago, Rob's House said:

I don't want to get all political here, but WTF is "The Biscuit?"

your right to be thrown into a burning table has been revoked.

[Gugny]

29 minutes ago, Rob's House said:

I don't want to get all political here, but WTF is "The Biscuit?"

 

Isn't it the space between your nuts and your bunghole?