ArmchairGM - A Call to Integrity

20

by user Ross K.

Every time an article like this shows up, there’s a small debate over whether or not it should be on this site or not. Let me tell you why it shouldn’t.

Yesterday I sent out a very professional e-mail to a very respected athletics communications department requesting a press pass to cover home games for this site. In this e-mail I explained a little about this site and how we are tying to build a respected and reputable sports news, opinion and information site.

Then when I logged on the site this morning, the same day they would be receiving my e-mail due to yesterday being Labor Day, I see “Who is the Hottest NFL Cheerleader?” at the very top of the page.

What are the chances of my e-mail being taken seriously if they happen to click the link to check out the site?

Not good.

I’m not judging anyone for ogling pictures of cheerleaders. If that’s your thing, have a great time. However I think this site should be held to higher standards and used for what it’s meant to be: a sports website.

While cheerleaders are part of sports, judging them by their looks is not. Leave that to Fark or College Humor or Maxim or whatever.

I know Sports Illustrated has a swimsuit issue, but Sports Illustrated’s staff isn’t run by a bunch of amateur/aspiring journalists as the majority of users of this site are.

We have to work harder to earn the respect of the people that visit this site. If we ever hope to be able to cover games and the sports world for real – not just by watching them on our couch or reading game recaps or ESPN.com stories, the audience whose respect we need to gain is not frat boys or high school kids with over-active sex drives.

There are millions of other websites that fill that need, I don’t think we need to be one of them.

Date

Tue 09/05/06, 9:49 am EST

Enable Comment Auto-Refresher

Patrickburke1980All-American

1186 days ago

Score 1

you make a good argument.

Permalink | Reply

Anonymous Fanatic #1

1186 days ago

Score 3

I wrote the article and you make a good argument. I will definitely think about it.

Permalink | Reply

1186 days ago

Score 4

that was me

BigPPupMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score 1

I agree, I never looked at it that way, but you bring up a valid point.

Permalink | Reply

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score 6

Your credentials is what they'll check, not everyone else's... send YOUR archive if you're concerned. After all, they'll give YOU the press pass, not us. You do your thing and we'll vote for it appropriately!

I'm all for fun AND legitimacy. Rob did absolutely nothing wrong. It IS a public forum and he brought what he thought the public wanted, judging by the votes/comments: mission accomplished.

+ I understand your concerns, but ease up, man... One article per 100 or so falls into this category... and since I am also a 'reader', I like variety. Why can't we have exactly that? Kudos to both/ALL of you for your efforts!

Let us know how it goes, CPCP... (However, I don't think an article like this is any better at creating 'legitimacy' by the way)

Permalink | Reply

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score 2

besides, if we vote the hottest Cheerleader and someone has the balls to get an interview - not that I care, but I nominate myself to try if no one else does... MORE PUB... all pub is good pub!

Alex HolowczakHall of Famer

1186 days ago

Score 2

I agree. It was interesting to note, however, that even some of this site's female persuasion voted... But considering you could all be spending time considering your voting for the Snooker Hall of Fame...

Permalink | Reply

FriskysmanVarsity Captain

1186 days ago

Score 5

ESPN does stuff just like this all the time with their hottest athlete brackets being the prime example. What's wrong with Armchair doing it? I think this is a case of some of us taking ourselves a little too seriously.

Permalink | Reply

I am a cpcpMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score -1

I talked about that in the article.

FriskysmanVarsity Captain

1186 days ago

Score 3

Again, I still think this is a case of people taking themselves too seriously. If you want to start limiting people on what they can write about on here because you have delusions of someone discovering your work and asking you to come write for ESPN.com and you don't want to jeopordize that, you might as well just shut this whole place down right now. I've seen a lot of pieces by utterly horrible writers; should we not allow them to write since it will lower the quality of our articles and give us less legitimacy?

FriskysmanVarsity Captain

1186 days ago

Score 0

And before you ask, no I didn't give you the down vote.

I am a cpcpMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score -2

I have no aspirations of writing for ESPN and you know that. You're taking yourself to seriously in trying to find a reason for discredit my article which is simply and opinion that quite a few people have agreed with.

FriskysmanVarsity Captain

1186 days ago

Score 2

Come on. You know I have never gone out of my way to discredit anything you write on here. This is our first disagreement and I just happen to think you are way off base.

The Widening GeierSoccer Kid

1186 days ago

Score 6

I slightly disagree. Firstly, I think it that the tone of your article teeters on the slippery slope of censorship. While I do think that an organization concerned with reputation might balk at issuing a press pass to a writer whose site's top article is "Hottest Cheerleader", I think the odds of you receiving a pass without an article like that are about the same. If AGM is your only offering in the journalism regard, I think you will have a tough time period. This is a fantastic wiki/forum, which I do enjoy writing on and learning from, but it is not likely to elicit a press pass from notoriously tough front offices and/or press departments. to question integrity based upon a fun article is a bit too harsh, unless you did so by design, to show your separation from said article to whomever might be viewing this site and debating your credentials.

Permalink | Reply

I am a cpcpMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score -1

I wasn't trying to separtate myself from the article, I was just saying how I feel. I didn't give my username to them and I don't use my last name anywhere on the site, so they couldn't really attribute it to me (other than the coincidence that I mentioned writing for a press pass, but I deliberatly didn't mention the institution for that purpose.) As far as censorship, would it be accepted for me to start posting movie reviews on here? How about recipies for chocolate chip cookies? I was addressing the topic of staying on subject.

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score 2

As long as it's sports related movies, yes (in fact there is already a category for it)! Recipes for tailgating or Helmet shaped cookies? Hell, YES!

FriskysmanVarsity Captain

1186 days ago

Score 1

As I said in the original thread, cheerleaders cheer at sporting events. This is a site about sports. Therefore, the article has its place on this site. If you can write about golf here, you can write about cheerleading.

I am a cpcpMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score -2

Again, I reference my article, "While cheerleaders are part of sports, judging them by their looks is not."

I am a cpcpMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score 0

To Update the Situation: I received an e-mail back that I need to contact a different department. I'm not planning on following up on it until all of this has passed.

FriskysmanVarsity Captain

1186 days ago

Score 2

Part of sports is judging the participants. If it wasn't, sites like this and countless others would not exist.

I am a cpcpMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score 1

I haven't seen any articles on here judging how hot any players are.

FriskysmanVarsity Captain

1186 days ago

Score 0

Doesn't matter what we're judging, only that we're judging.

I am a cpcpMajor Leaguer

1185 days ago

Score 0

As far as censorship goes, using my admin powers to delete the cheerleader article (which I would never, ever do) would have been censorship. Giving my opinion on whether or not the subject matter belongs is editing. If I worked for Premiere Magaine (it's a movie magazine if you're never read it) and I submitted an article to my editor about sewing curtains, the editor would not publish it. That's not censorship, that's keeping the magazine what it's meant to be. I don't feel that the article's content belongs, so I wrote this editorial addressing it.

FriskysmanVarsity Captain

1185 days ago

Score 1

Yeah, but sewing curtains and movies compared to cheerleaders and sports is a completely different thing. Unless the curtains belong to Tom Cruise, there's no doubt the article doesn't belong in a movie mag. But considering that cheerleaders are a part of sports and many other sporting websites have done features on cheerleaders, I don't think there's any doubt the article is at home here. Certainly you are free to express your position, but if there is any uncertainty at all (and there is A LOT in this case), I think we ought to err towards freedom of speech.

I am a cpcpMajor Leaguer

1185 days ago

Score 0

Actually reading through the comments, there are more users that say I make a good point/agree with me; even the author of the cheerleader article. While there may be "A LOT" of uncertainty with you, overall, there't not that much.

FriskysmanVarsity Captain

1185 days ago

Score 0

As I said, if there is any uncertainty at all (which there is, and not just from me), I think we ought to err towards freedom of speech. And besides, all the agreeing comments were made before I came in and gave the other side of the argument. Since then, I think most agree that the article has its place, regardless of their personal feelings about judging cheerleaders by their looks.

BigPPupMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score 3

I think people are over reacting to this article. Its not trying to censor anyone, or control how, or what you right. What is is saying, is be mindful of what your posting. AGM does not want to turn into a Maxium or something like that. Personally I liked the cheerleader article and voted on it, but we have to be aware and careful to not cross too far over that line, and damage the integrity of a great site.

Permalink | Reply

FriskysmanVarsity Captain

1186 days ago

Score 1

What's the difference between trying to censor someone and telling them to be mindful of what they post? It's one thing to disagree with an article, but any argument discouraging its existence is well on its way to censorship.

The Widening GeierSoccer Kid

1186 days ago

Score 2

I think the motivation is also a bit suspect. This isn't calling for "integrity" for integrity's sake, its for Ross' own benefit.

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score 1

I think the only censorship that should be minded is that we should be encouraging MORE readers/membership, not making it so stringent that people are afraid to contribute. I hate to say this, but some of the 'language' while technically closer to sports talk than not, isn't good for the site. If I can limit the F Bombs, everyone can... that's not censorship, it's good business!

I am a cpcpMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score 1

Yes, I'm that selfish. I did this all for me. Look at me instead of the cheerleader!!! I need the attention!!!!

Pardon me for citing relevant examples.

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score 2

Now you're T.O.??? hee hee!

Alex HolowczakHall of Famer

1186 days ago

Score 2

I think that it was a bit of a publicity thing. It says that users votes count 3x as much as non-users. Perhaps Roblefko hoped that it would get external attention, and as a result increase User Numbers. Similarly cpcp was trying to do the same thing (the site would get extra publicity and credit). So they were both hoping to achieve the same thing, but in different ways. Irrespective of which way was the right one.

Permalink | Reply

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score 1

This is how we all help Armchair grow! Different Strokes/Different Folks/One wiki-sports site for all! Maybe we should have an all-member showdown?

The Widening GeierSoccer Kid

1186 days ago

Score 7

<discretely offering that bickering may do as much damage as cheerleader articles>

Permalink | Reply

I am a cpcpMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score 2

I agree, I'm mad at myself for getting pulled in to it.

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score 0

You made a good point, so don't regret it.

I am a cpcpMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score 1

I meant getting pulled into the bickering in the comments, not posting the article.

ASwaffAll-American

1186 days ago

Score 1

I like your argument, but I see ESPN.com do things like that all the time. They take polls on the hottest women in sports, and they do yearly reviews of sex in sports. While I don't like the articles, I don't know that they diminish the website's integrity. If ESPN.com is doing it, you should be okay.

Permalink | Reply

I am a cpcpMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score 3

I seen to recall several articles on this site discrediting ESPN as an institution of integrity, just sayin' :-)

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score 4

ESPN discredited itself when Disney/ABC took over...

ASwaffAll-American

1186 days ago

Score 0

I didn't write any of those articles, but I'd agree with a general criticism of ESPN as an institution of integrity. My point was just that if you're doing the same thing ESPN is, you'll probably be okay. If you want to make a broader criticism of the integrity of sports journalism as a whole, that would be something else. And I'd probably agree. I'm just making the point that I don't think that article hurts the integrity of the site within the sports world. I'd be more quick to point to the shoddy rants that pass for articles with some of the members here when talking about something that hurts the integerity of the site. Sports journalists will stand for chauvanism, but there's no excuse for bad writing.

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score 0

if you do the same thing as ESPN, then you lack creativity and therefore suck just like ESPN does... now if you'd pardon me, I'm going back to watching ESPN News, reading The Magazine and listening to ESPN radio...

"Shoddy Rants" - this from the guy who stated "BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO" on the afore mentioned Cheerleader article, etc...

Ring! Ring! It's the pot calling...

ASwaffAll-American

1186 days ago

Score 1

Well, "Boooo" isn't a hastily thrown-together jumble of off-topic nonsense. That's what I was referring to. My "boooo" was to state my displeasure over yet another one of those articles without rehashing the same arguments that go nowhere.

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

1185 days ago

Score 0

I wasn't referring to your 'Boo", I was referring to your diatribe above.

UfgatorsDiv-I Stud

1186 days ago

Score 2

at the very least, Roblefko did not feature any photographs of the women on the front page of the article itself; rather, he included links to the photos.

Permalink | Reply

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

1186 days ago

Score 2

Well crafted article and despite any criticism of the content, such a great example in how to do a voting tournament properly - Even though I didn't vote, because IMO, it's stupid; I only hope there are more like it.

The BeastAAA-er

1186 days ago

Score 0

Last time I checked Athlon has a spirit contest, for the nation's top CHEERLEADER.

Permalink | Reply

I am a cpcpMajor Leaguer

1185 days ago

Score 0

I don't know what Athlon is, but thanks.

DRE-LOAAA-er

1186 days ago

Score 2

I do not think the article hurts the integrity of this website because I feel this site has established it's legitmacy for providing excellent sports topics, debates and discussion. I think that the athletics communications department would be overly impressed overall with ArmchairGM. Some of the articles I've read on this site trumped any article I've ever read on ESPN.com or any other sports sites. However, I do think that articles such as the cheerleader article should be kept few and far between. I think we've done a good job of that. Big ups to I'm a Cpcp for keeping this site moving forward!!

Permalink | Reply

DennisODellTee-Baller

1185 days ago

Score 1

First, if your aspirations are that high, go to journalism school and prove your legitimacy. Second, the traditional sports journalism world as already taken us down this path as you note in your article. So, I doubt any SID or PR person is going to be all that surprised. If they followed your bar, they would deny just about any local morning sports talk show host. For example, you think Czaban gets denied a press pass because of his web site that has a daily vote for a snicky?

Permalink | Reply

XinophDraft Pick

1185 days ago

Score 3

First of all, if integrity is the most important thing in your life, don't be a journalist. Secondly, I think the vast majority of people here *aren't* aspiring journalists. I for one could not get paid enough to be a journalist, let alone a sports journalist. OK, that's not true. I could get paid enough, but it'd have to be an awful lot - the point still stands. I have little to no desire to be a journalist of any kind, let alone a sports journalist.

Permalink | Reply

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

1185 days ago

Score 0

that's some of the wisest comments you've made, X!

Retrieved from "http://armchairgm.wikia.com/ArmchairGM_-_A_Call_to_Integrity"

This page was last modified 15:30, 5 September 2006. Content is available under the GFDL.