Lost among the epithets

by user Iancass

Besides the obvious offensiveness of Ozzie Guillen's choice of insult for Jay Mariotti, what's unfortunate about him using such a slur is that it obscures a very valid criticism. If a sportswriter or columnist is going to bash someone in print, he or she should have the guts to face that person in the locker room the next day. And if Mariotti can dish it out, but can't take it, he deserves to be ripped for that.

Look, my sportswriting experience is limited. But it's given me an idea of how the job works. And sometimes, answering for your words is part of that - especially when you're expressing your opinions.

On his old radio show, Tony Kornheiser occasionally talked about the confrontations he had with Charles Mann and Darrell Green in the Redskins locker room. No, it wasn't easy, and he was scared a few times, but that's what (good) sportswriters do. And on his show yesterday, the Detroit News' Terry Foster mentioned an argument he had with the Lions' Brett Perriman, after he blamed the receiver for losing a game.

Should you take a bucket of ice water over your head, as Mitch Albom once did from the Tigers' Guillermo Hernandez? Of course not. But if you take a shot at someone, you'd better be in that locker room the next day to face up to it. Otherwise, you're not going to earn any respect from the people you cover or your colleagues.

Want an example of that? Check out the column from Mariotti's cross-town rival, Rick Morrissey of the Chicago Tribune, in today's edition. To paraphrase the article, showing up and taking your punches is a badge of honor among sports columnists. If you're not doing that, you're not a columnist, you're essentially a blogger. The only difference between Mariotti and many of us who post our opinions most days is that he travels to the events.

And if you read and watch the reports and columns on this story, you'll see writers and analysts taking offense to Guillen's remarks and half-hearted apologies, but you won't see too many - if any - defenses of Mariotti. It's too bad that's not the story being written.

Sweaty Men Endeavors http://sweatymen.blogspot.com

Date

Fri 06/23/06, 6:41 am EST

Patrickburke1980All-American

1256 days ago

Score -3

sweatymen.blogspot.com???

Permalink | Reply

The sharkDraft Pick

1256 days ago

Score 1

I agree. The only problem I have with Ozzie is the language he uses when going back at someone. Why does he feel the need to foster hate? Mariotti is an idiot - granted - but his words do not foster hate among or alienate the population at large.

Permalink | Reply

ASwaffAll-American

1256 days ago

Score 1

I think Mariotti had a fair point in his article when he said he's not always in Chicago, because he covers a number of events. He's not a beat writer for the Sox, he travels all over to cover stuff. It's not like he's avoiding Guillen, he's rarely at the games, and he wasn't IN Chicago the day after he wrote the article. You're presenting an unfair premise and an unfair criticism. I think what's REALLY lost in the slurs is that Guillen has made himself the story instead of the World Series winners being one of the best teams in baseball. What happened to the philosophy of the team and its players being the story, rather than the coach? This team will suffer as long as Guillen keeps trying to seek the kind of fame he never enjoyed as a player. The dude needs to take it down a notch or 12.

Permalink | Reply

FriskysmanVarsity Captain

1256 days ago

Score 1

Great post. You're absolutely right. Another writer doing the same sort of thing is Bill Simmons. He sits out there in LA bashing anyone and everyone but never has the guts to show up and face the music. He'd been bashing Isiah Thomas for some time, and Thomas finally got sick of it and basically indirectly threatened Simmons. What does Simmons do? He increases his rate of Isiah bashing. How is he any better than people who get into Internet flame wars? You know they wouldn't have the balls to type half of what they do if they had to say it to someone's face or at least face that person at some point down the line. Simmons would run away screaming if he ever saw Thomas on the street.

Permalink | Reply

ASwaffAll-American

1256 days ago

Score 1

So, this is a macho thing? Come and face me like a man? That's crap. Simmons is in LA. Does that mean that he can't write about anyone outside of LA? Only stories in LA are in bounds? Should he take a special trip to New York to tell Isaiah, "I'm writing a story that bashes you, and I just wanted to come out here and face you about it like a man"? What is he supposed to say? I don't buy your premise at all.

Permalink

FriskysmanVarsity Captain

1256 days ago

Score 1

I'm not saying anyone needs to face anyone. I'm just sick of all these sports writers who sit there in their cubicles and think they are qualified to bash everyone they don't like. You speak of a "macho thing," well I think it's become a macho thing for the writers. Mariotti is a prime example of this. Read this "year in review" about him and tell me he isn't trying to be a macho:

http://blogs...ottis_y.html

I don't think writers should be able to spew so much venom unchecked. I'm not saying they should have to go into the locker room and go head-to-head with their target in a fist fight, but there has to be some level of accountability.

In the case of Simmons, no, he doesn't need to go to New York and tell Thomas he is going to bash him, but he could show some balls by giving Thomas a chance to respond to all his bashing. Mariotti wouldn't give that opporunity to Ozzie, so Ozzie took it upon himself to respond, and now he's being criticized for it. Some of the blame has to go to Mariotti.

Permalink

ASwaffAll-American

1256 days ago

Score -1

By the way, Guillen isn't being criticized for taking it upon himself to respond. He's being criticized for the slur that he used, and the language he continues to use. This isn't repression of speech, it's trying to bring a level of decency to a game that seems to be losing it thanks to guys like Guillen.

Permalink

XinophDraft Pick

1256 days ago

Score -1

I'm sorry, but an idiotic post. Simmons, like Mariotti, isn't living in a cave in Afghanistan. He has a cell phone, he has employers, and I bet he's pretty easy to track down. Just because he doesn't live next door to someone he writes about doesn't mean he's hiding from them. This is juvenile logic and a red herring. Think about it; what would you do if someone threatened you? Call them a nice guy? He should not be a good reporter because Isiah's a bully? Give me a break. What are we, on the junior high playground here? Act like a grown-up.

Permalink

XinophDraft Pick

1256 days ago

Score -1

You know what, anyone is qualified to bash anyone in this country. It's called freedom of speech, look it up. The only difference between you and sports writers is that they get paid. If you don't like sports writers because of their negative opinions, you should never have a negative opinion on this site. It's only fair.

Permalink

FriskysmanVarsity Captain

1256 days ago

Score 1

Freedom of speech...yes. So remind me again why Jay has freedom of speech but Ozzie doesn't. And don't tell me it's because Ozzie called Jay a fag. Freedom of speech is freedom of speech, whether you like the speech in question or not. I'm not saying people shouldn't criticize each other. I'm simply saying everyone should get their fair chance to respond. If Ozzie wants to call Jay a fag, that's his right.

Permalink

XinophDraft Pick

1256 days ago

Score -1

He does have freedom of speech - obviously. He said it. If he didn't have freedom of speech he couldn't have said it - obviously. Go read the Constitution. Freedom of speech protects you from the government punishing you for what you say, not from your employeer disciplining you for what you say. Go take a social studies class and get back to me.

Permalink

FriskysmanVarsity Captain

1256 days ago

Score -1

Well then, what are we arguing about? Everyone should just leave Ozzie alone. Freedom of speech.

Permalink

XinophDraft Pick

1256 days ago

Score -3

You have freedom of speech. You don't have freedom to be Manager of the Chicago White Sox. As I noted in my article, the White Sox can and should fire him for being offensive. Your job is not constitutionally protected.

Permalink

FriskysmanVarsity Captain

1256 days ago

Score 1

So, basically, everyone should be fired everytime they call someone a fag or worse? How many people would still have jobs? That aside, the White Sox CAN fire Ozzie, but they won't. So leave it at that. You and other writers claiming he should be fired is just a way of trying to make Ozzie pay for exercising his right to free speech. Maybe I should inform your boss of all the personal insults you've been throwing at me today and see if I can't get you fired. How does that sound? With threat after threat to our civil rights these days, I'm surprised you or anyone would advocate a person losing their job over a bad word. Funny how you say reporters can write whatever they want, but if the manager of a baseball team says something wrong, he should be fired.

Permalink

XinophDraft Pick

1255 days ago

Score -2

Yes, that makes sense. Me saying that in this one situation one person should be fired means that I necessarily believe everyone should be fired in this same situation. Do you even have logic in your universe, or do you just choose to ignore it? I suppose it's much easier to take things completely out of context than to respond to what I actually wrote. I never insulted you, by the way. I criticized your ideas. If disagreeing with you is an insult, you must live in a pretty close-minded little world; no wonder you don't care about bigotry.

Permalink

ASwaffAll-American

1256 days ago

Score 0

"Mariotti wouldn't give that opporunity to Ozzie, so Ozzie took it upon himself to respond, and now he's being criticized for it. Some of the blame has to go to Mariotti."

What do you mean, Mariotti wouldn't give him the chance to respond? The guy has NO trouble finding a microphone. Mariotti is a sports writer, not Guillen's PR man. It's not his job to make sure that if he's going to write about Guillen, he covers him in the best possible light. He was giving his opinion, plain and simple. If Guillen wants to respond, he can respond. He obviously had his chance, and he blew it by using the kind of epithets and foul language that he always uses. Mariotti is not to blame for Guillen's inability to control his mouth, nor for his inability to take criticism. Coaches are criticized on a daily basis, from the newspapers to the water coolers to sports blogs like this one. It's part of the job. It's also part of the job to handle it like a man, instead of calling someone who disagrees agrees with you a piece of (bleep) wimp. Guillen is to blame 100% for his inability to control his mouth, not Mariotti.

Permalink | Reply

FriskysmanVarsity Captain

1256 days ago

Score 0

Mariotti goes beyond your typical sports writer. He clearly has a vendetta against Ozzie and the White Sox organization. As such, he has no credibility and I have no problem with what Ozzie said about him. What should he do, take the time to write out a well-spoken 1500 word column on why Jay is full of crap? Obviously he doesn't have time on his hands like Mark Cuban does. The only way for Ozzie to do that would be for Jay to sit down and interview him and clear the air. But Jay obviously has no intention of doing that so Ozzie kept it simple and called him a (bleep)ing fag. No matter what words Ozzie uses, the message is the same. I don't know how else Ozzie could handle it, other than not respond at all, but that isn't his style, and if you read the kind of crap Jay writes, you'd have to have some serious self-control not to respond. So it all comes down to HOW you respond. How would you propose he do it?

Permalink

XinophDraft Pick

1256 days ago

Score -1

He has a vendetta against Ozzie? Really? I read Mariotti's column, and it's not clear to me that he criticizes the ChiSox anymore than anyone else. I never would have even thought of it before this mess erupted. Plus, you might recall he did encourage the ChiSox to hire him in the first place. Get your facts straight.

Permalink

FriskysmanVarsity Captain

1256 days ago

Score 1

If you want to talk about facts, try reading some:

http://blogs...ottis_y.html

If you don't think Mariotti has a vendetta against the White Sox, I don't know what to tell you. It's pretty much common knowledge to people who actually follow the team. Ask a few White Sox fans what they think.

Permalink

XinophDraft Pick

1256 days ago

Score -3

You did read the part where I said I read his column, right? Oh well, if White Sox fans think it, it must be true. You're right, that convinces me. That's a good rebuttal there.

Permalink

FriskysmanVarsity Captain

1256 days ago

Score 0

Um, I'm pretty sure White Sox fans know more about Chicago writers than you do, being that they follow those writers every day. Oh, and congradulations on reading one column. That's impressive. I'm sure you can tell a person's feelings about an entire organization based on that.....
Listen, try reading the link I posted which contains a lot more of Jay's columns. I'd be very suprised if you can finish that and not believe he's a (bleeping) idiot.

Permalink

XinophDraft Pick

1256 days ago

Score -2

How else would you judge his feelings? Your magic mind-reading skills? I wasn't challenging the knowledge of White Sox fans about Chicago. You might know that if you actually read what I posted. I was challenging the assertion that Mariotti picks on one team. Since I read his column regularly, I know as much as anyone else who reads it regularly. Being a ChiSox fan doesn't give you some special key to Mariotti's head. I didn't ever write that he wasn't an idiot. I wrote that he didn't especially pick on the ChiSox. Again, read what I actually wrote and respond to that next time.

Permalink

ASwaffAll-American

1255 days ago

Score -1

He doesn't have a vendetta against Guillen! He campaigned in favor of Guillen getting this job. Check your facts. You've been wrong every step of the way on this issue.

Permalink

XinophDraft Pick

1256 days ago

Score -1

It's a stupid criticism. Mariotti justly pointed that out in his column. Moreover, it's hypocritical because Ozzie didn't complain to Mariotti in private, just launched into an epithet-laced tirade in front of other reporters. Ozzie is a hypocrite. If he really believed that, he would have called Mariotti privately and expressed his beliefs, not sworn at him on TV.

Permalink | Reply

XinophDraft Pick

1256 days ago

Score -1

If we applied this stupid idea to all reporters, every columnist in the country who ever criticized President Bush would have to fly to Washington, meet with him in the Oval Office, and have a sit-down talk about it. Give me a break. This idea is so idiotic I find it hard to believe I actually have to argue against it.

Permalink

FriskysmanVarsity Captain

1256 days ago

Score 1

Maybe that's not such a bad idea...people talking things over and finding out all the facts before they resort to criticism. It would sure cut down on a lot of the BS being written these days.

Permalink

XinophDraft Pick

1256 days ago

Score -1

It's a terrible, idiotic, childish idea. What BS? People can write whatever they want. If it's an opinion, it's not BS. You might disagree with it, but it's not factually innacurate. Oh, and you know what? Most reporters actually do know the facts when they write about them. You might want to try it sometime.

Permalink

ChachiOSUDraft Pick

1256 days ago

Score 3

Sorry to jump in late, but I felt the Bill Simmons criticism was unwarranted. Simmons has wrote many unflattering things about Elgin Baylor and is not only a Clippers season ticket holder, but has also been in the same room as Elgin many times and I think they even finally talked about it all and worked out their problems. Also, Thomas didn't vaguely threaten him, he did threaten him. Thomas pretty much said, "I don't like what this guy said about me so I want to beat him up." Is that anyway to act? Don't most of us move past that stage of life in the third grade? Also, if you read Mariotti's response, he says he has been physically threatened numerous times on trips to the White Sox clubhouse. Would you want to keep going back their if that was happening to you?

Permalink | Reply

ASwaffAll-American

1255 days ago

Score 1

Why do people think this falls under freedom of speech? The First Amendment protects you from government persecution (or prosecution) for things you say. We have censors in this country, and we have libel suits. Freedom of speech is not without any exception at all. The First Amendment does not protect you from being fined by your employer for saying things it deems to be detrimental, and this is one of those things. He is part of the MLB world, and he makes all of MLB look bad with something like this. The First Amendment does not protect people from every and any action that might be taken for their offensive language. That's why I'm allowed to speak my opinion, but I could be prosecuted for inciting a riot. Why do you insist on hiding behind an amendment that this has nothing to do with?

Permalink | Reply

XinophDraft Pick

1255 days ago

Score -2

Exactly! Well put, ASwaff. The first amendment *is* why we can have independent media; it bears no relation on whether an employer can punish you for detrimental or offensive speech.

Permalink