Lolo Jones Fires Back At Media For AK Analogy

[jazzcyclist]

The one thing I agree with ios that Lolo needs thicker skin. She's not the first athlete that people hated on. In her interview with Lewis Johnson after her heat, she seemed so discombobulated, it's amazing she was able to get through the race. Carl Lewis was hated on throughout his career, but he never let it affect him. The Williams sisters have also had to deal with haters, of a more insidious variety than that directed at Lolo. Look at Gabby Douglas, there were many people, Black women nonetheless, who were hatin' on her because they didn't like her hair. Ignore the haters Lolo.

[slowjo]

Great discussion about Jones on CNN this morning.

Basically they said that Jones expects the US media to be a cheerleader and not reporters. They felt that the NY Times article while harsh was fair-they guy who wrote it has followed and reported on women's sports for over 20 years-and at a time when it was not popular. He has a lot of respect, experience and persepective.

I think they hit the nail on the head-the press is not there to promote brand Jones.

[jazzcyclist]

Great discussion about Jones on CNN this morning.

Basically they said that Jones expects the US media to be a cheerleader and not reporters. They felt that the NY Times article while harsh was fair-they guy who wrote it has followed and reported on women's sports for over 20 years-and at a time when it was not popular. He has a lot of respect, experience and persepective.

I think they hit the nail on the head-the press is not there to promote brand Jones.

But you've also admitted to a hatred of Jones in the past. Most neutral observers who feel that Jones is fair game also concede that Longman went too far.

[Conor Dary]

This use of the word 'hatred' is becoming a broken needle. Who really cares anymore? Fortunately it is over.

That CNN is still on this idiotic story shows more of the level that they have sunk than anything else.

[jazzcyclist]

I just watched CNN piece. Since I'm a longtime Christine Brennan hater, I won't comment on her commentary, but here's the link to the video:

http://reliablesources.blogs.cnn.com/20 ... rip-media/

Also here's the take from the NYT Ombudsman:

The article by Jere Longman appeared under the Olympics-coverage “In the Rings” signature, which The Times uses to signify that the article is a point-of-view piece and not straight news coverage. This means, in The Times’s style, that the writer has some latitude to insert his own perspective.

I have written in the past about problems that arise with this approach, which sometimes translates into too much opinion appearing in the news columns. In this particular case, I think the writer was particularly harsh, even unnecessarily so.

I queried the sports editor about it, and his response was that “One person’s harsh is another person’s tough minded,” and that the writer, “while acknowledging Jones’s accomplishment and qualities of perseverance and candor, thinks this female athlete fell short.”

I believe writers like Jere Longman, who does have a long and worthy track record at The Times, should have some room to express their hard-earned perspective. But this piece struck me as quite harsh and left me, along with others, wondering why the tone was so strong.

http://publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.com/2 ... too-harsh/

[Conor Dary]

I just watched CNN piece. Since I'm a longtime Christine Brennan hater,

Hate, hate, hate....Everything is so black and white. I never watch CNN because it is all nonsense, Fox lite. Who cares what some moron there says?

[sprintzfan]

The one thing I agree with ios that Lolo needs thicker skin. She's not the first athlete that people hated on. In her interview with Lewis Johnson after her heat, she seemed so discombobulated, it's amazing she was able to get through the race. Carl Lewis was hated on throughout his career, but he never let it affect him. The Williams sisters have also had to deal with haters, of a more insidious variety than that directed at Lolo. Look at Gabby Douglas, there were many people, Black women nonetheless, who were hatin' on her because they didn't like her hair. Ignore the haters Lolo.

GREAT post jazz!!! Really well stated! I concur 1,000%. Not 100, 1,000!

[sprintzfan]

I just watched CNN piece. Since I'm a longtime Christine Brennan hater,

Hate, hate, hate....I never watch CNN because it is all nonsense, Fox lite. Who cares what some moron there says?

Agree with this characterization of CNN btw. Fox lite is nice. MSNBC is "Fox left" imo. But Fox lite is a good one for CNN. I'm gonna steal that one from you CD.

But unlike you CD, I still do watch all three networks though. Not a whole lot but some. Because as a bit of a politics junkie I like to keep up on the mood of the electorate. And I do think the 3 cable news channels, and talk radio too, influences how voters think.

But I totally understand why you or anyone else, would totally avoid CNN. It's irks me often times. Didn't years ago. (1990s I guess.) But the past 10 years or so I've lost a lot of respect for them.

[sprintzfan]

As for Brennan on "Reliable Sources" this morning, I switched away from the Gold Medal basketball game, (and ALMOST missed LeBron's game sealing three pointer as a result ) just to hear her. And I agreed with about 80 or 90% of what she had to say about Lo Lo and this particular controversy.

What I didn't respest is how clearly (clear to me) she was protecting aka refusing to comment candidly on Jere Longman, that author of the NYT article subjet of this thread. She made it clear, that just because he is a colleague and long time friend/associate, she wouldn't be honest condemn his take on Lo Lo as the unnecessarily mean and personal attack it was in many places. I think Brennan would only characterize the story as "tough."

I don't like that kind of personal bias. Particularly for someone who has always come across to me, as a vocal advocate of "women's rights."

Brennan didn't have to totally slam the guy. But she could have been a lot more honest and critical about the tone he took.

She should have had the guts imo, to be more critical of the tone of Longman's piece. The tabloid-like tone.

[jazzcyclist]

Here's ESPN's Israel Gutierrez' take on Sports Reporters this morning:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZJ46jZeyWs

[slowjo]

I do not hate Lolo Jones.

I hate mass murderers, child molesters and loud lawn movers on a Sunday morning.


You sound like you suffer from the same complex she has.


Don't like what someone says so call them haters.I

[Conor Dary]

I do not hate Lolo Jones.
I hate mass murderers, child molesters and loud lawn movers on a Sunday morning.
You sound like you suffer from the same complex she has.
Don't like what someone says so call them haters.I

I thought that was a dumb remark by Jazz. When Jazz says mojo hates LJ...you know he has jumped the shark.

[jazzcyclist]

I do not hate Lolo Jones.

I hate mass murderers, child molesters and loud lawn movers on a Sunday morning.


You sound like you suffer from the same complex she has.


Don't like what someone says so call them haters.I

I'm only referring what you said about yourself. I don't want a pissing contest with you.

[jazzcyclist]

I do not hate Lolo Jones.
I hate mass murderers, child molesters and loud lawn movers on a Sunday morning.
You sound like you suffer from the same complex she has.
Don't like what someone says so call them haters.I

I thought that was a dumb remark by Jazz. When Jazz says mojo hates LJ...you know he has jumped the shark.

You don't have the moral authority to talk about "jumping that shark" after some of you Penn State commentary.

[Conor Dary]

I do not hate Lolo Jones.
I hate mass murderers, child molesters and loud lawn movers on a Sunday morning.
You sound like you suffer from the same complex she has.
Don't like what someone says so call them haters.I

I thought that was a dumb remark by Jazz. When Jazz says mojo hates LJ...you know he has jumped the shark.

You don't have the moral authority to talk about "jumping that shark" after some of you Penn State commentary.

I still stand by all my Penn State commentary, if you don't mind.

I just thought it was idiotic to say mojo hated LJ. Mojo, one of the sweetest people here.

I once sent a nasty comment her way once, which I apologized for, but still regret.

[slowjo]

I have no idea what what comment you made Conor or even the apolgy (and whatever it was no need to dredge it up).

I rarely hold a grudge...life is just too darn short and we all say things we regret.

As for being sweet...well not always!

But hating an athlete is just beyond my comprehension...tired of, ashamed of (drug cheats -not L Jones!) exasperated by (ones I coach) oh yes!

[guru]

Jones strikes again, telling quadriplegic former Rutgers football player Eric LeGrande he needs to "get checked for a concussion. clearly u've been hit in the head" to challenge her to a race.

Yikes...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/gameon/20 ... r/1609691/

[lonewolf]

Missleading headline.. she had no idea who he was..

[tandfman]

Missleading headline.. she had no idea who he was..

I'm sure you're right. But the picture of him in a wheelchair might have given her a clue. Or she could have Googled him.

Bottom line: she surely meant no harm, but she could have been more careful.

[decafan]

Missleading headline.. she had no idea who he was..

The picture of him in a wheelchair might have given her a clue. Or she could have Googled him.

Give me a break. No reasonable person would think this. Lolo has over 300k followers and gets random tweets ALL the time. You expect her to research each person? She was clearly joking. She treated him like a normal person having fun talking smack. I have zero problem with this exchange.

You Lolo haters are reaching on this one. This is a non story.

[tandfman]

I am not a Lolo hater.

[decafan]

I am not a Lolo hater.

My apologies. You are an unreasonable person with no sense of humor and in lock-step with the Lolo haters on this particular matter. But definitely NOT a Lolo hater.

[Daisy]

she surely meant no harm, but she could have been more careful.

You are an unreasonable person with no sense of humor

Mmm, his comment seems reasonable to me. I think the difference here is that some people just don't use, or follow twitter. I guess twitter has a culture where her response is within the boundaries of normal?

I have to echo tandfman here, with respect to being 'more careful'. She should realise by now that her tweets will be taken out of context.

[gh]

... But the picture of him in a wheelchair might have given her a clue.....

Have you actually looked at his picture? Like so many Twitter handles it's an unrecognizable blob, and even if you double-click it, it's not readily apparent what's up. The day that vetting photos before you respond to a Tweet is the day that whole enterprise goes away.

It's meant (and used) for quick repartee.

I'm not sure what kind of reaction you think a runner is supposed to have to "wanna race me?" Adn in this case, what kind of response was LeGrand looking for?

I think the lolo haters are simply having a field day with an unfortunate chain of events. To call her insensitive in these circumstances is ludicrous.

[decafan]

she surely meant no harm, but she could have been more careful.

You are an unreasonable person with no sense of humor

Mmm, his comment seems reasonable to me. I think the difference here is that some people just don't use, or follow twitter. I guess twitter has a culture where her response is within the boundaries of normal?

I have to echo tandfman here, with respect to being 'more careful'. She should realise by now that her tweets will be taken out of context.

Daisy, if you read my first response to tandfman, you will see his original post in a quote. I believe the part you agree with was added later as an edit. At least I didn't see it in his original post. But for what it's worth, I still think it is unreasonable to ask her to essentially NOT partake in the fun twitter banter with someone she took as a fan having fun. Which, by the way, he was.

[Daisy]

Daisy, if you read my first response to tandfman, you will see his original post in a quote. The part you agree with was added later as an edit.

Ah, I missed that edit.

But for what it's worth, I still think it is unreasonable to ask her to essentially NOT partake in the fun twitter banter with someone she took as a fan having fun. Which, by the way, he was.

I totally agree. I detest the tabloid culture where celebrities have absolutely no privacy. Worse, more often than not, they are painted in a bad or unflattering light. Unfortunately, though, it is a reality.

edit: and now the NYTimes has picked up the ball too.
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2012/10 ... tweet.html

[jazzcyclist]

I'm not sure what kind of reaction you think a runner is supposed to have to "wanna race me?" Adn in this case, what kind of response was LeGrand looking for?

I think the lolo haters are simply having a field day with an unfortunate chain of events. To call her insensitive in these circumstances is ludicrous.

Amen!

[guru]

Currently, there are 46 news agencies running this story(via Google search). My guess would be none of them are motivated by being "Lolo haters".

Jones can't have it both ways - if she wants people to pay attention to her, she shouldnt be surprised when she's called on the carpet for insensitive - or flat-out stupid - remarks, whether they're products of a brain cramp or not. And as the article noted, it's not so much what she said, but how she responded once she was made aware of LeGrand's situation.

[gh]

Currently, there are 46 news agencies running this story(via Google search). My guess would be none of them are motivated by being "Lolo haters"....

Merely confirming the sorry state of modern journalism. Make that "journalism"

[jazzcyclist]

Currently, there are 46 news agencies running this story(via Google search). My guess would be none of them are motivated by being "Lolo haters".

Jones can't have it both ways - if she wants people to pay attention to her, she shouldnt be surprised when she's called on the carpet for insensitive - or flat-out stupid - remarks, whether they're products of a brain cramp or not. And as the article noted, it's not so much what she said, but how she responded once she was made aware of LeGrand's situation.

To a certain point I agree with you. Celebrity is a double-edged sword. As an old friend once said, once you're important enough in this world to make the cover of Parade and have Time doing fluff pieces on you, you're also important enough to make the cover of the National Enquirer and have the New York Times doing hit pieces on you.

[tandfman]

edit: and now the NYTimes has picked up the ball too.
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2012/10 ... tweet.html

NYTimes was just running a story written by the AP.

[slowjo]

I check out twitter about once a week and rarely tweet anything (who cares what I had for lunch..okay Squackee does but besides him?) .

I did eliminate about 90% of the track athletes I followed because their narcissitic tweets made me start to really dislike them. Also eliminated those who post Jesus talk all day long. I want to stay a fan of some of those people on the track so not reading their inane posts might help.



Not that I was ever a Jones fan.

[tandfman]

Daisy, if you read my first response to tandfman, you will see his original post in a quote. The part you agree with was added later as an edit.

Ah, I missed that edit.

You missed it because it didn't (and still doesn't) show as an edit. For the past couple of years, it's been the case that if you edit your own post before anyone has responded to it, the fact that you've edited it does not appear.

In this case, I read what I wrote and I immediately realized that it could have sounded harsh, which I did not intend. So I edited it. decafan must have grabbed the quote in that short period of time (probably less than a minute) when the unedited version was visible.

[tandfman]

I did eliminate about 90% of the track athletes I followed because their narcissitic tweets made me start to really dislike them. Also eliminated those who post Jesus talk all day long. I want to stay a fan of some of those people on the track so not reading their inane posts might help.

I follow a whole bunch of athletes, and I've found the same thing. A lot of them tweet many times a day, telling the world what they're having for lunch, with whom they're going to dinner or a party, and lots of other petty details of their life about which I couldn't care less. But I don't dislike them because of this. They are young people, chatting with their friends in a medium that many of them use for that kind of interchange these days. Yes, some of their posts are inane. And some of them are imperfect in matters of spelling and grammar. So what? Is any of that a reason not to stay a fan? Not to me.

As for the Jesus talk, it's interesting to see which athletes go out of their way to retweet bible quotes, thank Jesus for all sorts of things, and otherwise share their religious beliefs. Some Olympic champions and medalists do that. It's part of their lives, and in some cases probably a part of their success.

[Conor Dary]

I check out twitter about once a week and rarely tweet anything (who cares what I had for lunch..okay Squackee does but besides him?) .

I did eliminate about 90% of the track athletes I followed because their narcissitic tweets made me start to really dislike them. Also eliminated those who post Jesus talk all day long. I want to stay a fan of some of those people on the track so not reading their inane posts might help.



Not that I was ever a Jones fan.

I have never done twitter, and can see I haven't missed anything.

Jesus talk all day?....ugh.
Some of these people have got to be incredibly boring to be around.