Mort had Stage 4 Throat Cancer; Cheatriots fans whine some more

[slowstrung]

Oh, how to tiptoe around this... let's see if I can.

There is really no doubt that Mort was used by sources. Those sources are his employer's most important, and lucrative, business partners. The majority of consumers for both products (the NFL & ESPN) do not care about the truth - they long ago decided what was "true" and what was not, and have no interest in learning more (or that they are, in fact, wrong). The (minority) constituency that does care about the truth (ha!) has engaged in some rather vile behavior in making their dissatisfaction with Mort, his employer, and their business partner known.

Complicating things, a retraction was issued. It was weak, and it was done on Friday night at midnight by someone other than Mort - but it happened. As for why he didn't - well, I think that goes directly to how he was personally treated by DFG Truthers, and by some nominal "peers" like Scott Zolak. I don't think he's "right", but I can see why Mort has decided that his personal suffering at the hands of DFG Truthers has negated the need for him to apologize / own his mistake. And because it is just a "wronged" minority that thinks he should correct the record - and neither his employer, nor their business partner wants him to - he won't. Therefore, it's ok IMO to think Mort is a piece of shit. But in no place else does he have a credibility or integrity problem. He's still seen as a "journalist" in Bristol, in the NFL League Office, and in most NFL markets. In fact, he's probably gonna end up in Canton at some point - which will really make some people mad.

He has no obligation to "out" his sources - and no motivation to do so. The only people who really care are, unfortunately, tied to the DFG Truthers who long ago lost credibility with ... well, everyone. That's just a (sad) fact at this point. Mort "coming clean" would be bad for ESPN and the NFL. That's why it'll never happen. That's why they'll continue to trumpet him, and his "journalistic integrity". If you must, you can chalk up another "victory" for the NFL - they've "won" on brain damage, and they've "won" on domestic abuse, and they "won" on this.

What's a DFG Truther? Is that like the folks here who tell him all the ways his bullshit tweet has tarnished the GOAT and hurt the Pats for false reasons, or just the real twitter assholes who wish death on him? I hope you meant the latter, because "truther" is obviously a perjorative term nowadays.

 

[mauf]

Oh, how to tiptoe around this... let's see if I can.

There is really no doubt that Mort was used by sources. Those sources are his employer's most important, and lucrative, business partners. The majority of consumers for both products (the NFL & ESPN) do not care about the truth - they long ago decided what was "true" and what was not, and have no interest in learning more (or that they are, in fact, wrong). The (minority) constituency that does care about the truth (ha!) has engaged in some rather vile behavior in making their dissatisfaction with Mort, his employer, and their business partner known.

Complicating things, a retraction was issued. It was weak, and it was done on Friday night at midnight by someone other than Mort - but it happened. As for why he didn't - well, I think that goes directly to how he was personally treated by DFG Truthers, and by some nominal "peers" like Scott Zolak. I don't think he's "right", but I can see why Mort has decided that his personal suffering at the hands of DFG Truthers has negated the need for him to apologize / own his mistake. And because it is just a "wronged" minority that thinks he should correct the record - and neither his employer, nor their business partner wants him to - he won't. Therefore, it's ok IMO to think Mort is a piece of shit. But in no place else does he have a credibility or integrity problem. He's still seen as a "journalist" in Bristol, in the NFL League Office, and in most NFL markets. In fact, he's probably gonna end up in Canton at some point - which will really make some people mad.

He has no obligation to "out" his sources - and no motivation to do so. The only people who really care are, unfortunately, tied to the DFG Truthers who long ago lost credibility with ... well, everyone. That's just a (sad) fact at this point. Mort "coming clean" would be bad for ESPN and the NFL. That's why it'll never happen. That's why they'll continue to trumpet him, and his "journalistic integrity". If you must, you can chalk up another "victory" for the NFL - they've "won" on brain damage, and they've "won" on domestic abuse, and they "won" on this.

I think the tide of public opinion turned a bit when a federal judge threw out Brady's suspension, even though that decision was later reversed. Most fans don't like the Patriots or Brady, so neither will ever be seen as victims in this, but it's been a while since I've heard an intelligent fan maintain that they're cheaters. And the near-universal reaction to Brady's suspension, even among Pats haters, has been to compare it to the suspensions the NFL has handed out to rapists, wife-beaters, and other low-lifes. In sum, pretty much everyone outside New England has moved on -- something unfair happened to someone who they don't like, and they don't much care.

 

[PBDWake]

Like many others have said, the thing I hold against him is that he either refuses to accept any responsibility or doesn't understand why his specific reporting was relevant and take any responsibility. He thinks that since they were still "significantly underinflated" that the numbers are irrelevant. But the numbers really did shape the discussion itself. It made bill belichick give a goddamn science lecture on the podium to try and explain ideal gas law and how balls could get there and be a laughingstock to a national media that couldn't care less about in depth science. It brought in Bill Nye and Neil Degrasse Tyson to try and prove how it was impossible for footballs to get to that point (neither of whom I've seen rerun the numbers with the actual pressures). And as far as most anyone on a national level goes, those are the only two scientists that matter, and if anyone is gonna disagree with them, they're probably pats homers with bad science. And he refuses to own that. I let go of holding DFG over Peter king (now I just resent him because he puts out terrible content), but he at least made an apology in an equally visible forum as the one he put out the story in

 

[pappymojo]

http://www.ap.org/company/News-Values

This is from the Associated Press.

When we're wrong, we must say so as soon as possible. When we make a correction in the current cycle, we point out the error and its fix in the editor's note. A correction must always be labeled a correction in the editor's note. We do not use euphemisms such as "recasts," "fixes," "clarifies" or "changes" when correcting a factual error.

A corrective corrects a mistake from a previous cycle. The AP asks papers or broadcasters that used the erroneous information to use the corrective, too.

For corrections on live, online stories, we overwrite the previous version. We send separate corrective stories online as warranted.

This is from Mort.

When I am wrong, I will bury my head in the sand and stall as long as I can. When I absolutely have to, instead of making a correction, I will simply delete the original report/tweet and hide from discussing what I did. When questioned further, I will make excuses and say that even though what I wrote was wrong, it would still kind of correct if I changed the wording of the original report/tweet, even though anyone who is paying attention will understand that my rewording is still, more likely than not, inaccurate. Then I will complain about how mean my detractors are based on some internet comments even though the comments sections of the articles posted by my parent company (ESPN) are a god-damned cesspool of depravity.

 

[Morning Woodhead]

Maybe a thread title change. "Mort beat Stage 4 throat cancer....now he can fuck off"

 

[ifmanis5]

I don't think you understand what a false premise is.

• I used deductive reasoning to conclude that he was manipulated into posting false info by his source. That's not a false premise, it's the most likely of two possibilities.
• The issue of whether he meets my definition of what a journalist is or not is also not a false premise - it's my opinion.

I get that you have some weird affection for the journalist that you think Mort was at some point. I don't share that, but fine.

You said that Mort:

We know that either Mort was manipulated by his source to get incorrect information out to the public or that Mort made it up.

Those are your words and those are your premises.

I don't have any 'weird affectation' to paint him as a journalist when he has 30 years of work to prove that he clearly is one. He butchered the DFG story (and continues to) but by any definition of the word as it is practiced, he is a journalist.

 

[pedro1918]

Complicating things, a retraction was issued. It was weak, and it was done on Friday night at midnight by someone other than Mort - but it happened.

Is this correct? I thought the ESPN late night apology was because multiple ESPN personalities (Hannah Storm, John Clayton) kept reporting the Patriots were found to have video taped opponents practices. Was there a second late night apology?

I can't keep track of this stuff anymore.

 

[ifmanis5]

Is this correct? I thought the ESPN late night apology was because multiple ESPN personalities (Hannah Storm, John Clayton) kept reporting the Patriots were found to have video taped opponents practices. Was there a second late night apology?

I can't keep track of this stuff anymore.

Correct, they apologized for Spygate on screen graphic: http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/espn-apologizes-to-patriots-for-citing-false-super-bowl-report-from-08/

"On two occasions recently -- in an onscreen graphic and in an anchor’s unscripted remarks – SportsCenter incorrectly referenced an inaccurate 2008 newspaper account regarding the New England Patriots and Super Bowl XXXVI," King said. "We strive to be accurate in all of our reporting and fair to those we cover. Thus, we took steps to ensure that this error won’t happen again, and we deemed it necessary to make a public apology to the Patriots organization."

 

[soxfan121]

Is this correct? I thought the ESPN late night apology was because multiple ESPN personalities (Hannah Storm, John Clayton) kept reporting the Patriots were found to have video taped opponents practices. Was there a second late night apology?

I can't keep track of this stuff anymore.

Correct, they apologized for Spygate on screen graphic: http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/espn-apologizes-to-patriots-for-citing-false-super-bowl-report-from-08/

Thank you for the correction. My bad.

 

[Average Reds]

You said that Mort:
Those are your words and those are your premises.

The problem I have is that you referred to them as false premises, which is nonsense.

We know with factual certainty that the specific details of Mort's tweeted report were false. Which means as a matter of logic that he was either fed false information or he provided it himself. So there is absolutely nothing false about my premise there.

There's also the fact that you failed to quote the portion where I concluded that he was likely fed the false information, Which brands you as dishonest in addition to not being able to read.

I don't have any 'weird affectation' to paint him as a journalist when he has 30 years of work to prove that he clearly is one. He butchered the DFG story (and continues to) but by any definition of the word as it is practiced, he is a journalist.

That's your opinion. My opinion (or premise) is that his employment as a reporter convering the NFL at ESPN means that he is hopelessly compromised and as a consequence cannot function as a journalist.

I welcome an honest discussion about that. But I don't appreciate being labeled as "Alex Jones" in order to position me as some sort of whack job so you can ignore what I actually said.

 

[Van Everyman]

This is pretty funny:

View: https://twitter.com/zachzachzach/status/1173794012257574912?s=21

 

[Gambler7]

This is pretty funny:

View: https://twitter.com/zachzachzach/status/1173794012257574912?s=21

Looks Like Mort figured out how to use Twitter. He couldn't evenfigure out how to delete a tweet a few years ago.

 

[Van Everyman]

It's pretty bizarre, to be honest. I follow both Rapsheet and Schefter -- and they have 98% of the same content, so I'm not sure why this is the one that seems to have pushed Ol' Faithful over the top.

 

[Reverend]

Poor Ian.

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

This thread reminded me of how fun this place used to be a few short years ago.

All at the expense of Morts cancer. So fitting.

 

[Reverend]

This thread reminded me of how fun this place used to be a few short years ago.

All at the expense of Morts cancer. So fitting.