A Slippery Slope, Indeed!

I’ve not been a huge football fan over the years, but as a native Nebraskan, I’ve been proud that the Cornhuskers have generally fielded outstanding football teams with exceptional records. For me, the fact that Nebraska lost to the Oklahoma State Cowboys last weekend 45-14 in Lincoln was softened by my fondness for the Cowboys. Karen and I lived 10 years in Oklahoma, and we attended lots of Cowboy basketball and football games – even though OSU was usually at the short end of the stick while competing against the rival Sooners or the Nebraska Cornhuskers.

But this blog is not a soliloquy that joins the chorus of invective against NU coach Bill Callahan. I know very little about the man, and even less about his boss, Athletic Director Steve Pederson, who was fired today by NU Chancellor Harvey Perlman. I do know a little bit more about the University of Nebraska and its history – and I’ve always feared that this wonderful institution would forever wrap too much of its soul around a successful football team.

But this blog isn’t even about that endless friction between academics and athletics.

My subject in this blog is the Associated Press – the “AP.”

In the Rapid City (SD) Journal’s sports section on Monday, October 15, 2007, the Journal turned over huge headlines and 26 column inches to the Associated Press for an understandable fomenting of frustration about the Huskers and Callahan.

In an earlier day, I believe the Associated Press (AP) might have labeled this story as something other than news and perhaps would have put a by-line with the story.

Is there any doubt of the intent of the writer as the piece is ended?

“To win big, you need a wealth of resources and revenue, decked-out facilities and a big stadium that is packed beyond capacity seven or eight times a season. You also need strong leadership at the top. Which of those is Nebraska lacking?”

Perhaps the Rapid City Journal dropped a by-line or disclaimer that this is an opinion piece. Or maybe the Associated Press doesn’t much care that the line is blurred beyond recognition between AP news stories and things that are NOT news stories.

“Huskers hit a new low” was the headline. I suspect the Huskers will eventually overcome their adversity and prevail. My greater concern is that the Associated Press, a wonderful institution itself with a proud history, will continue its ill-conceived path into the world beyond factual news stories – without appropriately identifying it as such.

Worse, I fear it will spill over from the sports pages into other areas of reporting.

Return to Civil Discourse?

The firing of Don Imus was covered extensively by the media – and probably would still be a “front page” item, were it not for the shootings at Virginia Tech.

Sadly, Imus’ characterization of the women who play basketball for Rutgers as “nappy-headed hos,” was not atypical for Imus. A bright and articulate guy, Imus has traded in “edgy” comments for years, apparently emboldened by getting away with ever-increasing gross and/or offensive remarks, More sadly, he is not alone.

The airwaves remain filled with language and topics that perpetrators exchange for tidy paychecks from companies that trade in the business of bad taste. Of course, these same entities – like CBS and MSNBC – have done some good things over the years, too. That’s no excuse for tolerating, even encouraging and nurturing, program content that would never have been broadcast in days gone by.

Last week, I doubt that there was a broadcast market in the country not subjected to a poll asking, “Should Don Imus be fired?” Then later, after he was fired by both MSNBC and CBS, “Should Don Imus have been fired.”

The answer, of course, is yes. But the better question is: Does the firing of Don Imus signal an end to the trashy talk espoused by Imus, Howard Stern, and dozens of wannabe so-called “shock jocks”?

Broadcasting would do well to consider a return to the days when the National Association of Broadcasters issued its “seal of approval” for stations that subscribed to the NAB Code of Conduct. Find out more about the "Code of Conduct."

Some would contend that such a return to yesteryear is absurd, that it would fly in the face of the First Amendment, and that it would be unenforceable. I plead guilty to being a bit nostalgic, but I doubt that our forefathers envisioned the kind of filth being spewed over the airwaves of the 21st century. Enforcing such a code probably is a big stretch, especially in a day when “local” broadcasters responsible to local audiences are nearly impossible to find.

Perhaps we’ll just have to settle for banishing such trash to satellite radio services, which seem to have found a revenue stream from audiences that like such programming. Just as pornography has always had an audience, I suspect such “pay” satellite channels might survive – even thrive.

Better there than on the free over-the-air channels that belong to the public. It would be refreshing to see a return to relative civility by those broadcast media outlets that have spewed trash over our public airwaves in recent years.

The Death of...

You’ll find genealogy sites linked to the Black Hills Monitor, because I’ve been afflicted with the genealogy bug for a long time. In recent years, I’ve come to the conclusion that good obituaries have been dying off more rapidly than the poor souls they recognize.

The first sign was when a few enterprising newspapers figured out they could make a buck by selling obituary space to families of the deceased. When the newspaper business hit upon hard times, more and more papers looked to cut costs and eke out dollars wherever they could. The result was fewer newspaper-generated obituaries and more family-authored pieces that, while usually a bit longer and flowerier than the paper would generate, would put a few nickels in the coffers to help pay the rising costs of newsprint. These days, the Rapid City Journal will even put you on a guilt trip for not “showing how much you care” for a deceased pet by buying a pet obituary.

But that’s another story.

Today I refer to two obituaries about the same man. Jack Tatum. Not that Jack died. He didn’t. But he’s prominently discussed in obituaries written about former New England Patriot receiver Darryl Stingley, who died April 5. Stingley had been a quadriplegic since a tragic 1978 football game in which he collided with Oakland Raider safety Tatum. His football injuries apparently contributed directly to his cause of death.

I read about this in both the New York Times, one of my favorite papers, and the weekend USA Today, which I often pick up when I’m on the road. Both obituaries gave me the essential facts, but they diverged significantly when talking about Tatum.

Although I played a lot of football as a kid, I’m not a big fan of professional football, so I knew little about Stingley and nothing about Tatum. Both obituaries left me with a great deal of respect for the way Stingley chose to live his life after this horrific incident. As for Tatum, I’m not sure.

What I am certain of is the dramatic contrast between the Times and USA Today over the kind of guy Tatum was or is. The Times reported that Tatum never contacted Stingley after the incident. It quoted Tatum in his 1980 autobiography as saying, “This is the way the game is played…I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault.” The Times obituary of Darryl Stingley ended by drawing a stark contrast between a forgiving Stingley and an indifferent Tatum.

Frank Litsky of the Times ended the obituary, “Similar sentiments appeared in Stingley’s 1983 autobiography, ‘Happy to Be Alive.’ Tatum’s autobiography was titled ‘They Call Me Assassin.’”

The USA Today obituary painted a different picture of Tatum. It noted that although there was debate about the intensity of the hit, there was no flag thrown, and Patriot’s coach Chuck Fairbanks said nothing illegal happened. Unlike the Times story, USA Today carried a quote from Tatum that read, “I am deeply saddened by the death of Darryl Stingley…Darryl will be forever remembered for his strength and courage. My thoughts and prayers go out to his family.”

Same guys. Same-day obituaries. Different papers. And certainly a different portrayal of Tatum, depending on which paper you read.

It reminds me of the blind men who each touched a different part of an elephant and then described the elephant, resulting in huge disagreements about what an elephant is. How many other newspapers need to be read before we have an accurate assessment of Jack Tatum?

Please hand me my white cane.