Apparently, not Bobby Valentine. The Red Sox manager came freshly packaged off the ESPN set of its game-of-the-week and its Baseball Tonight telecasts, from where it seemed no one wanted him back in the Major League ranks whenever a position opened. This despite his vigorous lobbying for such.
Maybe it was his brash manner. Maybe it was his arrogance in practically declaring his availability and using the ESPN pulpit to do it.
But now that he's finally back where he thinks he belongs, he told Sports Illustrated that having managed in both New York and now Boston, he had no "preference" for either town's media.
He'd prefer, rather, to "...live in a nice little vacuum and play the game and not to have deal with people who have to either describe what happened or make up something about what they wish they saw."
What in the world would they have to "make up" without the Bobby Valentines of the world? Careful Bobby - you'll need someplace to park your car after the Red Sox gig. But, on second thought, ESPN needs people like you so they can continue to report things they "make up." They likely haven't leased out your parking spot yet to someone else who can "...make up something about what they wish they saw."
Like you would.
***
THE SOUREST PICKLE: I don't usually say I don't like people I've never met. But I'm beginning to think I can definitely say that people who call sports journalism a "juvenile interest" could be people I don't like.
Such a person is Dane Claussen, a sour pickle who did just that and much more in the Summer 2012 edition of Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, a publication which he edits for its publisher, the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (AEJMC). (By way of full disclosure, I'm a member of said organization.)
When I wrote to Claussen though, in disagreement, he replied to this career sports journalist that I have a temper problem (apparently anyone does who disagrees with him).
Yo, Dane, don't you get it? Your vicious attack on sports journalism is an attack on journalism. You claim to have encountered sports journalists in various newsrooms throughout that thing you call a career who "...were primarily having a good time" and that the "...more serious-acting journalists on staff later covered political news for USA Today, [the] Seattle Times, [the] Portland Oregonian, [the] Detroit News and other major dailies."
Good for them. And when did it become a crime to enjoy your job? By the way, I'm still waiting for political writers to tell me anything about this year's presidential campaign beyond the personal insults Barack Obama and Mitt Romney have been swapping. Maybe that's why insults are your first fallback in personal communication, Dane.
If anyone else wants to read the discouraging outlook Claussen has about (sports) journalism, go ahead. I won't reduce myself to repeat any more of it here other than to note that along his academic stops he found it personally disgusting that among "...students seriously planning to go into journalism...a far disproportionate number of them focused on sports journalism."
I guess Bryant Gumbel, Mary Carillo, Frank Deford, Bernard Goldberg, Jon Frankel, Andrea Kremer, Armen Keteyian and the Emmy Award-winning crew at HBO's Real Sports are pursuing a "juvenile interest." So is Bob Costas at NBC and so are Bob Ley and his Outside the Lines team at ESPN.
Stands to reason then that so is Christine Brennan at USA Today (ask your political reporter friends there what they think of her, Dane). So are the outstanding colleagues with whom I so proudly serve at the Journal of Sports Media, and especially founding editor Brad Schultz, whose chair I will never be distinguished enough to fill. So are the talented, award-recognized sports reporters alongside whose bylines I proudly plant this contributor's at The Daily Herald in suburban Chicago.
While we're at it, Dane, what do you think of your "colleagues" in the university ranks who teach sports journalism? Are we just instructing students on "...primarily having a good time?" Please explain that one to them at the AEJMC National Convention two weeks from this writing in Chicago (look forward to seeing you - no I don't).
Bottom line, your published words, Dane, are an insult to the entire journalism profession, if not the journalism-education profession as well. I'm stunned AEJMC allows you to use its publication to insult everyone who is attending its national convention. I would call upon the organization board to sanction you at the very least, although expelling you would be more appropriate.
By the way, I don't think unkindly of political writers, business writers, or any others, which is the way you obviously feel about all of us sports reporters of "juvenile interest." I was a business writer and author for a long time, concurrent to my sports reporting. I count among those business-journalism ranks some of my best friends and most-cherished relationships.
And I would never use my editorship of the Journal of Sports Media as a bully pulpit as you have, Dane, in conjunction with your editorial responsibility at Journalism & Mass Communication Educator.
No, wait ...I just used your name and the word "responsibility" in the same sentence.
I guess I do owe you an apology after all.
Nah. That wouldn't serve any purpose. It would just be of "juvenile interest."
Such a person is Dane Claussen, a sour pickle who did just that and much more in the Summer 2012 edition of Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, a publication which he edits for its publisher, the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (AEJMC). (By way of full disclosure, I'm a member of said organization.)
When I wrote to Claussen though, in disagreement, he replied to this career sports journalist that I have a temper problem (apparently anyone does who disagrees with him).
Yo, Dane, don't you get it? Your vicious attack on sports journalism is an attack on journalism. You claim to have encountered sports journalists in various newsrooms throughout that thing you call a career who "...were primarily having a good time" and that the "...more serious-acting journalists on staff later covered political news for USA Today, [the] Seattle Times, [the] Portland Oregonian, [the] Detroit News and other major dailies."
Good for them. And when did it become a crime to enjoy your job? By the way, I'm still waiting for political writers to tell me anything about this year's presidential campaign beyond the personal insults Barack Obama and Mitt Romney have been swapping. Maybe that's why insults are your first fallback in personal communication, Dane.
If anyone else wants to read the discouraging outlook Claussen has about (sports) journalism, go ahead. I won't reduce myself to repeat any more of it here other than to note that along his academic stops he found it personally disgusting that among "...students seriously planning to go into journalism...a far disproportionate number of them focused on sports journalism."
I guess Bryant Gumbel, Mary Carillo, Frank Deford, Bernard Goldberg, Jon Frankel, Andrea Kremer, Armen Keteyian and the Emmy Award-winning crew at HBO's Real Sports are pursuing a "juvenile interest." So is Bob Costas at NBC and so are Bob Ley and his Outside the Lines team at ESPN.
Stands to reason then that so is Christine Brennan at USA Today (ask your political reporter friends there what they think of her, Dane). So are the outstanding colleagues with whom I so proudly serve at the Journal of Sports Media, and especially founding editor Brad Schultz, whose chair I will never be distinguished enough to fill. So are the talented, award-recognized sports reporters alongside whose bylines I proudly plant this contributor's at The Daily Herald in suburban Chicago.
While we're at it, Dane, what do you think of your "colleagues" in the university ranks who teach sports journalism? Are we just instructing students on "...primarily having a good time?" Please explain that one to them at the AEJMC National Convention two weeks from this writing in Chicago (look forward to seeing you - no I don't).
Bottom line, your published words, Dane, are an insult to the entire journalism profession, if not the journalism-education profession as well. I'm stunned AEJMC allows you to use its publication to insult everyone who is attending its national convention. I would call upon the organization board to sanction you at the very least, although expelling you would be more appropriate.
By the way, I don't think unkindly of political writers, business writers, or any others, which is the way you obviously feel about all of us sports reporters of "juvenile interest." I was a business writer and author for a long time, concurrent to my sports reporting. I count among those business-journalism ranks some of my best friends and most-cherished relationships.
And I would never use my editorship of the Journal of Sports Media as a bully pulpit as you have, Dane, in conjunction with your editorial responsibility at Journalism & Mass Communication Educator.
No, wait ...I just used your name and the word "responsibility" in the same sentence.
I guess I do owe you an apology after all.
Nah. That wouldn't serve any purpose. It would just be of "juvenile interest."
***
But his recent passing removes a connection to Chicago's great eras of political reporting and communications in general. Plus, he was a friend of journalism education, including at my beloved Columbia College Chicago.
To his beloved Bonnie, also a great friend of journalism education at Columbia, my sincerest, most-heartfelt condolences.
Eventually, you replace good writers. But not great writing and Paul was a great writer.
***
Howard Schlossberg is editor of the Journal of Sports Media. He's an associate professor of journalism at Columbia College Chicago, where creativity and learning are embraced hand-in-hand. And he still writes sports for the award-recognized Daily Herald in Chicago's northwest suburbs.
