Philadelphia sportswriter Bill Conlin invokes Hitler in admonishing a blogger!
This is completely off topic as far as the 49ers are concerned, but as far as blogging goes, it's right on point. One of my fellow SB Nation bloggers passed along an interesting little article from CrashBurnAlley.com, a Philadelphia Phillies blog. Apparently the writer at CrashBurnAlley.com wrote to Bill Conlin in regards to voting for Jimmy Rollins for MVP. This Phillies blogger (again PHILLIES BLOGGER) was trying to explain why a guy like David Wright (among others) deserved the MVP award over Jimmy Rollins. The two emailed back and forth that say Bill Conlin go absolutely crazy in his condemnation of bloggers. Here's a link to the blog post, which details the background of the initial email and the subsequent email exchange. I HIGHLY recommend reading the entire post to get a better idea of everything. However, specifically, I wanted to bring to your attention one of Bill Conlin's responses:
Now I can see newspaper writers getting annoyed with bloggers infringing on their turf. When something new comes along traditionalists feel threatened. And if you want to wage war with bloggers so be it. HOWEVER, invoking a man who instituted mass murder in the name of ethnic cleansing goes beyond just being a bad idea. That's reprehensible and just hideous.
I first learned of this from the SB Nation Phillies Blogger and he made some interesting comments in regards to the pamphleteers comment.
From The Good Phight, our Phillies blogger:
This was, in part, how we got the American Revolution.
Perhaps it's to Conlin's credit (intellectually if not morally) that there is a strong similarity between the pamphleteers of the 18th century and the bloggers of the 21st. Just as the Thomas Paines of that time helped spread radical new ideas that ultimately undermined old, corrupt power structures, bloggers too refuse to passively accept the "wisdom" of pundits in every field of human activity--including sports. All of the sudden, we can talk back.
He sees us, all of us, as a threat to his enormous self-regard as an "expert." The discourse no longer goes just one way. As was never the case until the mid-1990s, when Conlin writes crap, we can call him on it, whether through direct e-mail--my god, how he must loathe logging on and having to endure the uninformed opinions of the hoi polloi--or by writing about it our own damn selves on blogs.
That he invokes Hitler is sufficiently offensive on its face that I feel no additional need to comment on it.
I'll throw up contact information in the comments if you feel like firing off an email to Mr. Conlin's bosses at the Philadelphia Daily News, as well as the opinion section. I think this is clearly something that is so far overboard that people need to learn about this.
0 recs |
10 comments
Comments
Ha!
By the way, Fooch, thanks for being one of the good guys.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2007 6:35 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Mr. Fucillo,
I guess my point is this: If Nazi references really get you into a lather, dont look at the stampede blue (sbnation's indianapolis colts blog) entry from Oct 30,2007. While Conlin only mentions the nazis in passing, stampede blue compares the Nazis to the Patriots and uses that comparison as the central theme of the whole entry;they've even got pictures to drive the point home. I hope you are able to check out that stampede blue post in question. If Conlin's rhetoric is "reprehensible and just hideous" I cant wait to see what damning pejoratives you use to characterize that stampede blue entry.
by doublecross on Nov 23, 2007 11:12 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
nazi's and satire
I think the difference between the Stampede Blue post and the Conlin emails was the use of satire versus wishing ill-will on a group of people (bloggers) by invoking the idea of mass-murder.
by Fooch on Nov 23, 2007 11:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Have to call BS on you fooch
by doublecross on Nov 24, 2007 9:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Castle Wolfenstein
As I said before, it's not something i'd personally choose to do, but I'm not going to condemn clear-cut satire.
by Fooch on Nov 24, 2007 11:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Gotta agree with doublecross
by KLundy on Nov 24, 2007 11:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh give me a break
There is, in fact, a distinct difference between what Conlin said and what the Colts blog was doing. I'll explain myself later because I have to go watch No Country for Old Men now (the theater doesn't wait while the blog can). But needless to say, I think the both of you are being shortsighted and critical for little more than the sake of criticism.
by howtheyscored on Nov 24, 2007 11:35 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Actually
Conlin, on the other hand, is ACTUALLY saying that the world would be better if there were no bloggers, that bloggers are disgusting people, and that if he met one he would be happy to spit in their face knowing nothing about them except that they blog. It's nasty. That he invokes Hitler to make the point is an attempt at a joke gone too far, but the joke itself comes from his rather disgusting conviction about these people.
by howtheyscored on Nov 24, 2007 9:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Bill Conlin
Like any other historical reference, the invocation of Hitler or genocide can only be judged from its context. People use Pearl Harbor ("The first Seattle game should have been the fans' Pearl Harbor..."), Stalin (Belichick), etc. That Bill Conlin is without good taste has been known for decades. If Tim Gunn ran the Philadelphia Daily News...
by Bob In Pacifica on Nov 24, 2007 8:18 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Sportswriters...
by jaytierney on Nov 24, 2007 10:15 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

by 






















