Bob Costas responds to his comments

by Fooch on Mar 18, 2008 11:37 AM PDT in News Comment 8 comments

If you were at Niners Nation over the weekend, you read about Bob Costas' comments referring to bloggers as get-a-life losers. Costas made several comments about bloggers and his general disdain. Well, Bob Costas decided to contact Deadspin to discuss his comments and add some context. Whether you like Costas or not, the clarifications definitely help. And of course Costas is no dummy knowing the influence Deadspin has in the blogosphere. Here are a few highlights:

I don't have any problem at all with the mainstream media being challenged or supplemented by new media. No entity has a monopoly over good writing from a valid point of view . . . In fact, many bloggers, on numerous subjects, sports included, are talented, humorous and bring fresh perspectives. . .

My commentary was aimed solely at a portion of Internet sports discourse, an unfortunately large portion, that consists of nothing more than potshots . . .

I was absolutely not saying that most or all bloggers were losers. It just seems so often that commenters use insults in the place of arguments. . .

As I mentioned in a comment within my previous post, there are clearly plenty of bad apples in the blogosphere. After sitting and thinking about Costas' comments that made sense. My problem existed with his generalities.

Deadspin: So you don't think anyone who writes a blog or comments online is a "get-a-life loser?"

Costas: Some have inferred that I have this elitist view, and that I think only people who have been somehow "certified" have the right to comment on sports. It shouldn't be confused with somehow being superior. If you opened up anything to large numbers of participants, you'd find some real gems in there . . .

Deadspin: We think the tipoff for people being angry was the "basement" line. Everyone's a little tired of that line.

Costas: Yes, well, that might have lapsed a bit into cliche.

The big thing to learn from this is in this age of instant access, when you're a big name media member you have to make sure you are clear in your thoughts when a potential shit storm could develop. Even before this I was slightly less of a Costas fan than when I was a kid. However, I certainly will not hold his blogger comments against him. I can sufficiently clarify things in my own mind. Considering I was quick to blast him over the weekend, I felt it was only fair to post his comments to the blogosphere. Fair and balanced, right? Thoughts?

0 recs | Comment 8 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Some are losers in basements...

If you read some of the commentors on sfgate.com, you'll quickly find many many MANY a numbnut somehow knows how to post their asinine thoughts to the web.

Not all of them... But there are many.

Thinking of giving up sports and taking up heavy drinking.

by Drunken Miller on Mar 18, 2008 1:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

The distinction

What Costas failed to do in the first place was to separate the actual bloggers from the commenters on those blogs. Because I agree that on many sites the commenters are just annoying. Have you ever checked out any of the comments beneath the stories on foxsports.com? Most of those people are fucking idiots.

by jaytierney on Mar 18, 2008 1:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Bob Costas is a douche.

Damn it, now I'm one of those get-a-life losers.

Here's to hoping Albert Hanyesworth stomps on Alex Smith's head.

by methodrampage on Mar 18, 2008 2:22 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Costas Comments & Who Cares

I think Sir Costas should do like the rest of us who employ these Niner Blogs as they were intended: exchanging/sharing meaningful comment on our favorite team - just ignore those with an axe to grind, an inability to string together a sentence minus misspelled words, or vitriolic sentiments.

by 9ernutt on Mar 18, 2008 2:53 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I do agree

that people on many blogs tend to resort to insults instead of arguments, and that's a shame. It's happened here and it really shouldn't. It's fine to disagree but be respectful. If you can't out argue someone then you should concede the point and move on or "agree to disagree."

Bring back the classic Uni's!

by wjackalope on Mar 18, 2008 3:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Agree to disagree!

I love that line. It's the perfect way of weasling out of an argument you can't win but won't admit you're wrong, or just straight up refusing to acknowledge someone else has a valid point, it's just not in line with your point of view. Honestly, agree to disagree always strikes me as the weasliest of weasly things to say.

Don't agree with me? Well, agree to disagree! =)

By the way, I'm in absolute agreement with your post. I just wanted to comment on that one thing, which always bugs me.

Thinking of giving up sports and taking up heavy drinking.

by Drunken Miller on Mar 19, 2008 4:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

There is nothing wrong...

... with holding onto your belief if the other person hasn't convinced you. Likewise, there is nothing wrong with the other person holding onto what they believe if you haven't convinced them. In the end, it is just "agreeing to disagree."

by sfgfan on Mar 19, 2008 4:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think it means SAINT Diego...

So true, but more often than not, both sides have very valid points. I see "agree to disagree" as a way of not having to acknowledge the validity of another point of view. But maybe we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. =)

Thinking of giving up sports and taking up heavy drinking.

by Drunken Miller on Mar 19, 2008 6:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs