Ahhh, the liberal media.......

Message

Bixby17 · #1 Post by **Bixby17** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 4:40 pm

How fun.

I got interviewed this afternoon by someone from the New York Times sports department.

He was interested in talking to me about this feature I wrote:

http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2008/02/ ... mnificati/

He thought what I wrote was interesting and wanted to talk to me about it. There's a chance I might be quoted in the paper which is a little scary because I don't speak in soundbites.

I don't think it will be in the paper tomorrow because some of the things I told him made him want to get more information.

Teehee. Too funny.

Ritterskoop · #2 Post by **Ritterskoop** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 5:44 pm

Yay! Let us know when/if it is published.

I have a soft spot for liberal medias.

Beebs52 · #3 Post by **Beebs52** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 8:29 pm

Cool. You may be another media expert! With credentials! Whoo hoo!

Flybrick · #4 Post by **Flybrick** » Sat Mar 08, 2008 8:38 am

Your article was well done.

You had me excited for you until I realized it was the New York Times interviewing you.
So, anything run from them might/might not be factual.

In addition to their run of 'mistakes' over the past few years, I'm neighbors with a certain rising young star -oops, I made it all up; don't blame me because the pressure was too great - NYT reporter sacked for false stories.

I'm a big fan of the Times in case you couldn't tell................(sarcasm switch to "ON")

peacock2121 · #5 Post by **peacock2121** » Sat Mar 08, 2008 8:40 am

How great is that?

Terrifically great!

What an acknowledgment.

Bixby17 · #6 Post by **Bixby17** » Sat Mar 08, 2008 12:03 pm

I was not quoted today. But I believe the information I told the reporter made him rethink the direction of the article and he is trying to get more information about the stuff I told him. He also interviewed a law professor about the indemnification stuff, but I knew enough about the sports part of the issue to tell the reporter that I thought the document that he had was an old one and not the most recent.

It could be something I get a mention about in the future.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/08/sport ... ref=slogin

He says in the article that the NFL and Walsh's attorneys report at being closer to a resolution on the contractual language. I'm really curious to see how they came out with it because at least their initial proposals were really far apart.

The funny thing about his interview is that he had to get off the phone with me and call me back. Turns out that Senator Specter was returning his call.

As for the accuracy of the NYT, I'm not sure that their sports department is divided into liberal or conservative. Which makes sports great. I can say that typically, I have found the NYT coverage of the Texans a little more accurate than some national publications.

MarleysGh0st · #7 Post by **MarleysGh0st** » Sat Mar 08, 2008 12:26 pm

Bixby17 wrote:I was not quoted today. But I believe the information I told the reporter made him rethink the direction of the article and he is trying to get more information about the stuff I told him. He also interviewed a law professor about the indemnification stuff, but I knew enough about the sports part of the issue to tell the reporter that I thought the document that he had was an old one and not the most recent.

It could be something I get a mention about in the future.

Maybe you'll become one of his independent experts.

Bixby17 wrote:The funny thing about his interview is that he had to get off the phone with me and call me back. Turns out that Senator Specter was returning his call.

Put on hold for a senator? The nerve!