I See London, I See France, I See the Author's... Bias
by Troy Hufford on Jun 18, 2010 4:30 PM MDT
in Strictly My Opinion
Email
PrintRemember way back in the day (last weekend) when Elvis Dumervil was sent "the letter"? The letter was basically a reminder that said Elvis had until Tuesday to sign his contract or he would only receive a 10% increase in his salary from last season. At the time, people started forming opinions. As we all know, opinions are sometimes very dangerous things. A good one is usually based on solid reason and, often, some sort of fact. A bad one, however, is usually based on bias. Now, before we go on, let’s define bias.
According to Webster’s dictionary, Bias means
"an inclination of temperament or outlook; especially: a personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment".
Bias isn’t necessarily a bad thing. In my own words… (wade carefully into my pool of opinion)… bias can be defined as the extent of which your personal experience, background, or expertise influence your decision making or opinions. Sometimes the word "bias" is given a negative connotation, as it is often used to insult another person’s objectivity ("You're biased, so you don't know what you're talking about"), but bias isn't always a bad thing.
As Broncos fans, we are biased against our rivals, (the Chargers, Raiders and Chiefs) but that’s to be expected. Some of us may even be biased against the Patriots or Colts or Steelers. That’s not necessarily a bad thing. It’s just a preference. Just because you like or dislike a team, it doesn't mean you can’t be objective.
That is the crux of the issue, here. When we read an article, we need to be aware of author bias so we can figure out if a piece can be taken as fact or if the writer is just serving up a platter of flame kissed opinions with a smoky bias sauce.
So, what does that have to do with Elvis Dumervil and the talks that surrounded "the letter"?
It’s simple. Most people believed a lie. I’m not going to point fingers at any of you MHR members because, for the most part, you didn’t fall for the hype. However, if you looked at any of the other blogs, watched any of the sports networks, or followed a link on twitter, you were bound to find an "opinion". Many of the conclusions drawn showed a bit more bias than fact, unfortunately. Let’s go through a few examples.
This isn't exactly an uncommon thing in the NFL (Marcus McNeill and Vincent Jackson of the (Chargers) also received letters last week saying the same thing), but it's a troubling thing for the Denver Broncos.
In this piece, a Niners Nation writer is talking about how sending the letter is a bad idea and this move represents the latest in a series of poor decisions by the Broncos. I'm still confused. Why is it only troubling for the Broncos and not other teams? It seems like this quote is insinuating a little bit more than what is mentioned and if you go read the post, you’ll realize that it is. The author is clearly biased against Josh McDaniels and even states in the comments that he is trying to paint McDaniels as "a lunatic".
Would the Broncos really play hardball with their Pro Bowl linebacker by paying him a relative pittance?
In this piece, the DP poses a rhetorical question, while raising doubts about the tactics of the Broncos front office. I have some questions, though. What says that the Broncos were playing hardball? Did McDaniels say that the Broncos were playing hardball? It was a letter. We weren't given the full text of the letter to be able to determine intent or tone, so it's impossible to say whether or not the Broncos were giving a friendly reminder or a strongly worded threat. Thinking that the Broncos were playing "hardball" after sending a letter is a little bit more inferring than I am willing to do.
In their latest round of contract negotiations, the Broncos threw a cut block at NFL sack king Elvis Dumervil.
Did they? I got a letter from my friend a few days ago that was a wedding invitation. I knew that his wedding was coming up and I had it written on my calendar. Should I be offended by this invitation? Is he insinuating that I don’t know when their wedding is?
Those were just a few statements from the past week or so about Elvis’ contract negotiations, but it doesn’t end there. McGeorge recently posted a bit from Walter Football, stating how the Broncos were going to suffer a less than satisfying season in 2010. That’s fair, but many members stated in the comment thread, here, that they believe Walter Football is biased against the Broncos. That may be the case or it may not be.
Will it [the season] go into the crapper? If last season's finish is any indication, it most certainly will.
Well… um… last year isn’t an indication. The Broncos are off to a 0-0 start right now, just like every other team in the NFL.
And speaking of screwing things up, McDaniels eliminated Denver's renowned zone-blocking scheme in favor of a more traditional system. This really hurt left tackle Ryan Clady's development.
I think there’s more that went into it than that. While it certainly may have slowed Clady’s development, I think that the word "hurt" is a bit of an exaggeration, don’t you?. And "screwing things up", screams like excellent objectivity, as well. (That last bit was sarcasm.)
Talk about bad timing - the Broncos developed a solid defense the year after Josh McDaniels banished Jay Cutler and changed the offensive line's blocking scheme. Denver finished 12th in points allowed, seventh in yardage surrendered and third versus the pass.
Denver also finished by giving up 317 yards rushing in the final 3 games of the season… Wait… What’s that?... Oh, right, my mistake… Let's try that again... The Broncos gave up 317 yards rushing in the final game, against the Chiefs. Yes, the Broncos defense was solid, at the beginning, but they struggled down the stretch. To put that into perspective, the Broncos gave up a combined 309 yards against the Bengals, Browns, Raiders, and Cowboys, all together. That means the Broncos didn’t give up 317 total yards on the season until week 5 against the Patriots.
That's a bad defense, not a solid one. That said, I have nothing against Mike Nolan. I was as disappointed as the next guy when he left. However, many are putting Nolan on a pedestal as some defensive coordinating god. He's good, but he isn't that good.
What I find most interesting about this last quote is how Walter Football managed to slip in a little jab about "banishing Jay Cutler". The writer was clearly trying to make an argument about the defense, but just for good measure, it seemed like as good a time as any to throw in how Josh McDaniels is "banishing" players from the Broncos. It doesn't add anything to the point he was trying to make. Whenever I see a piece that reiterates that Cutler was forced out or "banished" without saying why it was a bad thing, it reminds me of last year's draft coverage when Steve Young kept repeating "You do not... trade.... a franchise... quarterback." Yes, we get it. You don't like the trade, but please explain yourself. I'm much more interested in hearing the reason behind your opinion than I am in hearing your opinion.
Moving away from the Walter Football piece, it’s certainly fair to say that some of the arguments have holes and many of those could certainly stem from an anti-Broncos bias. The literary tactics used in this piece are quite blatant but at the same time, they are subtle enough to draw in an unsuspecting audience.
Now, I apologize if you feel like I am just rehashing old news, but I really think it's important that we all realize the importance of being able to determine a good statement from a bad one. Question a news article with no quotes. Question a statement without supporting reasons, videos or statistics. I'm not saying to question everything, but be aware and don't let an author feed you poor opinions.
Just because it’s a well-known fact, doesn’t mean it’s true.
- Woody’s blackboard during Around the Horn June 14th 2010
I had an English teacher, in high school, who warned us before we read every single article, "Consider the source. The first thing you need to identify, when reading something, is the author’s bias". This bit of advice can certainly apply to all of us, here at MHR. When you are examining a story about the Broncos, consider a few questions.
- Who is the author and why is he writing? Are they writing to stir the pot and create readership or are they writing to report what they see?
- If it is an opinion piece, is each opinion supported by a reasonable fact (stats, quotes, examples, etc.)?
- Who is their audience? Could the article have just been written to feed the audience's bias?
- Has this author been objective in the past or are they known to be biased towards or against a team/player?
- Do you see any faulty logic?
The game is played on the field, not in the media. – Emmett Smith
I think Doc (Emmett Smith) summed it up with his comment on Thursday. I think this is the best sentence that we could hear, as Broncos fans. If the game were played in the media, we would be coming off a 3-13 season, while Jay Cutler just threw 700 TDs and -4 INTs. We'd also have to pay about 300 million dollars to a top 5 draft pick in a few months and we'd still be looking at a 1 or 2 win season in 2010 because we lost Mike Nolan and Brandon Marshall.
Keep in mind that haters hate. Who cares if someone is biased against the Broncos? I sure don't. If anything, it just makes the Broncos more motivated.
Respect is not given, it is earned, doggonit. And they don't respect us. Nobody respects us. You know what you gotta do in that situation? TAKE IT!!! TAKE IT!!!
Well said, Brian Dawkins... Well said.
70 comments
|
32 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Also remember...
In the age of blogs and twitter we all are used to immediate feedback. So we overanalyze every little piece of information out there as if it would provide us the answer on whether the Denver Broncos will beat the Jacksonville Jaguars on Sept 12. But at the end of they day we have to wait and watch the game, and all of the past 8 months of analysis and opinion won’t matter.
So we overanalyze every little piece of information out there
You mean like analyzing various quotes about a letter and the potential bias behind it? I realize it’s a slow part of the off-season but is this not something MHR has driven into the ground since the Cutler Fiasco? We get it.
A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day.
by A.J. Haefele on Jun 18, 2010 4:58 PM MDT up reply actions
I wish it were that easy.
The problem is that some things are said just so it starts conversation. (“Stirring the pot”, as people often call it.) That’s the MSM’s business, after all. If people will read it, they’ll write it. That causes readers to think, “yeah… that does make sense when put that way…” and “hmm, that is very interesting when put in that light”. If the idea gets bounced around enough, it can sometimes become truth, regardless of whether or not it is fact.
I think that’s what happened with “the letter” (to an extent), the Cutler fiasco, the Marshall/Scheffler benching, and so on. Pretty much any time a huge story comes out, just make sure you’ve got your bias blocker glasses on.
The primary purpose of this piece wasn’t to rehash these things and I apologize if it came across that way. The true purpose of this article was to bring bias to the forefront so that we can make sure we aren’t following opinions that are junk. I used “the letter” and the walter football article as examples because they were current and were good supporting examples for this piece.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
PS3 ID: broncomaniac6
by Troy Hufford on Jun 18, 2010 5:29 PM MDT up reply actions
I think the article was well written and had a valid point
But I find it humorous how much time the media and we, the fans, analyze, debate, argue over non-events. The Broncos sent a letter to Elvis Dumervil, and there were a 100 stories and blogs analyzing what this letter and whether Elvis would sign his tender. And in the end, Elvis, being the quality guy he is keeps his word signs his tender and will be starting come week one, just the same as if no one had ever printed anything about said letter. I guess it gives us something to talk about in June. I remember the days where you had to check the paper the day after the draft to see who the Broncos drafted, and it was just the list of names and their schools.
The media, and everyone else for that matter, is biased. That was certainly the case last year. Of course this time last year all my coworkers were telling me how bad the Broncos would be, and when I said they would win at least 8 games they all called me crazy. So I made them put their money where their mouths were. And none of them will ever bet with me again. I can’t fault the media for having anti-Broncos bias when it helps get the uninformed San Diego crowd to hand me over a wad of cash
by jayrocksd on Jun 18, 2010 5:57 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
My issue really exists
in that at MHR, bias (esp from the MSM) is never, ever, ever, ever far from the forefront. ANYTIME a talking head, an anonymous source, or an expert comments on the Broncos at least a handful of comments come out about how that person is an idiot or a moron or a complete hack and we all grab the pitchforks on march on the MSM castle. I just don’t see the point anymore. I enjoyed reading it, I just think if the core purpose is really to bring bias to the forefront, it’s gotten to the point of the off-season when we’re conjuring up stories for the sake of conjuring up stories (sound familiar…?). I’d venture to say the majority of the MHR readership has a pretty decent grasp of the Doom situation and especially after the last 16 months of witch-hunting, we understand the Broncos are going to be cast in a generally negative light until they do something to prove otherwise. I guess I’m just missing something?
A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day.
by A.J. Haefele on Jun 18, 2010 7:05 PM MDT up reply actions
I hear ya and I agree.
Yes, bias is never far from the forefront. It is lurking around every corner. However, I felt there needed to be a reminder that it’s there, because it isn’t often talked about directly.
I’m not pointing fingers at anyone on MHR. I mentioned that above. This was inspired by conversations I have had on other sites, with some of my friends in real life, and a few comments that discussed the topic of bias, yesterday. The topic presented itself, I wrote about it and that was all.
I just think if the core purpose is really to bring bias to the forefront, it’s gotten to the point of the off-season when we’re conjuring up stories for the sake of conjuring up stories
You don’t have to sugar coat it. You’re saying that this post is a filler. That’s fine. It’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it. I humbly disagree. Maybe this article doesn’t directly apply to you because you already recognize bias and know when to ignore things. That’s fine, but it might apply to some people. Last weekend when the “letter” was being discussed, lots of people needed this reminder, so here it is.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
PS3 ID: broncomaniac6
by Troy Hufford on Jun 18, 2010 7:53 PM MDT up reply actions
What else would we read and blog about?
Ron Artest’s psychiatrist?
We’re Broncos fans, and like starved dogs we pounce on any morsel of news or commentary about the team. I’m just thankful to have something to read about.
by Velveeta on Jun 18, 2010 9:56 PM MDT via mobile up reply actions
exactly. I want more people to blast us.
We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. - Benjamin Franklin
Whoa there...Did you just say what I think you said?
My prescription: two happy pills, (since they’re best taken with food, enjoy a nice medium rare Tebown steak), chase the whole thing with a glass half full of the orange koolaid (Orange Crush will do in a pinch), get a good night’s sleep and try that comment again…. - Broncs Cheer
by Orange and Blue on Jun 18, 2010 10:06 PM MDT up reply actions
What is the point?
Sport writers over at DP could handle their stories a little better if they would just try, but they won’t. They feel if a story about a Bronco player’s life or roots would be too boring for readers to read, so they conjure up speculative reports to stir the amagination. I’ve gotten to the point when I start read an article without quotes or facts I’ll just go on to the next one. I want to read about factual statements not just hearsay (source) or an opinion from an author unless he/she states the article is just that, an opinion. Then I really know where this person stands.
Nice.
My sentiments exactly!
MileHighReport.com member since 02/06/07, promoted to "Position Coach" (i.e. new staff writer) on 02/16/10!
Rec'd
Good post.
I have to admit that I didn’t read the whole Walter post. To me, it looked like the post of a “hater” and “baiter”. In addition, the poster is someone who often displays the same characteristics. I have decided that I don’t have enough reserve attention span to either enjoy or benefit from stuff like that.
But you define the influence of bias in the development of opinions very well. Objectivity, as you indicate, is never totally detached. Someone once said, “I’ve never met a motive that wasn’t mixed.” We all have our biases.
Biases admitted are seldom destructive. They can even be amusing – i.e. Raider bashing, etc. But biases that stem from hatred or vindictiveness are never constructive, much less civil or helpful. It’s good to identify them, confront them and deal with them. Especially if it helps to clarify issues, opinions and analysis.
Thank you for your post.
by ivanthenotsobad on Jun 18, 2010 5:20 PM MDT reply actions 1 recs
By the way...
Love your headline.
Haven’t heard that old rhyme for years.
In the case of the Walter’s article, you’ve seen more than “underpants”. You’ve see a nakedness that displays a noticeable lack of manliness.
by ivanthenotsobad on Jun 18, 2010 5:23 PM MDT reply actions
hahaha, nice.
It was actually different at my school. We used to say “I see Paris, I see France, I see (Name here)’s underpants”. I realized sometime later that “Paris” couldn’t be correct because Paris is in France. You may as well be saying “I see France, I see France…”
Oh well.
Elementary school phrases were not logical, anyways, so both ways would be acceptable. I guess it’s hard to complain about a rhyme when at the same age, “Hannah banna banana, fee fi fo fanna… Hannah” was popular.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
PS3 ID: broncomaniac6
by Troy Hufford on Jun 18, 2010 5:38 PM MDT up reply actions
Excellent piece, KB
Someone asked me why I comment so infrequently. When someone is so concerned with being right, it’s a great waste of time to reason with them. When someone is totally negative I choose not to read their comments. That said, it’s very difficult to get facts instead of rhetoric. There’s an old Scottish proverb: “Facts are chisels that will not ding”.
Thanks, KB. GO BRONCOS!
'The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.'
-- Albert Einstein
by hairybear on Jun 18, 2010 5:36 PM MDT reply actions 1 recs
Absolutely. Rec'd.
When someone is so concerned with being right, it’s a great waste of time to reason with them.
I’ve been there, done that, got the t-shirt. I wish I were more like you sometimes, hairybear. I find myself fighting a losing battle against hard headed people more often than I am proud of. It’s rough, believe me. You’re doing the smart thing.
And yes… GO BRONCOS!!!
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
PS3 ID: broncomaniac6
by Troy Hufford on Jun 18, 2010 7:58 PM MDT up reply actions
“Ridicule is the only weapon against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them.”
-Thomas Jefferson
by Velveeta on Jun 18, 2010 10:01 PM MDT via mobile up reply actions
Rec'd
Good read, and you sure summed things up pretty well. To me, it was blatantly obvious that much of the MSM was trying to stir the pot about “the letter,” even after Klis reported the Dumervil was going to sign the tender. But it’s good to be among the many here at MHR who don’t fall for that, this is a good “oasis” of intelligence, respect, and optimism regarding the Broncos.
"Mr. President, call in the National Guard! Send as many men as you can spare! Because we are killing the Patriots! They need emergency help!" - Shannon Sharpe
by Broncoman27 on Jun 18, 2010 5:48 PM MDT reply actions 1 recs
Yes. Same here.
Unfortunately, some people started giving the story credibility, somewhere, and it magically became fact… until Doom signed on Monday. I think that MHR should get it’s own link at the DP, just to save some of their readers from their own comments…
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
PS3 ID: broncomaniac6
by Troy Hufford on Jun 18, 2010 8:00 PM MDT up reply actions
Some people just hate McDaniels.
Of course that’s just another preference. Some in the MSM hate him because they don’t agree with his methods. Some here at MHR because of that, or they can’t get over the Cutler trade or because he isn’t Shanahan. Whatever your reason you’re entitled to it.
But what I can’t stand are the ones who hate McDaniels just because they do, have predicted he weill fail and react to his every decision as though they WANT him to fail just so they can say they were right. For some people, having others percieve you as being right is more important than actually having the facts. Making a lot of noise is more important than making an argument and anyone who disagrees with you is less intelligent than you are.
To me, if you’re in the media you may have a personal bias but you have a responsibility to deliver information to a wide variety of ears and eyes and if you want to be credible, it is important to keep that in mind. And if you’re a Broncos fan you may or may not be happy with everything but you’re either a fan or you’re not. Nobody likes being wrong, but we all know nobody is always right so pretending that you are makes you look just as ignorant as someone who’s always wrong.
I don’t like everything about McDaniels’ approach but he’s the coach, I am not so while I have my opinions I want the team to succeed, so I hope he knows something I don’t. Just the fact that he HAS the job is proof of that already.
But most of all, the guy has had the job for one season, and it was a season full of flux. He hasn’t even had a chance to fail yet! Now that the roster is almost entirely his, and his plan is in full swing, let’s see how it goes. While I am personally pleased, this may yet turn out to be a colossal failure. But for now I see no reason to assume that, and have no trouble throwing my hat in the ring with McDaniels.
If my faith turns out to be misplaced then so be it, but I am ultimately more interested in the Broncos winning than I am about being able to gloat that I posted something in an anonymous internet forum and turned out to be a lucky guess.
Why hate on your OWN team when you've got the Raiders?
by TheMastermind on Jun 18, 2010 6:00 PM MDT via mobile reply actions 6 recs
Absolutely.
But what I can’t stand are the ones who hate McDaniels just because they do, have predicted he weill fail and react to his every decision as though they WANT him to fail just so they can say they were right. For some people, having others percieve you as being right is more important than actually having the facts. Making a lot of noise is more important than making an argument and anyone who disagrees with you is less intelligent than you are.
If I could rec this more than once, I would. Believe me.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
PS3 ID: broncomaniac6
by Troy Hufford on Jun 19, 2010 12:17 PM MDT up reply actions
Well Said...
- Become an unshakable optimist by thinking continually of the things you want to happen, and by refusing to think about the things you fear might happen!
by BroncoSense72 on Jun 20, 2010 7:39 AM MDT up reply actions
Was it Kurt Cobain
who coined the phrase
I’d rather have people hate me for who I am, than love me for who I’m not.
?
I don’t know if he thought of it, or that was just the first person I heard it from. But very applicable to the Broncos of ’09 and ’10.
That's quite a long handle there, G Funk. - That's what she said.
First (and only, in our lifetimes) team to three consecutive SB wins!!!! ( =
by PearlJamBroncoGFunk on Jun 21, 2010 8:08 AM MDT up reply actions
I love that quote...I am using it!
You, my friend, are proof you dont need to have big floppy feet and a red nose to be a clown!
I will admit
It has taken me time to warm up to McDaniels being the head coach. It was like I got punched in the gut when I heard Shanahan got fired, and I am sure a lot of people feel the same way about that. 14 Years is a long time to have the same head coach (not to mention the 2 glorious super bowl wins), but after a lot of soul-searching, and research and fighting my way past my own Shanahan bias, I came to the conclusion that it was best that he move on. I must also admit that I am a very big Bronco fan. I grew up watching them. My dad forced me to watch them as a kid, and by god I am a way bigger fan now than he ever was then. Liking the Broncos this much is hard to explain. It’s almost like a love, never ending, and accepting whatever happens with them, and sticking with them through the good and the bad. That said, I have listened to McDaniels talk about his concepts about team, and philosophy very carefully. I have watched for characteristics, and body language, smirks and sneers that would make me think negatively about him, and I must say I have been impressed with him as a coach, and have found nothing to make me think anything negatively about him. I believe in his philosophy, his work ethic, and his decision making. I also felt the same way about John Ralston, Red MIller, Dan Reeves, and even Wade Phillips. ….Okay, not Wade Phillips. The thing is I’m with McDaniels all the way too. Good and bad. Give hm a chance. One year. It’s only been one year. I know it’s the Not For Long league, but This type of system takes time. Nothing worth a damn is ever easy to achieve, and certainly does not happen overnight. The multiple championships are brewing.
by BroncoRick69 on Jun 18, 2010 6:36 PM MDT reply actions 7 recs
nice angle, KB
BIas makes the world go round. It’s pretty much involved in every human emotion.
The “offended” party always feels victimized, but hey, if they didnt they’d be “dead” inside.
I welcome having disparaging remarks thrown at our team…it makes being on the top o’ the hill that much sweeter.
We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. - Benjamin Franklin
Whoa there...Did you just say what I think you said?
My prescription: two happy pills, (since they’re best taken with food, enjoy a nice medium rare Tebown steak), chase the whole thing with a glass half full of the orange koolaid (Orange Crush will do in a pinch), get a good night’s sleep and try that comment again…. - Broncs Cheer
by Orange and Blue on Jun 18, 2010 7:37 PM MDT reply actions
Best angle, consider the source
Is the motive to inform, infuriate, infiltrate, or instigate? Then we should assimilate and …propagate. No, just kidding there, but that might be better time spent than to agitate. I form my opinions, and yes, I have them and we all do, they’re like belly buttons, on half of what I see and none of what I hear. Unless it’s my wife I’m hearing, then I’m a believer…for a moment. GO BRONCOS!
Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he'll eat for a lifetime.
"Losing stinks" - Josh McDaniels
And I saw London too. Ha, haven't heard that in a lonnnnng time
Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he'll eat for a lifetime.
"Losing stinks" - Josh McDaniels
by azbroncomaniac on Jun 18, 2010 8:58 PM MDT up reply actions
Very Nice, KB
I especially liked your pointing out that “bias” in and of itself is not a negative word. We all, as you indicated above filter our opinions through the filter of our personal experience, background, and/or expertise and we use that filter to guide our choices.
Bias and criticism are both neutral words, but are often viewed with negativity, and as a result many good points that have been made by MHR members have gotten buried under those labels (and no, I’m not point fingers, especially since I have been guilty on occasion of that form of reaction).
Kudos & rec’d for this gentle reminder.
We live in an age when instant gratification isn't fast enough
The bias I see in the MSM, stems from the fact that we are the definition of average, and have been for a number of years.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think we will be average in 2010, but one of the hardest things to do is get respect when your record doesn’t show greatness. One other thing to consider is that the broncos have been one of the better franchises in the league since the late ‘70s and we have beaten the hometown favorite teams of many of the MSM writers. When we traded out Shanny for our new Wunderkind, the floodgates were open for the “negative waves” to flow, especially when McD rid himself of guys who didn’t or wouldn’t fit his system. As far as the writers from Cleveland, Oakland, or a number of cities from the East Coast are concerned, I don’t think much of their bias, especially since they couldn’t find Denver on a map. I really love what McD and Co. is doing and the BS will subside should we go 10-6 and take the division. It won’t stop completely untill we win another SB, but even then the story line will be why we can’t repeat, much as what the Saints are currently getting in the press.
There's Still
a lot of McDaniels hatred throughout the league, sad but true. The good thing is he doesn’t listen to the naysayers and merely goes about his business. He truly is an example to all of us, especially those among us who happen to be working professionals
Brad James
by the new Bradfather on Jun 18, 2010 11:05 PM MDT reply actions
Why would someone in the national media be biased against the Broncos?
They are paid to have opinions. Those opinions may be right or wrong, but they are required to have them. I can see arguing with the factual basis for their opinions, but why worry about their bias. Their opinions don’t hurt the Broncos or their fans, in my opinion. For example, I also worry about the treatment Doom is receiving. I don’t know if it will result in Doom going somewhere else after next year or not. I hope not, but I also do not know what is the fair price to pay him. If he demands more than the Broncos are willing to pay, then who is right. Only time will tell, but everyone will have an opinion just as we all have opinions about the Chargers problems. If I were Doom’s agent, I would make the Broncos pay or I’d walk, but maybe Doom wants security rather than risk. The same thing is playing out with the Patriots. How much to pay their star guard and how much to pay Brady. I would say that Brady should play out his contract and get as much as possible, but that is just my opinion. I don’t think I’m biased, I just think that loyalty is a bunch of huey. Teams only have it when it suits their purpose. Players should do likewise.
I agree with you that in many cases, bias is not the right term. While bias plays a part in some of the negative press that the Broncos have gotten over the past year or so, there is a lot more to it than that.
I would postulate the following categories:
1. Biased — writers who have an axe to grind against the Broncos. Maybe they were invested in Shanahan and/or Cutler, maybe they grew up raider fans, maybe they were a 14 year old Green Bay Fan in 1998, who knows, but they just have bad feelings about the Broncos organization that bubble up to the surface when they write. This phenomenon if probably fairly rare.
2. Pot Stirrers — they write, not so much to express honestly derived opinion as to create controversy. The goal is not the pursuit of truth or knowledge, but rather to gain an audience.
3. Parroters — rather then taking the time to research and formulate their own opinions, these folks just repackage “facts” derived from others and repackage them as their own (these same people copied the answers to their math homework from the back of the book and write essays in scholl using Cliff’s notes). This process continues until some conglomeration of marginally thought out opinions becomes accepted fact.
Most columnists are a mix of these (with varying amounts of originality and actual original thought added in)
I think the general MSM bias towards the west is...
#3.
The east coast media simply has no idea what is going on for most the AFCW and NFCW teams, so they do a very superficial analysis of the story-lines they see, which tend to be of the pot-stirring variety.
One of my favorite examples was a FootballOutsiders analysis of the Denver o-line predicting that the 2008 Denver oline was going to be completely horrible…. and from their perspective, perhaps I could see it. They looked at the 2007 oline, which was competely decimated by injuries (Nalen, Hamilton, Lepsis, etc. all having been hurt), and looked at the 2008 line with a rookie coming in (Clady) and Nalen retiring and figured we would be putrid. They said that while Cutler/BMarsh/etc. looked solid, they would get killed by bad oline play and the offese would regress.
What I pointed out was:
1) 3/5 of line was injured, pushing in a bunch of rookies (Kuper) and JAGs (Pears, Holland, etc.)
2) Folks were coming back from injury – aka Hamilton
3) The players who were being replaced hadn’t been there in 2007 anyway (Nalen, Lepsis), and weren’t that effective even when they weren’t hurt
4) The young guys who would be starting either had a year starting/learning (Kuper, Harris) and/or were highly touted draft picks (Harris, Clady), or would be starter-experienced backups (Pears, and the OC we traded to HOU when Weigman came in).
Basically, I said even in a worst case scenario where Clady didn’t pan out and Hamilton remained injured, we’d have the same quality oline we had in 2007 because it wasn’t like Lepsis or Nalen or Hamilton had been playing anyways. The reality scenario was most the 2007 starters became backups to better guys in 2008.
I figured it would take a year for Clady to really develop, so was surprised as anyone about how great the 2008 line was… but my more detailed view also made me know that the MSM storylines about the expected craptastic oline was just plain wrong…
I don’t think the MSM has a general bias against Denver in particular, but I do think they simply have very little depth of perspective. AZ, Sea and Denver probably get the shortest end of the stick on this (KC, StL probably not far behind), because we are west, but away from the big California media centers. As such, the nuance in the stories is typically lost when they hit the national media.
KY, this is well documented and your points are clear. It is clear (and annoying) that all of the cool kids love to hate on McD.
But here’s my question. What does non-bias look like? How would a purely neutral reporter write a story about Doom and his tender? There is no definition of “unbiased” on which all of us can agree. If you’re writing that story, do you mention Doom’s stats from 2009? Do you mention his super-disappointing 2008? When do you bring up the cancelling of the CBA — and how do you characterize that? Do you point out that other teams are in tender fights? Do you quote his agent, an outsider, or the Broncos organization first? The selection, arrangement and placement of all of these details impacts the story. And I think that once we recognize that all journalism contains bias — it’s the product of humans, so it has to — it’s easier to see these guys as jokers with an opinion. Going on about bias is giving them too much credit.
Excellent questions.
Non-bias is difficult to achieve. I would argue that there is a definition of “unbiased”, however. It would just be the opposite of bias. It would be a lack of inclination or preference. Now, that is easier to document in theory than in practice, obviously. There are aspects that can be considered unbiased. Stats, facts, and quotes are all unbiased, in and of themselves. The interpretation of these are where the bias creeps in.
The interpretation of those aspects is where the bias sets in.
Stats – TJ’s series entitled “The stats that don’t lie” is true. The numbers are what they are. However, our interpretation of those stats are where the bias come in. If a QB has a completion percentage of 65 percent, some may say it’s good and some may say it’s bad. That’s up to the opinion of the individual. If someone just presented a table of data, that could be considered unbiased.
Facts – If a story breaks and only the facts are reported, then it can be considered unbiased. In the case of “the letter”, if Klis would have come out and said, “Dumervil was sent a letter. Here are the facts. Here’s what happens if he signs it. Here’s what happens if he doesn’t. The end” then it would contain no bias. It is the facts. No assumptions are made. No inferences are made. No opinions are formed. It’s impossible to include bias into a story where you don’t present an opinion of any kind.
Quotes – If Coach McDaniels says something, some may call it coach speak and others may eat up every word. However, our own bias is often a factor in our own determination of how to interpret a quote. Some people are more trusting than others and are able to take a quote at face value. Others may have more difficulty in believing certain things.
When reporting a story, though, a quote is not biased. The author isn’t spinning his own web of opinions, they are just presenting the information exactly how the coach/player/owner says it. It is important, however, to take into account how a quote is presented. Obviously, things can be taken out of context. That’s why I enjoy Potent Quotables so much. The quotes are just there without doctoring or bias.
Obviously, it is difficult to write a story and not infer anything, assume anything, or form an opinion. I did, however, say that bias isn’t necessarily a bad thing. It can be useful in providing some context and reasonable conclusions. However, it’s one thing to provide a beneficial biased opinion and it’s another thing all together to let your bias cloud your objectivity and judgement.
A perfect example is Mike Nolan. Many people (mainly Woodson and Dukes) were up in arms because their bias lead them to believe that he was the end-all-be-all of the Denver Broncos “good” defense. Admittedly, his defense did a great job in the first 6 weeks, but if he gets all the credit for the first part of the season, he has to be equally responsible for the back end of the season, as well. So, when you’ve got guys on the television bad mouthing McDaniels because he got rid of Nolan, that is the type of bias we need to be careful of. I don’t recall them ever talking about the final few games, when they talk about Nolan. They always seem to use phrases like “fixed the defense”, “turned around the defense”, “savior of the defense” and things like that.
Anyways, I guess my biggest squall with this whole situation isn’t necessarily bias, in and of itself. I just take issue when people let their bias get in the way of analysis.
Man, this reply got lengthy, in a hurry. :)
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
PS3 ID: broncomaniac6
by Troy Hufford on Jun 19, 2010 12:14 PM MDT up reply actions 2 recs
Not well written
Sounds like a bias doesn’t it? Well, this post isn’t well written. It is exceptionally well written:0) I wonder how many were biased about my subject line BEFORE they read the rest. All I know is my biases get in the way of looking at the facts or even listening with an open mind. Thank you for an EXCEPTIONAL post! Very, very well done! Now, if it just rubs off on the MHR psychie.
"Peace, a journey without distance to a place we have never left."
by BroncoCUbuffs on Jun 19, 2010 11:53 AM MDT reply actions 1 recs
+1!
EXCELLENT point, and nicely laid out!
Not as excellent as the OP of course ; P
That's quite a long handle there, G Funk. - That's what she said.
First (and only, in our lifetimes) team to three consecutive SB wins!!!! ( =
by PearlJamBroncoGFunk on Jun 21, 2010 8:14 AM MDT up reply actions
I kind of agree
There were some media outlets that were low on the Broncos, especially right after the draft, but since then almost every MSM site and show have us being in the middle of the pack, which makes sense considering what has happened. We are looking to our draft to fix holes at receiver and OL, but since they are all untested it’s hard to have two key areas in uncertainty. While you might see some sites down on us, most i’ve seen have us around 25-15 and 8-8 to 10-6. Since the draft we have also been on the rise in a lot of power rankings as well.So while it’s easy to look at the media and say, “how dare they say such things.” Take a moment and look at it from their view, we have a lot of untested players, we’ve lost our leading receiver, we’ve already had injuries in the off-season and have some tough games. So being a Denver fan, it’s easy to feel jaded, but in reality, we do have a lot of question marks going into next season.
I am a bear of very little brains and big words bother me.
Nice Post KB
However, I have a few comments…
I really see no reason why the MSM would have any biased against MCD or the Broncos for that matter. Denver has done nothing in the last few years to warrant any high expectations and have been treated as such. There is nothing wrong with that. Living near Detroit I’ve seen them get ripped on in the MSM. This is to be expected when you consistently put out bad teams. While Denver hasn’t put out terrible teams they haven’t exactly set the world on fire.
Far too many members of MHR want ‘yes man" reporters. Meaning they want to hear only positive things about Denver and refuse to listen or believe anything that is negative about their beloved Broncos. Peter King, for instance, was ridiculed on this site when he predicted Denver would draft a QB in the top 45 picks. He nailed it. It’s become the popular crutch of MHR lately. Say something negative about the Broncos and the MSM hates MCD. It’s brutal and in my opinion bringing down the site.
The fact is, every single member of MHR would die to be a professionally paid analyst or media member. Peter King, John Clayton and Bill Williamson have connections on the inside that anyone of us would die for. The fact is, if anyone of us were lucky enough to get paid to follow football it would be us giving our opinions and getting ripped on by members of MHR or corresponding sites. Heck, I get ripped on when I give my opinions on Orton and I’m not even getting paid.
You probably get this a lot. This isn't the real Caesar's Palace is it?....Did Caesar live here?
You know where I wanna go? I'll tell you where. Someplace warm. A place where the beer flows like wine. Where beautiful women instinctively flock like the salmon of Capistrano. I'm talking about a little place called Aspen
by johnnystarr on Jun 19, 2010 12:37 PM MDT up reply actions
opps
This was meant to be a response to the entire article.
But I totally agree with MAx as well
You probably get this a lot. This isn't the real Caesar's Palace is it?....Did Caesar live here?
You know where I wanna go? I'll tell you where. Someplace warm. A place where the beer flows like wine. Where beautiful women instinctively flock like the salmon of Capistrano. I'm talking about a little place called Aspen
by johnnystarr on Jun 19, 2010 12:37 PM MDT up reply actions
I'm not going to sit here and tell you that I'd rather hear negative things.
That’s a given. Usually, when you hear good things in the media, it is because your team is doing good things. I’m just not very familiar with what that feels like because it doesn’t seem like there is any praise for good moves, only ridicule for bad ones. That isn’t necessarily a local problem, either. I don’t claim that as a broncos-specific issue. Just turn on the news and you’ll see 3 homicides, 2 robberies, 3 traffic accidents and 1 good samaritan story. That’s just the way it is, sometimes.
I don’t have a problem with that. But when they make the situation seem worse than it is and make outrageous claims, that’s when I start to get upset.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
PS3 ID: broncomaniac6
by Troy Hufford on Jun 19, 2010 9:48 PM MDT up reply actions
That reminded me of a quote:
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people’s accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man’s failures. ~Earl Warren
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts... for support rather than illumination."
- Andrew Lang (1844-1912)
by c_style on Jun 22, 2010 10:56 AM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
I
actually am a professional media analyst, I just don’t get PAID seriously. Nevertheless, it’s true, I’d LOVE to cover the NFL. Perhaps one of these years…
Brad James
by the new Bradfather on Jun 19, 2010 11:51 PM MDT up reply actions
lol
I have a buddy who is a sports reporter and he’s looking to get out as well. I guess growing up you always figured if you’re on TV or in the newspaper you’re making big dollars. I was wrong.
Good luck on getting into the NFL. That would be a dream job though. Give me all the major sports except the NBA and I would be in heaven.
You probably get this a lot. This isn't the real Caesar's Palace is it?....Did Caesar live here?
You know where I wanna go? I'll tell you where. Someplace warm. A place where the beer flows like wine. Where beautiful women instinctively flock like the salmon of Capistrano. I'm talking about a little place called Aspen
Actually
I’m radio and our company has been in the red for years. That explains my lack of payment
Brad James
by the new Bradfather on Jun 20, 2010 6:26 PM MDT up reply actions
True, but there are question marks going into every season.
Last year, we had a lot of question marks, too. (new head coach, new QB, new defensive coordinator, new defensive scheme, new… older secondary, and so on). That’s the nature of the NFL. Every team is going to be different. Granted, some teams endure more change than others, during an offseason, and that affects how they are seen by the media.
Like you said, many were quite low immediately after the draft and things are looking a little better now. That just means that the MSM was knee jerking. That’s a whole other issue that I didn’t even address in this post, but it is certainly another thing that bugs me (although I am guilty of doing it from time to time).
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
PS3 ID: broncomaniac6
by Troy Hufford on Jun 19, 2010 9:55 PM MDT up reply actions
It's true
Each team has question marks each off-season, but for some teams those question marks aren’t as big as others. Take teams like the Saints, Packers or Colts. They have so many pieces in place, while there are some questions, they aren’t o much of a bother. Where teams like the Broncos, who were middle of the pack last season, it’s hard to see the moves we’ve made making us a hugely better teams. While I do like what we’ve done this off-season, my Bronco-vision makes things a bit brighter, whereas someone who isn’t a Bronco fan can see we’ve lost some pieces this off-season as well as made some good moves. But because we don’t have enough established, outside of our secondary, to really by able to look at each off-season and say “we’re good for next season.” As for MSM knee-jerking, I wouldn’t call it knee-jerking after the draft because people have been looking at these players for weeks, when a name pops ups for the pick, most could tell you where he was from, position and pros and cons. So while OTAs can change opinions about our draft choices, I don’t think that is what has happened. Our receivers have yet to really try anything extensive, out lineman haven’t played in pads, and Tebow is 3rd in reps. So we really haven’t seen anything from our rookies yet outside of our corners. After training camp, the media will make another opinion about our draft class, but so will we.
I am a bear of very little brains and big words bother me.
I
agree with this 100%.
You probably get this a lot. This isn't the real Caesar's Palace is it?....Did Caesar live here?
You know where I wanna go? I'll tell you where. Someplace warm. A place where the beer flows like wine. Where beautiful women instinctively flock like the salmon of Capistrano. I'm talking about a little place called Aspen
True.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
PS3 ID: broncomaniac6
by Troy Hufford on Jun 20, 2010 7:20 AM MDT up reply actions
great job kb
okay i have cerebral palsy arthris and chronic fatigue as well i have a great life and loveing folks some days are better than other days i got a make-a-wish in 2001 and saw my favorite team the broncos it was the trip of a lifetime i wish everyone couild have gotten to enjoy that with me i know some of u hate the broncos and that okay but i bleed organ and bule for my mnr fans but i bleed orange and blue denver will rise again resident broncos fan for every blog resident broncos for stampede bule thanks shvd98z24 real name jeremy woodard nettleton high class of 02 yes i am a raider
Thanks j-man. It's been a while. I hope you're doing well.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
PS3 ID: broncomaniac6
by Troy Hufford on Jun 19, 2010 9:27 PM MDT up reply actions
This guy has been traveling all over SBN
J-man has been busy.
I am a bear of very little brains and big words bother me.
Great stuff KB and I appreciate that you took the time too to respond on that Niners post, too
My only quibble is he’s a blogger (which I don’t mean as a disparaging term), but he’s not “MSM”. Now he’s reflecting some of the same biases we see in the MSM with guys like John Clayton, who basically decided something about McDaniels, and will be damned if logic or facts get in the way of that preconception. Smiley is reflecting that same bias, as much as he says “my thoughts are my own” in that post. And he’s entitled to that opinion. But he’s seriously misinformed many times over in both his piece and in his comments below it.
McDaniels is building a team full of talented players that are ALSO team first, not me first. We will see how that works out of course. But some of the comments there make it sound like people think he’s just picking up players that say “Yassuh!” but lack talent. Sure Marshall and Cutler are special talents but they have some indisputable issues and incidents that even the anti-McD writers have admitted. The jury’s still out on his drafts but one can see that there is A PLAN. And these players have both talent AND character. How can this be confusing to people?
And at the topic at hand, Doom, it’s pretty clear from what we’ve heard from both sides that they both want him to stay and work something out. This sitiuation is not about questioning Dumervil, certainly not anything negative about him. It’s about what each side think he’s worth and can afford. It’s not that unusual. And it will probably be resolved to both sides (and our) liking soon enough.
In short, his piece is a lot of conjecture, very little inside knowledge, meant to prove a thesis, and pretty piss poor reporting. MSM or not.
Thanks for standing tall.
There's no need to fear, Underdog is here! / Broncos/Dodgers/Lakers fan in Niners/Raiders/Giants/Warriors country, and damned proud of it.
suffering fools poorly
Freezing temperatures and thin air should create a hostile environment for opponents, …" – ‘pinsky’
I guess I’ll break my comments into smaller chunks.
Part of me goes ‘what the ????’ when I read some of inane comments by Cherepinsky on WF. And it’s not about bias, or about the supposed legitimacy of any opinion just because you have it; it’s about the dumber than a fencepost mental process that brought someone to that opinion.
Much of what is written on WF is not a good faith attempt at offering an opinion so we don’t have to pretend in many cases that his comments rise to that level. There’s a difference between valid disagreements which occur in a pluralistic society and an insult. Cherepinsky often isn’t offering opinions or what I call analysis; he’s merely talking smack, or behaving like an immature 7th grader does when he brags and insults others in order to impress his friends.
Re: the weather. I really wonder about the state of science education in this country. I’m tempted to explain the physics of weather, heat index, wind chill, etc., but I think I"ll let anyone whose understanding of Colorado weather was formed in a Coor’s beer commercial go on believing whatever they believe. High altitude robs the brain of oxygen and that could be an issue for some people, so maybe they should stay away.
Just remember this — it’s really, really, really cold in Colorado so don’t come here, cause you wouldn’t probably wouldn’t like it.
no goats, no glory.
by Colinski on Jun 19, 2010 10:06 PM MDT reply actions 2 recs
LMAO!
But it’s a dry cold!
Character may be manifested in the great moments but it is made in the small ones -- Philip Brooks
by KaptainKirk on Jun 19, 2010 10:25 PM MDT up reply actions
an aborted lecture
I once tried to explain that the sun’s corona had a temperature of several thousand degrees but because it’s a near vacuum it contains less total heat than the inside of a spaceship. My audience replied that a vacuum can’t be hot. So I hit him:^)
no goats, no glory.
by Colinski on Jun 19, 2010 11:28 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
Sometimes we look at reporters as super heroes...
Someone we can look up to and relate to when we need to know something, but as we all realize, they are mere mortals like ourselves and they have feelings and emotions that must be filled before we can ultimately be statisfied. It can be clearly assumed that some of these authors are jealous of how the Dnever Broncos handle team affairs, others are just plain mad at the organization for the dismissal of the beloved (Shanahan) and the Broncos will have to do something beyond all compare for them to point and say, see, I told you they would be alright…Some just won’t ever treat the Broncos with respect and those…I don’t read and don’t give a hoot or a holler about them. You know? They can Klis my butt!
I really wish you wouldn't have said "look at reporters as super heroes"...
I now have a terrifying image in my head that will haunt my dreams for quite some time. What is this image, you ask? It is John Clayton in a superman costume. Tights and all.
Does anybody know a person that will perform a cheap lobotomy???
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
PS3 ID: broncomaniac6
by Troy Hufford on Jun 20, 2010 10:02 AM MDT up reply actions
That's scary...
It is John Clayton in a superman costume. Tights and all.
That is one person who should never advise or analyse anything on football…He should just stick with weasels and such…
by bfree2bronc on Jun 20, 2010 11:34 AM MDT up reply actions
And preaching
about drugs being bad, m’kay.
That's quite a long handle there, G Funk. - That's what she said.
First (and only, in our lifetimes) team to three consecutive SB wins!!!! ( =
by PearlJamBroncoGFunk on Jun 21, 2010 8:17 AM MDT up reply actions
tell that to Big Pharma
And the really good stuff is the endongenous opioid peptide, e.g., endorphins, enkephalins, dynorphins, endomorphins.Never accept substitutes.
no goats, no glory.
The critics have a point with respect to Dumervil
The gestures of good faith have been flowing entirely in one direction.
What "gestures" should flow the other way?
First of all, we don’t know anything about what conversations have taken place privately between Doom’s agent and Xanders. Secondly, the only “gesture” that the Broncos have is to give what ever was asked. Doom’s gesture of good faith is just being smart. He knows that he doesn’t get better by not working with the team. Worst case senario, he is a free agent next year and needs to have had a great 2010 to up his value. The best way to have a great year is to work as hard as he can for as long as he can. Best case, the business people get the contract done and he has already been working with the team.
I think a lot of the general bias
comes from winning so well in the 90’s, then once John left…. Well…. There was that absence of the bona-fide ‘elite’ feeling….
I believe this also spoiled many Bronco fans, especially the younger ones. They grew accustomed to a winning team and perpetually hoping Shanny would pull it together. This also seems to be the general reason a lot of folks won’t give McDaniels a legitimate chance, they want Shanny and Cutler/Marshall/Scheffler, and can’t get behind, or haven’t noticed/been made aware of the whole team concept McDaniels has instilled and will continue to.
Great read KB, and I believe objectivity can be attained by a journalist, it just takes time and true effort, which the true effort part is what seems to be lacking from most sports writers in general, unless it comes to (one of) their favorite team(s), then the effort is there, just tends not to contain the objectivity part. Thanks again!
That's quite a long handle there, G Funk. - That's what she said.
First (and only, in our lifetimes) team to three consecutive SB wins!!!! ( =
by PearlJamBroncoGFunk on Jun 21, 2010 9:44 AM MDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Getting Social With MHR
Web Stuff
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
