So, this theme has been tossed about over the last week but especially the last couples of days by various outlets.

After all, everyone is a reporter now with the major emergence of social media, but what continues to remain is not taking the time to perform one of the most basic tenants of journalism - simple research.

With the commitment of Deandre Johnson and eventual hiring of Kendal Briles, those that only seek to throw stones and play in the mud puddle have put their incomplete skill set to task to produce articles with titles such as these gems:

Lane Kiffin gets first signee at FAU and, of course, it's controversial

With his first two big moves at FAU, Lane Kiffin officially is Peter Pan

Lane Kiffin already taking risks at FAU

Lane Kiffin Takes FAU Head Coaching Job Amid Controversy

Now, it should be noted that Kiffin went on record yesterday on Johnson, and two of these were written prior, but still all that was required to avoid the pothole was a phone call to FAU to qualify the claim before putting it out to the masses in completely false fashion.

“I’ve never even met him. I wouldn’t know him if he walked in the room. So, it was something that the president, athletic director and the previous staff had done…", Kiffin said.

No one is denying that he had some missteps in previous stops, including himself, but leave it to the media to always try and keep a good man down.

Rant over…

Rick said

So, this theme has been tossed about over the last week but especially the last couples of days by various outlets…

Posted On: Dec 29th 2016, 10:05 AM #365265

It easy for the Media to pick on FAU here. Lane coming to FAU and being in the spotlight doesn't fit their lets prop up SEC schools and shred smaller schools for letting having these players and coaches.

You don't see much talk of how Cam Robinson  who was charged with felonies the offseason shouldn't be playing.

I laugh at anyone who discusses integrity and ethics when it comes to college football like it's important or something. Everyone loves ethics until it their team effects them in the W and L column, but they are the same person to call out other schools for their players mistakes.

Even on this forum someone on here rambling on about how Charlie brought all these ethics to the program and that was important in the next hire then boom we hire Lane, and bring in De'Andre, and hire Briles. I will bet all the money in the world that ethics person will be cheering those same guys on come the fall.

Everyone wants to pretend their players are someway more ethical and cleaner than everyone else's', but the truth is only 1 percent of these kids (which important because lets remember they are kids) ever hits the surface.

When I was in college I saw players do a million things from drinking and driving to drug use and I always chuckled a bit when people talk about how clean the program was.

You have to remember what you are watching this is a violent that takes a special kinda crazy to play in a league that doesn't pay those players for putting their bodies on the line.
So sit back and enjoy our modern day gladiators and never pretend that it is anything more than that.  

''ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED!!!"

I went to extreme measures to not be the guy to get on Twitter and verbally thrash Paul Finebaum, and a few other ESPN analysts for their inaccurate response to Johnson signing. Had they done their research as a true journalist would, they'd know that Kiffin didn't recruit him.

And Paul referring to FAU as "half way house for trouble athletes" didn't bode well with me. I don't care what point he was trying to make, but that's an insult to former and current athletes and alumni.

Rant over.

Island_Owl88 said

I went to extreme measures to not be the guy to get on Twitter and verbally thrash Paul Finebaum, and a few other ESPN analysts for their inaccurate response to Johnson signing. Had they done their research as a true journalist would, they'd know that Kiffin didn't recruit him.

And Paul referring to FAU as "half way house for trouble athletes" didn't bode well with me. I don't care what point he was trying to make, but that's an insult to former and current athletes and alumni.

Rant over.

Posted On: Dec 29th 2016, 11:13 AM #365267

Paul has built his career on mountain of white trash.

ESPN went from its original intent to covering sports to being a another form of a instrument for social change and political platform. i wont get into the politics of that, but it is fair to say why ESPN is losing out viewers to other sports networks and social media aspects. Why would I want to watch ESPN and hear some body like Colin Kapernick and the coverage given to him by the network when I just want to hear about match-ups for the up coming week. Why do I want to watch somebody like Bruce (Kate) Jenner who i applaud for standing up for what he/she believes in being named person of the year over a Iraq vet double amputee who competes in a numerous of different events. They do some good things like running stories of the problems of college sports and sexual assaults. Yet they go off on tangents about certain things before waiting for all the facts to come in. Same in all major media outlets. Heck Bob Costa's gets blasted every time he goes off on anti-gun rant on Sunday Night football a few years ago. Many of these writers feel it is necessary to get their own views out without fact checking or verifying information, because they believe its for the greater good. Yet many Americans like myself want politics kept out of sports as well as other things. Many of feel like if a player commits a crime or is accused of it, we just want the facts or a quick blurb stating what happen, what may happen or its outcome, then move on. We dont need it in our faces 24/7 as they continue to report on the story. Heck most times in investigations it can be weeks or months before it is complete or a charge comes down. So sports reports stop trying to be instruments of social change and give us our sports please. Just saying. Thank you and Rant over.

At least we are getting talked about. I mean think about it, we are an actual story leading up the College Football Playoff.

This is the most we have been talked about on a national level probably ever. People will actually be curious to what happens with our results in 2017 it might be to root against us, or in some cases root for us.

I think it is great whether if it is positive or negative.

USMCOWL said

ESPN went from its original intent to covering sports to being a another form of a instrument for social change and political platform. i wont get into the politics of that, but it is fair to say why ESPN is losing out viewers to other sports networks and social media aspects. Why would I want to watch ESPN and hear some body like Colin Kapernick and the coverage given to him by the network when I just want to hear about match-ups for the up coming week. Why do I want to watch somebody like Bruce (Kate) Jenner who i applaud for standing up for what he/she believes in being named person of the year over a Iraq vet double amputee who competes in a numerous of different events. They do some good things like running stories of the problems of college sports and sexual assaults. Yet they go off on tangents about certain things before waiting for all the facts to come in. Same in all major media outlets. Heck Bob Costa's gets blasted every time he goes off on anti-gun rant on Sunday Night football a few years ago. Many of these writers feel it is necessary to get their own views out without fact checking or verifying information, because they believe its for the greater good. Yet many Americans like myself want politics kept out of sports as well as other things. Many of feel like if a player commits a crime or is accused of it, we just want the facts or a quick blurb stating what happen, what may happen or its outcome, then move on. We dont need it in our faces 24/7 as they continue to report on the story. Heck most times in investigations it can be weeks or months before it is complete or a charge comes down. So sports reports stop trying to be instruments of social change and give us our sports please. Just saying. Thank you and Rant over.

Posted On: Dec 29th 2016, 12:32 PM #365269

Couldn't be more wrong ESPN is losing viewing because young people are dropping cable. The social stuff is probably the best thing EPSN has left and is very successful for them it's why shows like Dan Le bartard are growing rapidly and you see more reporters like Bomani Jones, Pablo Tore, and Sarah Spain who all have more interesting things to say in deep discussions on sports and it's social impact.

I can not stand when it's a line of gas bag old coaches and players giving hot takes on useless conversations like subject like "are the Raiders for real?!?!?!'' or ''give me your top 5 list in the unimportant category''.
I do not give two s****  what some hokie ex player or someone like Mike Greenberg just firing hot takes like some guys in the corner of sports bar has to say.

People like Mike Greenberg, Stephen A Smith and Mark Schlereth are ESPN's problem not social discussions.

We can discuss more how Kap kneeling effects our world or we can parade 150 failed ex coaches ESPN, so they can tell you turnovers and field position are important in football games……..

owlcountry40 said

USMCOWL said

ESPN went from its original intent to covering sports to being a another form of a instrument for social change and political platform. i wont get into the politics of that, but it is fair to say why ESPN is losing out viewers to other sports networks and social media aspects. Why would I want to watch ESPN and hear some body like Colin Kapernick and the coverage given to him by the network when I just want to hear about match-ups for the up coming week. Why do I want to watch somebody like Bruce (Kate) Jenner who i applaud for standing up for what he/she believes in being named person of the year over a Iraq vet double amputee who competes in a numerous of different events. They do some good things like running stories of the problems of college sports and sexual assaults. Yet they go off on tangents about certain things before waiting for all the facts to come in. Same in all major media outlets. Heck Bob Costa's gets blasted every time he goes off on anti-gun rant on Sunday Night football a few years ago. Many of these writers feel it is necessary to get their own views out without fact checking or verifying information, because they believe its for the greater good. Yet many Americans like myself want politics kept out of sports as well as other things. Many of feel like if a player commits a crime or is accused of it, we just want the facts or a quick blurb stating what happen, what may happen or its outcome, then move on. We dont need it in our faces 24/7 as they continue to report on the story. Heck most times in investigations it can be weeks or months before it is complete or a charge comes down. So sports reports stop trying to be instruments of social change and give us our sports please. Just saying. Thank you and Rant over.

Posted On: Dec 29th 2016, 12:32 PM #365269

Couldn't be more wrong ESPN is losing viewing because young people are dropping cable. The social stuff is probably the best thing EPSN has left and is very successful for them it's why shows like Dan Le bartard are growing rapidly and you see more reporters like Bomani Jones, Pablo Tore, and Sarah Spain who all have more interesting things to say in deep discussions on sports and it's social impact.

I can not stand when it's a line of gas bag old coaches and players giving hot takes on useless conversations like subject like "are the Raiders for real?!?!?!'' or ''give me your top 5 list in the unimportant category''.
I do not give two s****  what some hokie ex player or someone like Mike Greenberg just firing hot takes like some guys in the corner of sports bar has to say.

People like Mike Greenberg, Stephen A Smith and Mark Schlereth are ESPN's problem not social discussions.

We can discuss more how Kap kneeling effects our world or we can parade 150 failed ex coaches ESPN, so they can tell you turnovers and field position are important in football games……..

Posted On: Dec 29th 2016, 1:55 PM #365271

100% accurate. Why do you think ESPN let Colin Cowherd, and Skip Bayless walk away? It useless sport banter. I will take Papi on HQ telling me he is intrigued over Stephen A Smith giving a hot take on how good Carmello is still.

http://www.si.com/college-football/2016/12/28/lane-kiffin-alabama-usc-fau?xid=socialflow_twitter_si

SI published this article today! A much fairer view of Lane, and FAU I think.

Enjoy

Agreed with you Rick.

Even before he officially signed on as coach here Kiffin was blasted by the media. It's been "guilty until proven innocent" since day one and they're watching his every move to see what other stones they can throw at him.

I get that his past gave them plenty of fodder for that and in the age of viral stories and clickbait a volatile coach can generate a lot of views for them. They know there's a built in base of angry Tennessee, USC and now maybe even Alabama fans who will seek out stories about him and share them on social media to add their two cents as a caption.

So I understand all that. And I appreciate the strange interest that has bubbled up, with people who only know him by reputation suddenly interested in what happens to FAU football; looking forward to hearing more stories from fauowl of the strange new Kiffin fans who bought merchandise at his store.

What really should be more unacceptable is taking guesses at facts - like Kiffin recruiting Johnson as his first recruit - and building an entire story about what this says about him as a coach and us as a school. I have to wonder what gets journalists disciplined or fired anymore.

This is a dangerous thing because journalism is a vital profession; when fake news rises up it undermines the faith of the public in legitimate journalism.

I wish there were a group of journalists who would come together and rate media websites so when you see a story with an inflammatory title and wonder if you should take it seriously you could see that their efforts overall have been rated a D+ or whatever and know not to trust them… but then that group would face the same criticism that Snopes does.