Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

An article on the Blade website (sorry, my "expertise" doesn't tell me how to post the link) talks about the Ohio Pharmaceutical Board looking into the issuance of medications to UT athletic dept. via the MED. College.... seems like there's an unending string of problems 20 mi. north.

Here's the link http://tinyurl.com/38z265

Somebody shoud have sought permission before giving their WR's all that Midol...

Interesting. I often hear of the Rocket faithful slamming the Blade because the paper - seemingly - has it "out" for UT athletics. I usually poo-poo such beliefs, but the target on the UT AthDept appears to be larger since the merger and Dr. Jacob's appointment.

If there is truth behind the allegations, so be it. If these are just simple accusations, the Blade should be investigated.

I've read that there is a relationship between smoke and fire.

Yes, the Blade has historically carried a grudge towards UT, but often with some agenda in mind. The ramp-up on this seems to be a bit faster than normal, maybe owing to the new president's logical and more aggressive push to clean things up. The Blade doesn't want to seem like it missed something in its back yard.

However, there might be something to a lot of this, some of it, none of it. I personally find the mess discomforting to watch unfold. Nothing good can come from it, aside from fixing issues that might exist. And not that I expect it to impact BGSU, but you never like hearing about a conference member-except for Marshall when we expected it, going through stuff like this.

Despite what is happening, I haven't yet seen the magic "UT" moment, that takes a simple mess and turns it into the extraordinary.

Everyone here seems to be doing their jobs. The Blade is reporting stuff that looks funny, and they seem to be doing it with a decent amount of nuance.

How easy it would it be, after all, to blow this thing about dispensing drugs way out of proportion? They gave the president the chance to say, way high in that story, that this had nothing to do with steroids, etc. Fair enough.

One could argue the pharmaceutial angle is being overplayed to begin with. One could argue it's just bureaucratic mumbo jumbo that few care about. But with all the other stuff that is clearly smoking rather warmly -- the funky accounting practices, the way expense accounts for nonemployees are being handled at a public institution -- it is an element of an important story.

And UT seems to be doing a good job, too. When The Blade called with tough questions, they got out ahead of the story and announced a series of major changes. It was a great move.

Over the decades, The Blade has developed a reputation for using its news columns to carry on crusades and carry out grudges. But I haven't seen much of that lately on the issues I follow closely, and I don't necessarily see it here.

Schadenfreude wrote:Everyone here seems to be doing their jobs. The Blade is reporting stuff that looks funny, and they seem to be doing it with a decent amount of nuance.

How easy it would it be, after all, to blow this thing about dispensing drugs way out of proportion? They gave the president the chance to say, way high in that story, that this had nothing to do with steroids, etc. Fair enough.

One could argue the pharmaceutial angle is being overplayed to begin with. One could argue it's just bureaucratic mumbo jumbo that few care about. But with all the other stuff that is clearly smoking rather warmly -- the funky accounting practices, the way expense accounts for nonemployees are being handled at a public institution -- it is an element of an important story.

And UT seems to be doing a good job, too. When The Blade called with tough questions, they got out ahead of the story and announced a series of major changes. It was a great move.

Over the decades, The Blade has developed a reputation for using its news columns to carry on crusades and carry out grudges. But I haven't seen much of that lately on the issues I follow closely, and I don't necessarily see it here.

Very true, Schade. The Tom Noe situation is a good example. They used a straightforward journalistic approach and never resorted to beating a dead horse down to shoe leather. The whole story was reported and wrapped up within a just a couple years of constant rehashing of minutia.

Yes, the Blade has certainly changed their style recently and I suspect each and every issue with UT will be found to be completely nefarious and underhanded but will be treated with great care and consideration due to the strict journalistic ethics under which "One of America's Newspapers" operates.

I feel the Blade has shown the desire and ability to take a newsworthy topic, such as the Noe story, and thoroughly investigate and report on it. A year before that, they won a Pullitzer for the Tiger Force/Vietnam series.

I think this is more an example of a similar style of journalism then a specific vendetta or something like that.

The Blade won a Pulitzer for investigative reporting in 2004 for the series that ran on the "Tiger Force". They spent years researching claims of atrocities commited b the Tiger Force unit in Vietnam. The government stonewalled them, but they kept at it and got the story. They won over small time nominees like the Washington Post and the New York Times.

They did a heck of a job on the Noe thing...they did a tremendous job covering the Father Robinson murder case..

What infuriates me about the Blade is the publisher's use of it to settle scores and set agenda's. If you look at what the paper accomplished over he years, you could easily argue that it deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as the Zoo and Art Museum when local treasures are discusssed.

You hate to see something with a auch a proud tradiiton whored out

Flipper wrote: They did a heck of a job on the Noe thing
You hate to see something with a auch a proud tradiiton whored out

Yeah, they did a great job with Noe-until they ran the same stories every day for a year when they were no longer newsworthy just to beat the guy to a pulp. I guess that 's the whoring part. And the same will happen with the UT story until they extract their pound of flesh- Hardly the kind of thing that puts them up there with great local treasures like the At Museum, the Zoo and the University of Toledo.

h2oville rocket wrote:

Flipper wrote: They did a heck of a job on the Noe thing
You hate to see something with a auch a proud tradiiton whored out

Yeah, they did a great job with Noe-until they ran the same stories every day for a year when they were no longer newsworthy just to beat the guy to a pulp. I guess that 's the whoring part.

Well, I disagree -- and it can be inferred that the judges of the Pulitzer Prize also disagree. Last year, they named The Blade a finalist for its public service medal for its workers' comp scandal coverage. The public service medal is probably the most coveted Pulitzer Prize there is.

http://www.pulitzer.org/year/2006/public-service/

Meanwhile, Tom Noe has been sentenced to more than 20 years in two different prisons.

I suppose, if you'd like to discuss why The Blade should have gone easier on Noe, we could.

If the Blade genuinly had it in for UT, they'd have kept Ron Musselman on the UT sports beat instead of replacing him with Matt Markey after the relentless caterwauling about his supposed bias from the Rocket mob.

Aside from a couple John Harris columns tiptoeing around the issue, the columnists have never called for (or raised the possibility of ) the dismissal of any of the major athletic players, i.e Mike O'Brien and Tom Amstutz.

In most other towns, this wouldn't be the case.

Schadenfreude wrote:[Well, I disagree --

I'm stunned.

Flipper wrote:The Blade won a Pulitzer for investigative reporting in 2004 for the series that ran on the "Tiger Force". They spent years researching claims of atrocities commited b the Tiger Force unit in Vietnam. The government stonewalled them, but they kept at it and got the story. They won over small time nominees like the Washington Post and the New York Times.

They did a heck of a job on the Noe thing...they did a tremendous job covering the Father Robinson murder case..

What infuriates me about the Blade is the publisher's use of it to settle scores and set agenda's. If you look at what the paper accomplished over he years, you could easily argue that it deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as the Zoo and Art Museum when local treasures are discusssed.

You hate to see something with a auch a proud tradiiton whored out

the blade has a clear adgenda and for what its worth the value of pulitzer winers int eh past 25 years is questionable as they have a bit of an adgenda...the blade like 99% of all media is trash...you have to do to much work to figure out what is what...bring back boring straight up reporting with out slant and the world will be a far better place

What 1% of the media isn't trash and what makes it "non-trash"?