Does media affect point of view?

[hateraid]

This is a statement made by my dad, a long NBA follower. When it comes to deciding who's the best player of all-time, media actually created the legacy of Jordan far greater than what he really was. Not that he's saying he's not a Jordan fan, but simply put, the media hyped him into superstardom and banished any type of negativity because NBA was a struggling league and neede to create a poster boy. He also felt that Dr.J (being a bit of a homer) was a better all round player but the league didn't didn't have enough attention and creativity to focus on him as a face for the game. He felt that if the media wanted too, they could create him into the persona of Kobe and that the crimes Jordan committed were too easily forgiven.

Keep in mind, this is not a Jordan hate thread, this is a question about how media affects our point of view. Please don't insult my father about this because this is a point of veiw that many NBA historian feel too. Barber Shop talk if you will.

[Younggrease]

This is a statement made by my dad, a long NBA follower. When it comes to deciding who's the best player of all-time, media actually created the legacy of Jordan far greater than what he really was. Not that he's saying he's not a Jordan fan, but simply put, the media hyped him into superstardom and banished any type of negativity because NBA was a struggling league and neede to create a poster boy. He also felt that Dr.J (being a bit of a homer) was a better all round player but the league didn't didn't have enough attention and creativity to focus on him as a face for the game. He felt that if the media wanted too, they could create him into the persona of Kobe and that the crimes Jordan committed were too easily forgiven.

Keep in mind, this is not a Jordan hate thread, this is a question about how media affects our point of view. Please don't insult my father about this because this is a point of veiw that many NBA historian feel too. Barber Shop talk if you will.


it is true to a point... i dont think MJ is inarguably the best. But he is my choice, the media makes it seem like he is head and shoulders above any1 else and larry and magic pretend like they think he is better than them so they dont ruffle feathers

[DCL]

i wouldn't say it's the power of the media as much as the stupidity of some people, who can't ever think for themselves.

[SoCalMike]

The media has a tremendous influence on what we see, read and hear. Especially with the media conglomerates that have been continuing to grow by buying up media in their respective markets, thus contributing to singularity of objectives.

They have a lot of power to create and manipulate people's views and perceptions.


:pimp:

[DCL]

censorship is weakness.

[geeWiz15]

So what if Bush isn't a good President. Did you come up with that all by yourself or did the various media groups who hate him influence you?
... it's called reading and being up to date on current events. the media doesn't have a liberal bias. it's their job to be skeptical of those in charge, and the Repubicans are in charge. it's that simple. just cause they're being busted doesn't mean there's a liberal bias... it means the media wants a story. the only people with bias are the ones trying to spin those stories.

people complain about a liberal ideology among those who are educated and those who investigate current events for a living crack me up. if the smartest, most aware people in the country are liberal, maybe those liberals have a point, eh?



It was a good analogy, it just wasn't very well explained. I'm glad Fox News still supports him because whether he's a saint or the biggest **** up in the world, Fox News realizes that he's the leader of the country and is going to support him until he's booted out.
so you're saying being lied to is ok if it's for a patriotic reason? you realize it's the media's job to check government corruption right? it's not the media's job to support the president... it's to report the news. people choose to support the president themselves.

[Xsatyr]

... it's called reading and being up to date on current events. the media doesn't have a liberal bias. it's their job to be skeptical of those in charge, and the Repubicans are in charge. it's that simple. just cause they're being busted doesn't mean there's a liberal bias... it means the media wants a story. the only people with bias are the ones trying to spin those stories.

people complain about a liberal ideology among those who are educated and those who investigate current events for a living crack me up. if the smartest, most aware people in the country are liberal, maybe those liberals have a point, eh?



so you're saying being lied to is ok if it's for a patriotic reason? you realize it's the media's job to check government corruption right? it's not the media's job to support the president... it's to report the news. people choose to support the president themselves.

The post will be deleted with the others.

[hateraid]

The post will be deleted with the others.

Hopefully not. Outside the politcial topics this thread has some validity to even todays game. it would be a shame to get deleted. Delete the politcs, fine.

[Xsatyr]

Hopefully not. Outside the politcial topics this thread has some validity to even todays game. it would be a shame to get deleted. Delete the politcs, fine.

I was talking about the post not the thread. It is funny how the thread lead to politics though. Kind of like every time you go to youtube and watch a random video there always seems to be, "Americans are greedy rednecks and killers."

[xxxSuperStar]

As a journalism major, weekly columnist and owner of a PR/marketing firm, I can tell you that there are many things that go into creating, maintaining and tarnishing an image.

There is also a lot that goes into what is and isn't published in a paper or put on TV.

People, like me, make a career of creating images, maintaining images and discrediting people (if necessary).

There are influential people that wield a lot of power. Influence comes from either money or power (think government or CEO).

All in all, the media is (like the U.S. government) a check on many things including businesses, people, stars, athletes ect, but they in turn are balanced by the power and influence of the people.

So to keep this on basketball and Jordan...

Jordan was and is very influential to many people with a LOT of money and power, and he has a ton of money himself, which gives him a tremendous amount of power that kept many of those negative stories from ever surfacing.

And the media expanded from Dr. J's time to Jordan's time. He was the at the right place at the right time, and handled himself and was marketed perfectly.

[hateraid]

As a journalism major, weekly columnist and owner of a PR/marketing firm, I can tell you that there are many things that go into creating, maintaining and tarnishing an image.

There is also a lot that goes into what is and isn't published in a paper or put on TV.

People, like me, make a career of creating images, maintaining images and discrediting people (if necessary).

There are influential people that wield a lot of power. Influence comes from either money or power (think government or CEO).

All in all, the media is (like the U.S. government) a check on many things including businesses, people, stars, athletes ect, but they in turn are balanced by the power and influence of the people.

Ironic how your avatar has a bar of soap in the mouth and you work for the media.

[TheHonestTruth]

Media sucks.
Jordan is NOT GOAT.
Steve Nash is.

[xxxSuperStar]

Ironic how your avatar has a bar of soap in the mouth and you work for the media.

And I think that what I didn't point out clearly is that Jordan is a very smart and lucky businessman.

He made himself a household name by expanding to products outside of sports/basketball (hotdogs, Hanes, Chevy ect), so that when the Bulls were on TV and in the finals the casual fan "knew" him.

He helped propel Nike to the forefront of the shoe market, and therefore was the first athlete to produce a signature line (which all major athletes do today). But the difference, even in the 90s, is that Air Jordan was the only one.

He had some people create some wonderful and memorable ads and commercials ("Be Like Mike," Mars Blackmon, ect)

He was well spoken and well dressed. He always wore a suit where other players wore shorts, jeans ect.

He shied away from "hot" topics like politics, race, religion ect.

Both he and his agent/manager were very smart and have made a ton of money because of it.

[Xsatyr]

And I think that what I didn't point out clearly is that Jordan is a very smart and lucky businessman.

He made himself a household name by expanding to products outside of sports/basketball (hotdogs, Hanes, Chevy ect), so that when the Bulls were on TV and in the finals the casual fan "knew" him.
He helped propel Nike to the forefront of the shoe market, and therefore was the first athlete to produce a signature line (which all major athletes do today). But the difference, even in the 90s, is that Air Jordan was the only one.

He had some people create some wonderful and memorable ads and commercials ("Be Like Mike," Mars Blackmon, ect)

He was well spoken and well dressed. He always wore a suit where other players wore shorts, jeans ect.

He shied away from "hot" topics like politics, race, religion ect.

Both he and his agent/manager were very smart and have made a ton of money because of it.

Yeah his six championships are meaningless. I mean seriously the Bulls had an all star roster for those six years.

[hateraid]

Keep in mind, this is not a Jordan hate thread, this is a question about how media affects our point of view.

Please keep this in mind

[Knoe Itawl]

This is a statement made by my dad, a long NBA follower. When it comes to deciding who's the best player of all-time, media actually created the legacy of Jordan far greater than what he really was. Not that he's saying he's not a Jordan fan, but simply put, the media hyped him into superstardom and banished any type of negativity because NBA was a struggling league and neede to create a poster boy. He also felt that Dr.J (being a bit of a homer) was a better all round player but the league didn't didn't have enough attention and creativity to focus on him as a face for the game. He felt that if the media wanted too, they could create him into the persona of Kobe and that the crimes Jordan committed were too easily forgiven.

Keep in mind, this is not a Jordan hate thread, this is a question about how media affects our point of view. Please don't insult my father about this because this is a point of veiw that many NBA historian feel too. Barber Shop talk if you will.

Jordan is a bad example because on the basketball court he always matched, and surpassed the hype.

The problem starts when the media starts hyping up people that don't live up to it.

[joewait]

yes of course the media affects point of view. look at how deep lebron james is in the average viewer's conciosuness, even though his greatest accomplishment to date is getting to the 2nd round due largely to controversial calls.

the media is a corporate enterprise just like most everything in society and it taps into popular culture. and right now marketing/favoring players with a street/hip hop background is what sells. you won't see much about dirk nowitzki even though he's the best player in the world, or even tim duncan.
just look at espn.com--the only guy there who isn't full of crap (because espn doesn't force him to be) is bill simmons

[RainierBeachPoet]

it goes without saying that media shapes our views. that is one reason i rarely watch tv and prefer to read instead

as it relates to hoops and mj in particular, the context must be understood first. i think that your father is right in that dr j was a great all around player-- he is in the hof as proof. unfortunately, what mostly exists today that people see is his great dunks, but he was much more than that.

unfortunately, the league had its image problems. most of the usa saw the nba as too black and too drug ridden and its popularity dipped significantly-- especially in the mid to late 70s.

enter magic and bird. they brought back interest in the nba with their high profile rivalry. magic in particular with his charismatic smile and marketability helped the nba make some serious leaps forward in terms of not only a national interest but an international interest and considerations. magic and bird helped get the nba on stable ground again both in terms of the fan base and beyond --- esp with merchandising

i believe that the rise of cable tv in the early 80s had also a major hand in popularity gains for the nba. never before did we have access to sports as we did when espn came into our living rooms

all of this set the stage for mj. a good discussion of the intersection of mj/nike/transnational corporations/cultural influences/global implications is in the book michael jordan and the new global capitalism by walter lafeber (w.w. norton & co. 1999). lefeber is not a sportswriter but a historian and argues strongly that the convergence of these factors with the face of mj helped spread the u.s. market influence all over the world in ways that were not seen before

in a word, billions of dollars were to be had with mj as the pitchman. nike in particular had distinct interests that mj grow and grow and grow in the publics eye. there was too much $$$ at stake

a squeeky clean image is what the corps. wanted from mj and he delivered. for those of us who follow the game closer, we know that mj wasnt a saint. but that didnt matter. in the media, it is all about the image that can be cultivated. and mj was the king


on a personal note, i absolutely loved mj when he first came into the league. he had flash, the best dunks, had a competitive spirit and was just downright fascinating to watch in the court. but then, he was everywhere and all the time. the media just became saturated with mj this and mj that.

i reacted negatively. i love the nba and there were so many good teams and players but it was just focused on jordan jordan jordan. if all you eat is chocolate cake, you get tired of it after awhile.

so, i enjoyed cheering against him and the bulls (it was easy since i liked the sonics, magic and zeke)

$$$ drives the media and images make $$$ and influence the ways we think and what we desire. it is the foundation of advertising; jordan happened to be the right person at the right time to make many people a TON of $$$

[Y2Gezee]

Ofcourse the media affects views by some fans. There are some that can watch a game and make their own views. However, for some of you fans the effect of a highly paid "analysts" spewing his idiotic opinion goes a long way with what some people take as fact.

The media is the reason the MVP award has been so so poorly represented the last couple of years. They like the little white hope, and found his success in Phx to be a surprise so yeah they try to reward him and say well Shaq will be able to win another one down the road (which he won't, as he definately deserved that one), then the next year say nobody did anything great enough to take it from him (when Dirk was amazing and won 60 games). Now this guy who doesn't even deserve to be in the hall of fame is a 2 time MVP, and looking at a 3rd one all because the media thinks this makes for a cute little success story, and evidently somebody is going to have to average a triple double and win 70 games to get it away from him, as the idiots believe it to be a good reason to vote for him by saying nobody has done anything "amazing" enough to take it away from the reigning MVP. That's bullsh*t. For Shaq to only have one, Kidd to have none, and this guy to have 2 for those reasons are ridiculous. Those 2 guys are top 3 in their positions all time, Duncan only has 2 and he's arguably the greatest pf ever.

As for the media pushing Jordan. Well the media is only smart enough to look at wins and stats and memorable moments. The fact that Jordan was amazing at providing all of that is the reason they loved him so much, and its well deserved. I think Jordan is definately the best player ever, however I coun't Magic Johnson to be 1b, as if Im starting a team I do not even hesitate to take the greatest pg ever, who could also dominate the game at the other 4 positions, and in the golden era of the sport.

But the media's beliefs and personal opinions totally sway opinions and like in the Nash situation or the Lebron hyping, can totally effect history.

I try to do my own research in all phases of news to not allow the media to shape my total opinion. And, while I try and don't think Im a person that just hates people or particularly players just because media pushes them down my throat, but some of the things that the media does have power to do (like vote for awards) does make me dislike that player and particularly the love that player gets.

[Timmeh]

... it's called reading and being up to date on current events. the media doesn't have a liberal bias. it's their job to be skeptical of those in charge, and the Repubicans are in charge. it's that simple. just cause they're being busted doesn't mean there's a liberal bias... it means the media wants a story. the only people with bias are the ones trying to spin those stories. Well if the media wants a story they need to get a truthful one. That's why I hate those stupid magazines that print out some bogus crap for fun like the "50 Bible prophecies that will come true by 9/11/07" and "Hillary Clinton's sex affair with aliens!!!!"...It's retarded and it shows America's state of the media. All I'm saying is if you're looking for a story, do it right and don't fabricate crap to make it juicy.


so you're saying being lied to is ok if it's for a patriotic reason? you realize it's the media's job to check government corruption right? it's not the media's job to support the president... it's to report the news. people choose to support the president themselves. No, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that even though Bush may not be the best President in the world, Fox News still supports him, though they do point out his shortcomings and mistakes, they don't blast him out of the water like Sean Hannity and the other idiots on talk radio. Fox supports him and they're going to stand by him.

Personally, I don't think Bush is the man for the job, but I did think that Kerry wasn't any better. But, as a citizen of America I'm going to support the leader of the country, I'm not going to gather a group of people and move to Montana, preach anarchy and burn the forests down.

[dejordan]

i think that problems stem from the need for the next big thing all the time. look at bassy. he's a decent player who needed 3 years of seasoning in a big time college program, but media hype pushed him forward to fast for his own good. also i think a lot of the hate you see for kobe, bron, and wade on this board comes not from people who dislike their games but because they were all annointed by the media before they'd accomplished anything.

[SsKSpurs21]

I remember an MJ documentary a while back about how the media protected him because he gave the media what they wanted. He would always do interviews, he would always give them sound bites so they returned the favor by keeping his image clean.

from what i heard, and dont quote me on this, but the reason why the media attacked kobe so much was because shaq was the loveable guy who provided the media with stories and sound bites. and since shaq and kobe were fueding the media took shaqs side and attacked kobe because shaq gave them what they wanted.

the media can make you, and just as easily they can break you.

[gb8]

I always hate when dr J comes into the goat arguments. Yes he was ahead of his time and a revolutionary player bt he is in no shape or form the better or greater player than jordan. I was having this debate recently with someone who is an "old timer" and he kept insisting that dr j was better. Despite the fact that I pointed that jordan surpassed pretty much any achievement that the good doctor can claim.

Also the media absolutely affect your point of view. Simple example, put a camera amongst a riot an film it one from the police point of sight, you will be greete with the images of masse sof people rioting against the police force, then flip the calera angle and fil it from the rioters prespective and all of a sudden you see the force and aggressive heavy handed policing.

[dejordan]

I always hate when dr J comes into the goat arguments. Yes he was ahead of his time and a revolutionary player bt he is in no shape or form the better or greater player than jordan. I was having this debate recently with someone who is an "old timer" and he kept insisting that dr j was better. Despite the fact that I pointed that jordan surpassed pretty much any achievement that the good doctor can claim.

Also the media absolutely affect your point of view. Simple example, put a camera amongst a riot an film it one from the police point of sight, you will be greete with the images of masse sof people rioting against the police force, then flip the calera angle and fil it from the rioters prespective and all of a sudden you see the force and aggressive heavy handed policing.
people are loyal to their guys. someday durant will have mastered the 26 footer, led the league in scoring and rebounds for 2 decades, won 12 titles, and dunked from the three point line, and i'll be telling my nephew how mj was better.:)

[gb8]

people are loyal to their guys. someday durant will have mastered the 26 footer, led the league in scoring and rebounds for 2 decades, won 12 titles, and dunked from the three point line, and i'll be telling my nephew how mj was better.:)

LOL I would love to se all that i would be a durant ******* by the 3rd title.

[abraxas]

This is a statement made by my dad, a long NBA follower. When it comes to deciding who's the best player of all-time, media actually created the legacy of Jordan far greater than what he really was. Not that he's saying he's not a Jordan fan, but simply put, the media hyped him into superstardom and banished any type of negativity because NBA was a struggling league and neede to create a poster boy.
I absolutely, 100%, completely agree with your father. Jordan is without a doubt the man most responsible for the mainstreaming of the NBA and the transformation of players from athletes into entertainment celebrities. Today's NBA is just as much (if not moreso) about marketing an image than it is playing a game. Why do teams add a new jersey or change a few details of their old ones every year? Why did the shorts get longer? Why have Shaq, Iverson and Artest all been involved in the entertainment industry?

I've mentioned this idea in many posts regarding Steve Nash, since I believe he's an excellent example of how a great player can be overlooked or doubted because he lacks flashy endorsements and doesn't try to push into the entertainment world. I also think the search for the 'next Jordan' is responsible and Nike has spent millions hypnotizing us into thinking Grant Hill, Vince Carter, Kobe Bryant, Tracy McGrady, and now Lebron James will all be the next Jordan.

I honestly think younger basketball fans do not even watch full games and rely on highlights to understand the game, since the quick-cut editing of sports highlights has lowered our attention spans to about ten seconds. So we just end up noticing what looks coolest and flashiest. Has anyone seen that cell phone commercial with Dwyane Wade and Charles Barkley where the waitress mistakes Barkley for Wade's father? That's exactly what I'm talking about....

[Horde of Temujin]

for sure, were all sheep

[RainierBeachPoet]

I absolutely, 100%, completely agree with your father. Jordan is without a doubt the man most responsible for the mainstreaming of the NBA and the transformation of players from athletes into entertainment celebrities. Today's NBA is just as much (if not moreso) about marketing an image than it is playing a game. Why do teams add a new jersey or change a few details of their old ones every year? Why did the shorts get longer? Why have Shaq, Iverson and Artest all been involved in the entertainment industry?

I've mentioned this idea in many posts regarding Steve Nash, since I believe he's an excellent example of how a great player can be overlooked or doubted because he lacks flashy endorsements and doesn't try to push into the entertainment world. I also think the search for the 'next Jordan' is responsible and Nike has spent millions hypnotizing us into thinking Grant Hill, Vince Carter, Kobe Bryant, Tracy McGrady, and now Lebron James will all be the next Jordan.

I honestly think younger basketball fans do not even watch full games and rely on highlights to understand the game, since the quick-cut editing of sports highlights has lowered our attention spans to about ten seconds. So we just end up noticing what looks coolest and flashiest. Has anyone seen that cell phone commercial with Dwyane Wade and Charles Barkley where the waitress mistakes Barkley for Wade's father? That's exactly what I'm talking about....

good post!

tim duncan is another example of a guy who gets the job done but is consistently ignored by the national media because he doesnt have the "flash" factor that is key to advertising/marketability

btw, that barkely/wade commercial just kills me everytime!!!

[DCL]

they actually did attempt to "sell" duncan as a marketing prospect. the fans just never bought it. but people in basketball know and respect his game. but i don't think his failure in marketing has to do with his personality as much as his quiet style. he had all the production, but he just wasn't flamboyant, which was good, but fans usually wanted to see the opposite.

[BBallBeatwriter]

Brilliant point. This thread DESERVES stars. This is a long-overdue thread, and I read recently in a book how his arrogance on and off court were facaded by the media. He and David Stern knew that every suburban dad could feel comfortable having thier kid look up to an athelete and MJ felt the public percieved him so infallable, that he told reporters not to leak news that his fiorst son was born illegitamatley.

[hateraid]

Brilliant point. This thread DESERVES stars. This is a long-overdue thread, and I read recently in a book how his arrogance on and off court were facaded by the media. He and David Stern knew that every suburban dad could feel comfortable having thier kid look up to an athelete and MJ felt the public percieved him so infallable, that he told reporters not to leak news that his fiorst son was born illegitamatley.

Did you think there was an alterantive at the time or Jordan was the lone savior? This question is posed to anybody as well.

[Xsatyr]

Brilliant point. This thread DESERVES stars. This is a long-overdue thread, and I read recently in a book how his arrogance on and off court were facaded by the media. He and David Stern knew that every suburban dad could feel comfortable having thier kid look up to an athelete and MJ felt the public percieved him so infallable, that he told reporters not to leak news that his fiorst son was born illegitamatley.

I don't care about his life off the court. I respect what he did on the court and thats what counts.

[RainierBeachPoet]

Did you think there was an alterantive at the time or Jordan was the lone savior? This question is posed to anybody as well.

as i mentioned before, i think the saviors were bird/magic. they saved the league and stabilized it. it sky rocketed with mj

i think it was a convergence of:

jordan's God given ability, hard work, good looks and competitive nature
nike's great marketing campaigns and its global ventures
a smitten media that loved mj
the expanded tv deals-- esp with cable
the expansion of the league
the various intense rivalries that existed
the greater influx in $$$$ at all levels (esp. merchandising)
the larger contracts for players

[hateraid]

I don't care about his life off the court. I respect what he did on the court and thats what counts.


And you very well should. but as his accomplishments on the court go, somebody else trumped what he's done. So clearly he can't be the definative no.1, yet alot people believe so. Does your respect for him make him no.1 all time?

[RainierBeachPoet]

I don't care about his life off the court. I respect what he did on the court and thats what counts.

i too like to try to bracket hoops apart from "real life" but it is not possible

the topic of the thread is media's influence on peoples perspectives and indeed it does play a huge role in how the publics perception of a player/team is

as much as i can marvel at kobes hoops skills, i cannot forget the rape charge and the drama that ensued. any other non-rich black man would be doing time

how much did all of that affect the publics perception of kobe? how about oj? does the public have a short memory?

[hateraid]

i too like to try to bracket hoops apart from "real life" but it is not possible

the topic of the thread is media's influence on peoples perspectives and indeed it does play a huge role in how the publics perception of a player/team is

as much as i can marvel at kobes hoops skills, i cannot forget the rape charge and the drama that ensued. any other non-rich black man would be doing time

how much did all of that affect the publics perception of kobe? how about oj? does the public have a short memory?


So do you think that if the media wanted to they could spin the whole rape thing and create a positive image out of that? Similar to Jordan having illegitimate kid, cheating on wife, gambling, ect., ect....

[RainierBeachPoet]

So do you think that if the media wanted to they could spin the whole rape thing and create a positive image out of that? Similar to Jordan having illegitimate kid, cheating on wife, gambling, ect., ect....

let me ponder this overnight h-aid...

[Xsatyr]

And you very well should. but as his accomplishments on the court go, somebody else trumped what he's done. So clearly he can't be the definative no.1, yet alot people believe so. Does your respect for him make him no.1 all time?

As far as I am concerned he is number 1 of all time. Until somebody else does something to make me think otherwise he will be number to me.

[Xsatyr]

i too like to try to bracket hoops apart from "real life" but it is not possible

the topic of the thread is media's influence on peoples perspectives and indeed it does play a huge role in how the publics perception of a player/team is

as much as i can marvel at kobes hoops skills, i cannot forget the rape charge and the drama that ensued. any other non-rich black man would be doing time

how much did all of that affect the publics perception of kobe? how about oj? does the public have a short memory?

Six rings without a dominant big man speaks for itself. I never thought Kobe was better than Jordan bc I always felt he would need a big man to win. Shaq goes to Miami and then look what happens. I never think about the person themselves bc I have came terms along time ago that people are just human. And I personally always thought Kobe was innocent bc of the girl's reputation so that changed nothing. In fact I kind of felt sry for him during that time but I really don't like him bc of his personality.

[RainierBeachPoet]

Six rings without a dominant big man speaks for itself. I never thought Kobe was better than Jordan bc I always felt he would need a big man to win. Shaq goes to Miami and then look what happens. I never think about the person themselves bc I have came terms along time ago that people are just human. And I personally always thought Kobe was innocent bc of the girl's reputation so that changed nothing. In fact I kind of felt sry for him during that time but I really don't like him bc of his personality.

this is the exact point of this thread: does the media alter public perception?

kobe's lawyers knew exactly how to beat the charge-- throw so much mud and doubt on the accuser that she would drop the charges so as to not see the trial period at all

high priced lawyers work the media to their advantage. that d.a. in little eagle county didnt have a prayer even if he did have a strong case in court--- it didnt get to that level

[RainierBeachPoet]

nba cares about itself and its own rep more than these causes.

i respect people who give to worthy causes that dont make their generosity a photo-op

is it just me, or does the whole "nba cares" push seem a bit contrived? perhaps a way to make the nba seem respectable? perhaps a stern brain-child?

this nba cares thing reeks of pumping up the nba's rep by surrounding the players with some needy folks in a feel good 30 second video "sight-bite"

i cant say that those who participate in these things have bad intentions-- on the contrary, i am sure that they believe that they are doing good things.

but more effective things can be done and done less ostentatiously so as not to make me suspicious of self-serving motives underlying seemingly charitable works.

how about bolstering known, proven and effective organizations that do the work day in and day out-- not just show up on a saturday, take a few photos with players hugging a couple of kids and then leaving: probably never to be seen their again (at least not without a camera present)

and then leaving enough money that would equal a couple of "blackjack hands" as sir charles would say

the nba knows how to handle media relations...

[Xsatyr]

this is the exact point of this thread: does the media alter public perception?

kobe's lawyers knew exactly how to beat the charge-- throw so much mud and doubt on the accuser that she would drop the charges so as to not see the trial period at all

high priced lawyers work the media to their advantage. that d.a. in little eagle county didnt have a prayer even if he did have a strong case in court--- it didnt get to that level

She had a past that speaks for itself. But if your talking about the masses than yeah, I mean 90 percent of Americans are brainwashed anyways, no offense to any of you.

[apriorist]

[QUOTE=geeWiz15
people complain about a liberal ideology among those who are educated and those who investigate current events for a living crack me up. if the smartest, most aware people in the country are liberal, maybe those liberals have a point, eh?
.[/QUOTE]

Just because someone is more educated, it does not necessarily make them smarter. Retention of facts and application of those facts in a logical manner are two entirely different things. The Unabomber got his degree at Harvard. 'Yes' was a seriously smart mathematictian, but did he apply his knowledge logically that somehow led him to sending bombs to people because he didn't like technology? What exactly defines "technology"? He used technology to kill people who worked with technology. Oh, but he was an educated liberal and so therefore sooooooo smart. But you're probably liberal and so therefore not open-minded (not that most conservatives are).

[Xsatyr]

Just because someone is more educated, it does not necessarily make them smarter. Retention of facts and application of those facts in a logical manner are two entirely different things. The Unabomber got his degree at Harvard. 'Yes' was a seriously smart mathematictian, but did he apply his knowledge logically that somehow led him to sending bombs to people because he didn't like technology? What exactly defines "technology"? He used technology to kill people who worked with technology. Oh, but he was an educated liberal and so therefore sooooooo smart. But you're probably liberal and so therefore not open-minded (not that most conservatives are).

The highlighted sentence makes no since bc liberals are open minded, well a true liberal. The problem with government is the two party system that has its flaws. Politicians just choose sides even if they fall in between bc they don't want to lose any votes. But if someone is educated then they are indeed smart but education does not teach morals and thats where the real problems come in.

[johndough]

i wouldn't say it's the power of the media as much as the stupidity of some people, who can't ever think for themselves.

This post pretty much sums it up.That, said the media puts alot of research/cheese into manipulating the way people think....all venues.In the end it's up to you to recognize this.

Concerning Jordan......when the majority of your PEERS/former players say you're the greatest?..It's pretty hard to argue with that.

[johndough]

The highlighted sentence makes no since bc liberals are open minded, well a true liberal. The problem with government is the two party system that has its flaws. Politicians just choose sides even if they fall in between bc they don't want to lose any votes. But if someone is educated then they are indeed smart but education does not teach morals and thats where the real problems come in.


Let me get this straight...what you're saying is...there are different 'off-shoots' of both parties....essentially rendering it anything BUT a two party system?If so, I totally agree.

Thats why its reffered to as the political pigsty.It's a sham.It's fairly well documented that the that the country...the world for all intents and purposes, is controlled by the ruling/global elite...who make decisions to further THEIR gains/agenda.

[DreamRockets]

This is a statement made by my dad, a long NBA follower. When it comes to deciding who's the best player of all-time, media actually created the legacy of Jordan far greater than what he really was. Not that he's saying he's not a Jordan fan, but simply put, the media hyped him into superstardom and banished any type of negativity because NBA was a struggling league and neede to create a poster boy. He also felt that Dr.J (being a bit of a homer) was a better all round player but the league didn't didn't have enough attention and creativity to focus on him as a face for the game. He felt that if the media wanted too, they could create him into the persona of Kobe and that the crimes Jordan committed were too easily forgiven.



jordan isn't inarguably the GOAT, nothing is set on stone in the nba, but his legacy is far greater than that of many other possible GOATS, i think few players can be considered above jordan:

magic for all the championships he won and because he had an unparalled winning %, kareem because of his numbers all around, his accolades, his championships and longevity, he ranks at the top of nba history in points, rebounds, blocks, games, championships, finals appearences, has 6 mvps (most all-time), and shaq due to his dominance, great winning %, championships, great all around numbers, etc, i don't think you can make a case for anyone else being better than jordan.

[apriorist]

The highlighted sentence makes no since bc liberals are open minded, well a true liberal. The problem with government is the two party system that has its flaws. Politicians just choose sides even if they fall in between bc they don't want to lose any votes. But if someone is educated then they are indeed smart but education does not teach morals and thats where the real problems come in.

Liberals just *say* they're open-minded. Doesn't mean they are. They are open to *some* ideas but closed to others, no different from conservatives. For example, most of them actually believe that there is some objective measure for "morals". That's why you hear them say "The Iraq War is immoral". That makes no sense. Immoral by what standard?

[XxNeXuSxX]

Liberals just *say* they're open-minded. Doesn't mean they are. They are open to *some* ideas but closed to others, no different from conservatives. For example, most of them actually believe that there is some objective measure for "morals". That's why you hear them say "The Iraq War is immoral". That makes no sense. Immoral by what standard?
Um, immoral as people are dying for no reason? You know, that small reason. :confusedshrug:

[Xsatyr]

Liberals just *say* they're open-minded. Doesn't mean they are. They are open to *some* ideas but closed to others, no different from conservatives. For example, most of them actually believe that there is some objective measure for "morals". That's why you hear them say "The Iraq War is immoral". That makes no sense. Immoral by what standard?

I said a true liberal which is why I brought up the two party system. Politicians lie most of the time and many of them are not who you think they are. For instance someone might claim to be liberal even though their opinions on some issues are conservative. They just wouldn't tell you bc they are not trying to lose votes. It is pretty hard to be one or the other on every issue but they claim they are so they won't lose votes.

[hateraid]

Just wanted to bring up this topic on how it pertains to the current NCAA season. Now that the season has past have we been satisfied with the results of Greg Oden?
Personally, although I've been championing this guy, his season was not all that immpressive. He didn't seem to live up to the billing of the next great big man. Is it because of the media hype that his name is in the same breath as Durant, who is clearly the better player, but poeple have been clinging on to the notion that Oden should go number one based solely on the fact he was the media icon the past couple of years.
If media never came into play how would the world perception of Oden be right now?


BTW, this is not an Oden bashing thread, I personally would love to see him in a Sixer uni by next season. But it is what it is.

[hateraid]

Bump, wanted to gather current poster's perspectives

[riseagainst]

definitely do, now people think LEbron >= MJ. :lol

[bmd]

Absolutely.

Just like people think Bruce Lee was the greatest fighter and martial artist ever.

People think that little Asian guy could beat real fighters twice his size.

Legends will often be greater than the man when people repeat the same lies over and over.

[Cali Syndicate]

The rivalry of Bird and Magic saved the NBA and the marketing of MJ took the NBA to the next level.

MJ dropped 28ppg as a rookie. Missed more than 3/4 of his next season and dropped 49 and 63 on a team people call one of the best teams of all-time. Larry Bird, then one of the top 3 players in the league, called "MJ God in disguise."

Media or not, if the NBA was going hype a player up, they sure picked the right player for the job.

[TMacMagic]

If you know how to think for yourself and not let other people form your opinions, what the media says doesn't affect you. However for those not so set in their ways, yeeerrrrrrpppp.

[LakersReign]

If you actually watch games, what the media says doesn't affect you. That's cuz you'll be able to tell the difference between hype and reality.

[NumberSix]

If you actually watch games, what the media says doesn't affect you. That's cuz you'll be able to tell the difference between hype and reality.
Says the raging KobeTard.

[BlueandGold]

It obviously does, not just in athletics but every realm and sector of life, mass media communications has a huge effect on how people perceive certain events, what is transmitted and what is omitted as well as the dominant status quo/paradigms of our current day.

To say that it only "affects points of view" is a vast understatement. The media itself is an indoctrination tool.

[Freedom Kid7]

Smart thread is smart. Before I go into anything, I will say it's weird to read this thread now. ISH must have been really different five years ago.

The media always affects the point of view, whether it be politics, sports or other cultural stuff. A good example here is back in 08 (hell, even now) when Obama was campaigning the media without a doubt gave him a huge boost. He was incredibly charismatic and seemed to be the symbol of hope (partially due to his race). He played well to the media and in return they swayed toward him. Meanwhile, other candidates at the time/now (Ron Paul, Huntsman) lacked certain things that the media likes. I'm not gonna go into politics, but that comes to mind for media pandering.

Now, regarding the NBA. Generally, most people here have MJ as number one and Kareem number two. Sometimes it differs, but generally KAJ is somewhere near the top. The ultimate difference between those two is ultimately the way the media represented them.

MJ was the ideal posterboy. Athletic, flashy, charismatic, easily marketable, pretty good looking and a good basketball player. He gave the media what they wanted just as other posters stated, and in return the media shied away from his dark side (gambling addiction, him being an ass, the list goes on). Granted, you can find out about that through certain books, but the mainstream media didn't want to harm the basketball posterboy. He was good to them, so why harm them. In addition, Jordan didn't get into political issues, so that helped as well. Due to all that, the media hypes him (even today) as the best, but fortunately his play was solid and he backed it up.

Kareem was a great basketball player. He arguably has the most impressive longevity (averaged beyond 20/10 for 20 years. That is something that will not be touched), one of the best go to moves, etc etc. But he was not good with cameras or the public. The whole name change didn't sit well with some people, and he was not that friendly to the media (it showed a political side of him that certain people felt uneasy about). So, in return the media did not sit well with him and thus he was not protected like Jordan. People became aware of the ass he was. His achievements weren't hyped up nearly as much as Jordan, etc. I guess a part of it goes to the fact that he was probably at his peak during the times the NBA had the worst reputation (hell, he was involved in the whole Kermit Washington crap). I feel maybe if Kareem stayed as Lew Alcindor and had the media-persona that Jordan had, maybe things could be different.

So, simply put, yes it does. Media affects the point of view in just about everything whether it be idolization, political, or cultural. It's there and it affects opinions

[gasolina]

I agree.

In a way, referees are human too, and like normal human's their opinions might get swayed by external factors (media).

Like a certain player might get away with more ticky tack fouls and a travel here and there because the referee had developed an agreement bias. (ESPN says this guys is good, he couldn't have lifted that pivot foot on that spin layup)

And in turn, certain players confidence goes through the roof, and we all know that confidence makes an already great player very deadly. (Oh let me just put my head down and blindly drive to the basket, they'll call a foul anyway) (man, I've gotten to the line 10x this half, coach won't mind if I take this ill-advised three, anyway I'm in a rhythm now with all those free throws)

[PickernRoller]

Iraq has WMD....Siria about to use Chemical weapons...Rebels are freedom fighters aka terrorist. Security contractors, new word for mercenaries. Impeachment, new word for coup d'etat.

In short, yes it does and that's one of the main reasons it exist. "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it"

[RIP CITY]

Media definitely effects alot of people's point of view, not everyone's but alot of people. I personally don't take anyone in the media very seriously, I find most of them to be full of sh*t up to their ears. To me, the only real difference between most media members and the general public is that they have a College Degree that allows them to write/report their opinions and be paid for it, their opinions hold no extra value to me just because they went to school for four years to learn how to write an article better than someone else who has just as valuable of an opinion as they do.

They do, in alot of cases, have inside information that the general public is not privy to but in the end, their opinion is still just that, an opinion.

I don't believe Michael Jordan is the best basketball player ever because the media told me so, I believe it because I've never seen another basketball player play the game of basketball better than Michael Jordan. All this talk of Nike, Hanes and McDonalds making Jordan bigger than what he was is nonsense to me. I can only speak for myself, but from my perspective, none of those things mean anything to me and I never even payed much attention to his advertising to begin with. His TV commercials don't make him a better basketball player. I've seen way more LeBron James commercials in my life than Jordan commercials and that doesn't make me think LeBron is better than Jordan or the Greatest Player of All-Time.

I'm sure there are alot of people who's opinion is swayed by the media but my opinion is not one of them. Most people in the media are a joke to me.

[NumberSix]

I've seen way more LeBron James commercials in my life than Jordan commercials and that doesn't make me think LeBron is better than Jordan or the Greatest Player of All-Time.
Really?

[hateraid]

Media definitely effects alot of people's point of view, not everyone's but alot of people. I personally don't take anyone in the media very seriously, I find most of them to be full of sh*t up to their ears. To me, the only real difference between most media members and the general public is that they have a College Degree that allows them to write/report their opinions and be paid for it, their opinions hold no extra value to me just because they went to school for four years to learn how to write an article better than someone else who has just as valuable of an opinion as they do.

They do, in alot of cases, have inside information that the general public is not privy to but in the end, their opinion is still just that, an opinion.

I don't believe Michael Jordan is the best basketball player ever because the media told me so, I believe it because I've never seen another basketball player play the game of basketball better than Michael Jordan. All this talk of Nike, Hanes and McDonalds making Jordan bigger than what he was is nonsense to me. I can only speak for myself, but from my perspective, none of those things mean anything to me and I never even payed much attention to his advertising to begin with. His TV commercials don't make him a better basketball player. I've seen way more LeBron James commercials in my life than Jordan commercials and that doesn't make me think LeBron is better than Jordan or the Greatest Player of All-Time.

I'm sure there are alot of people who's opinion is swayed by the media but my opinion is not one of them. Most people in the media are a joke to me.

Now taking your post into consideration, take my father for an example. He's obviously much older than you, and he has witnessed Dr.J play. He's a very intellegent NBA fan and could run post laps around posters today. His honest opinion was Dr.J was a way more talented player than MJ. If Dr.J garnered the same media credintials he may have gone down as one of the greatest players ever. Since his skillset did not translate on paper, it had to be witnessed.
Saying that, do you respect his opinion?

[IGotACoolStory]

Did not read.


But I will say that if the only way you could evaluate NBA players was purely by actually watching them (that means no sportscenter, no endoresments, no first take or PTI), players like LeBron would be universally adored.

[RIP CITY]

Really?

Yup. Alot of reasons why. Main reason being, I watch more TV now than I did when Jordan was playing. I was younger and spent alot more time outside of the house than I do now. Which is the reason I've seen more Jordan commercials post-retirement than I did when he was playing. I really ONLY watched sports on TV at that time for the most part, I spent alot less time watching TV than I do now, I watch more than just sports now as well.

Let's not pretend like LeBron commercials aren't everywhere just like Jordan commercials were (LeBron commercials also get played on a more variety of channels than Jordan's playing days commercials did). The Media/TV market is even bigger now than when Jordan was playing. Plus when I said that, I mostly meant during their playing days, which is more effective to changing someone's views of that player, as a player. Seeing Jordan commercials now isn't going to be as effective as seeing them when he was still playing.

[LakersReign]

Did not read.


But I will say that if the only way you could evaluate NBA players was purely by actually watching them (that means no sportscenter, no endoresments, no first take or PTI), players like LeBron would be universally adored.

I disagree. Lebron wouldn't have fans if it wasn't for the 24/7/365 media hype machine. They had no interest in the NBA until he was courted by NBA scouts, and eventually signed as a pro. If it wasn't for all that, he wouldn't have the bandwagon fans he has now. Let's not even talk about the "real" Cavs fans who never knew the city of Cleveland had an NBA team. If it wasn't for the media, Lebron wouldn't have received half of the praise he gets now.

[RRR3]

I disagree. Lebron wouldn't have fans if it wasn't for the 24/7/365 media hype machine. They had no interest in the NBA until he was courted by NBA scouts, and eventually signed as a pro. If it wasn't for all that, he wouldn't have the bandwagon fans he has now. Let's not even talk about the "real" Cavs fans who never knew the city of Cleveland had an NBA team. If it wasn't for the media, Lebron wouldn't have received half of the praise he gets now.
You're not getting it; he was saying that if people only watched nba players play the games and had no knowledge of their doings off the court lbj wouldn't have haters.

[DatAsh]

I disagree. Lebron wouldn't have fans if it wasn't for the 24/7/365 media hype machine. They had no interest in the NBA until he was courted by NBA scouts, and eventually signed as a pro. If it wasn't for all that, he wouldn't have the bandwagon fans he has now. Let's not even talk about the "real" Cavs fans who never knew the city of Cleveland had an NBA team. If it wasn't for the media, Lebron wouldn't have received half of the praise he gets now.

You really hate Lebron don't you? It's almost scary reading some of your posts.

[RIP CITY]

Now taking your post into consideration, take my father for an example. He's obviously much older than you, and he has witnessed Dr.J play. He's a very intellegent NBA fan and could run post laps around posters today. His honest opinion was Dr.J was a way more talented player than MJ. If Dr.J garnered the same media credintials he may have gone down as one of the greatest players ever. Since his skillset did not translate on paper, it had to be witnessed.
Saying that, do you respect his opinion?

Respect his opinion? I'm sure I probably would if I knew him. Though, a caveat to that is I would have to know more about his general basketball knowledge to fully respect his opinion.

I don't agree with his opinion of Julius Erving being "way more talented" than Michael Jordan, at all. I don't agree with Dr. J being as talented as Jordan, let alone way more talented. I've seen enough of both to know that Jordan was the much more skilled, talented and physically gifted player, plus Jordan had the advantage of being able to learn from Dr. J and advance his game because of seeing Dr. J play. Michael Jordan was simply a better player than Dr. J but I do agree that Dr. J might be more celebrated had he played in a more media friendly era. But most hardcore basketball fans view Dr. J as a once in a lifetime type of revolutionary player and would still view Jordan as the better player.

[DaHeezy]

Why is everybody refering to media as commercials?

I'm thinking more print press, analysts, and networking. Yes it most definately affects the way people feel about players. The media force Jordan on people because the NBA was a sinking ship. It's the reason why Jordan is considered the greatest and guys like Duncan and Hakeem are not.

[LakersReign]

You really hate Lebron don't you? It's almost scary reading some of your posts.

If you say so. I only posted the truth, so take it however you want. You want to get butthurt over a post, then tell me I'm supposed to be mad about it? Just keep telling yourself that.

[RRR3]

If you say so. I only posted the truth, so take it however you want. Yopu want to get butthurt over a post, then tell me I'm mad about it? Just keep telling yourself that.
You posted your opinions which are not necessarily facts.

[RRR3]

Clown(rrr3) go change your bloody tampon and seriously stfu:rolleyes:

You and all the other clowns on here, ALWAYS post crap you try to call facts, then you try to come at me with that b.s? (yawn):sleeping
Nothing I said in this thread so far warrants personal attacks. This is an interesting thread let's keep it productive and civil.

[hateraid]

Respect his opinion? I'm sure I probably would if I knew him. Though, a caveat to that is I would have to know more about his general basketball knowledge to fully respect his opinion.

I don't agree with his opinion of Julius Erving being "way more talented" than Michael Jordan, at all. I don't agree with Dr. J being as talented as Jordan, let alone way more talented. I've seen enough of both to know that Jordan was the much more skilled, talented and physically gifted player, plus Jordan had the advantage of being able to learn from Dr. J and advance his game because of seeing Dr. J play. Michael Jordan was simply a better player than Dr. J but I do agree that Dr. J might be more celebrated had he played in a more media friendly era. But most hardcore basketball fans view Dr. J as a once in a lifetime type of revolutionary player and would still view Jordan as the better player.

But wouldn't you agree that he would be more qualified than you to assess that considering he lived in both eras and actually HAS witnessed both in their primes?

Kind of plays into my point because who ACTUALLY tells you Dr.J wasn't as good? Because unless you're 50+ you wouldn't neccessarily know. That's right: media.

I respect your point of view, not trying to diminish it, but you can't actually say because you can't gauge based on personal experience, you can only go by what people tell you and that in a sense is related to media. My dad is a hardcore NBA fan so you can't diminish his. You don't have to agree, but you can't say he's wrong, in fact he has more credible ground to say your wrong.

[Kobe 4 The Win]

The media does affect the point of view of most people. It's only because most people have lost the ability to think for themselves or they world rather not have to.

How many people, of their own accord, without the media urging them to do it, would be into Justin Beiber? How many people would look at that little turd and say "What a talent", "I need to rush out and buy his cd"?

[StateOfMind12]

Yes, this is obviously true.

There is a reason why most casual fans believe that Kobe Bryant is like the 2nd greatest player ever or a top 5 player ever and it is because of the media. Anyone who has watched basketball for a decent amount of time though know that Kobe is not even close to top 2-5 of all-time.

I honestly started posting on message boards such as ISH and other ones because I wanted to get a smarter and more knowledgeable perspective about the NBA and basketball and get away from what the media and most casual fans believed because I knew what they were saying was asinine.

[RRR3]

Yes, this is obviously true.

There is a reason why most casual fans believe that Kobe Bryant is like the 2nd greatest player ever or a top 5 player ever and it is because of the media. Anyone who has watched basketball for a decent amount of time though know that Kobe is not even close to top 2-5 of all-time.

I honestly started posting on message boards such as ISH and other ones because I wanted to get a smarter and more knowledgeable perspective about the NBA and basketball and get away from what the media and most casual fans believed.
I don't disagree with this but I'm not sure bringing up Kobe here is wise

[DatAsh]

If you say so. I only posted the truth, so take it however you want. You want to get butthurt over a post, then tell me I'm supposed to be mad about it? Just keep telling yourself that.


The truth? All I saw was your opinion. :confusedshrug:

I'm not butt-hurt over anything. I just can't help but notice that 90% of your post are about "Lebronytes" or accusing other people of having multiple accounts.

[StateOfMind12]

I don't disagree with this but I'm not sure bringing up Kobe here is wise
Kobe is the perfect example of someone who is overrated because of the media though so too bad.

People on message boards though tend to be on both sides of the spectrum which is no surprise considering how Kobe is probably the most polarizing player that has ever played the game.

There will never be a player as polarizing as him.

One side of the spectrum, you have people calling him the GOAT or 2nd GOAT to MJ and on the other side of the spectrum, you have people calling him a lucky version of Jerry Stackhouse.

[Da KO King]

Media's opinion creates the public's perception which becomes the de facto truth.

[hateraid]

Kobe is the perfect example of someone who is overrated because of the media though so too bad.

People on message boards though tend to be on both sides of the spectrum which is no surprise considering how Kobe is probably the most polarizing player that has ever played the game.

There will never be a player as polarizing as him.

One side of the spectrum, you have people calling him the GOAT or 2nd GOAT to MJ and on the other side of the spectrum, you have people calling him a lucky version of Jerry Stackhouse.

And to emphasize my OP, that is what my father's generation thought of Jordan.
You can't address/counter one without addressing the other

[tmacattack33]

This is a statement made by my dad, a long NBA follower. When it comes to deciding who's the best player of all-time, media actually created the legacy of Jordan far greater than what he really was. Not that he's saying he's not a Jordan fan, but simply put, the media hyped him into superstardom and banished any type of negativity because NBA was a struggling league and neede to create a poster boy. He also felt that Dr.J (being a bit of a homer) was a better all round player but the league didn't didn't have enough attention and creativity to focus on him as a face for the game. He felt that if the media wanted too, they could create him into the persona of Kobe and that the crimes Jordan committed were too easily forgiven.

Keep in mind, this is not a Jordan hate thread, this is a question about how media affects our point of view. Please don't insult my father about this because this is a point of veiw that many NBA historian feel too. Barber Shop talk if you will.

Yes, definitely (and obviously).

Especially amongst casual to subcasual fans. A casual or subcasual fan knows who Derrick Rose is and probably will look at him as a super-star, but they may not even know who Deron Williams is.

[TheeBeast]

There's no doubt that media effects our point of view. A perfect example in the NBA is Jeremy Lin, just look at what the media did with him within a few months... :rolleyes:

Just like with American Idol, if you don't look like star material then you won't get far just with a good voice. Same thing applies in the NBA... Do you see any casual fans talking about Luis Scola? :oldlol:

[DatAsh]

Sure....just keep telling yourself that. I'm always amazed at people who SAY(LIE) that they supposedly read my posts. But also ALWAYS conveniently never see anything else. Never knew it was possible to read, when all you do is glance over a few posts and form an opinion. Makes sense if you don't think about it. Believe whatever you want.

Keep telling myself that your opinions are just that, opinions?

As opposed to what? Taking your opinions as fact? :confusedshrug:

[LakersReign]

Keep telling myself that your opinions are just that, opinions?

As opposed to what? Taking your opinions as fact? :confusedshrug:

Holla back when you can show me a link to exactly where I EVER said anything like that VERBATIM on ISH:rolleyes:

[RIP CITY]

But wouldn't you agree that he would be more qualified than you to assess that considering he lived in both eras and actually HAS witnessed both in their primes?

Kind of plays into my point because who ACTUALLY tells you Dr.J wasn't as good? Because unless you're 50+ you wouldn't neccessarily know. That's right: media.

I respect your point of view, not trying to diminish it, but you can't actually say because you can't gauge based on personal experience, you can only go by what people tell you and that in a sense is related to media. My dad is a hardcore NBA fan so you can't diminish his. You don't have to agree, but you can't say he's wrong, in fact he has more credible ground to say your wrong.

Sounds to me that his opinion is just as biased as any other so no, I wouldn't say he's better equipped than anyone to be honest. Opinions are opinions, sounds to me that his opinion is clouded by bias towards players in his generation and he's over emphasizing the effect the media has on everyone. Again, I'm sure there are a tons of people who's opinion on this comparison would be based of the media telling them Jordan ranks higher on an All-Time list. Most of those people are casual fans, who are not as informed and go by what they are told because they don't follow the game as closely. But I've seen alot of full games of Julius Erving in his prime (admittedly probably not as many as your father but definitely enough to form a realistic opinion) and most people that have will tell you Michael Jordan was the more talented player by quite a large margin. No one in the media or otherwise has any real bearing on my opinion. I base my opinion of this comparison (Dr. J Vs. MJ) on what I've seen of both players (not what I've heard or read) and the difference to me between the two is pretty staggering.

Again, I'm not saying your father is wrong to feel that way and I'm not saying I don't agree with some of his points to a certain degree but in the end, no I do not agree with his overall conclusion that Dr. J. was better and only viewed as the lesser player because of the media. My opinion of your fathers conclusion would be this... The gap between the two players might be viewed as wider than it actually is because of Jordan's media attention but the gap is very real based on their actual play and talent.

[RRR3]

Holla back when you can show me a link to exactly where I EVER said anything like that VERBATIM on ISH:rolleyes:
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=7637913&postcount=73
:confusedshrug:

[LakersReign]

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=7637913&postcount=73
:confusedshrug:

Learn how to read:rolleyes:


If you say so. I only posted the truth, so take it however you want. You want to get butthurt over a post, then tell me I'm supposed to be mad about it? Just keep telling yourself that.

Yeah....um....the part where I supposedly said something about taking my opinions as facts seems to be missing....why is that? Oh yeah...that's right....cuz I never said it. Good job...good effort:facepalm

[RRR3]

Learn how to read:rolleyes:



Yeah....um....the part where I supposedly said something about taking my opinions as facts seems to be missing....why is that? Oh yeah...that's right....cuz I never said it. Good job...good effort:facepalm
You claimed you only posted the truth, implying what you stated could be factually quantified when that was not the case. You only wrote opinions which may or may not have some basis of truth to them

[knickswin]

yes. they overrate and underrate certain players.

[RRR3]

Semantics only proves you(rr3) have no real point here which is no big surpsie. done with the pretense of being "civil" so quickly....huh?(yawn):rolleyes:
I think I am being quite civil. How am I not?

[RRR3]

Good luck with all that:sleeping
Whatever. If you're not going to stay on topic this is pointless.

[LakersReign]

Whatever. If you're not going to stay on topic this is pointless.

Yeah cuz "staying on topic" means using semantics to MAKE UP a point you don't really have, in the first place. All in yet another one of your pathetic efforts to bait me into some POINTLESS argument, in order to get me banned. Same BORING sh*t....different day. Like I said before, good luck with all that:rolleyes:

[Calabis]

This is a statement made by my dad, a long NBA follower. When it comes to deciding who's the best player of all-time, media actually created the legacy of Jordan far greater than what he really was. Not that he's saying he's not a Jordan fan, but simply put, the media hyped him into superstardom and banished any type of negativity because NBA was a struggling league and neede to create a poster boy. He also felt that Dr.J (being a bit of a homer) was a better all round player but the league didn't didn't have enough attention and creativity to focus on him as a face for the game. He felt that if the media wanted too, they could create him into the persona of Kobe and that the crimes Jordan committed were too easily forgiven.

Keep in mind, this is not a Jordan hate thread, this is a question about how media affects our point of view. Please don't insult my father about this because this is a point of veiw that many NBA historian feel too. Barber Shop talk if you will.

I think you should ask your pops to revisit history.....Jordan received a ton of negative criticism(would have been a ton more if internet were around) and although people did hype him, he actually lived up to the hype, something rare today, as its just given before earned. Also if he thought Dr. J was a better all around player, then I wouldn't take his opinion seriously(not trying to be a dick, but c'mon that's BS)

Look at the critics today about his game, this board is full of them :oldlol:

[kileer7]

The question: Does media affect point of view?
Answer: Of course. I'm surprised anyone needs to ask.

The rest is not worth addressing.

[get these NETS]

not the media's fault

gullible and simple sports fans


for example

reporter's job is to cover game/player

player blows off reporter ,ignores him, or doesn't give him good quotes and reporter writes that player is a jerk

fan hears reporter and repeats the line even though it's not based on anything relevant to him

[PickernRoller]

Nothing I said in this thread so far warrants personal attacks. This is an interesting thread let's keep it productive and civil.

Thread ain't interesting....pretty straight forward answer of YES and only YES is correct. Anything else is pretty much kindergarten kids wondering why the sky is blue and blabbering about it which sadly happens to be the case here....yet again to no surprise.

[TheBigVeto]

Definitely not my point of view. I know the media is generally stupid and racist against minorities in NBA, and I also know that I am always right and those who disagree with me are morons.

[comerb]

considering Fox News has half the country believing all sorts of batshit crazy nonsense, I'd say yes.

[PickernRoller]

considering Fox News has half the country believing all sorts of batshit crazy nonsense, I'd say yes.

http://www.newscorpse.com/Pix/Caps/evangelist-beck.jpg

http://www.newscorpse.com/Pix/Caps/beck-jarrett.jpg

[DCL]

because half the population are morons and have an IQ below 100.

[Soundwave]

If it's all just about marketing, why hasn't the NBA/Nike/Gatorade etc. been successfully able to replicate another Jordan? Why not pick any one -- LeBron, Kobe, Vince Carter, etc. etc.

The public isn't buying it that's why.

Jordan was actually opposite of what you describe -- people loved him because he had all the hype, but he LIVED UP to all the hype.

He's the epitome of "winner" in sports culture (see: Michael Phelps citing Jordan as his hero, not any other Olympian/swimmer, even Kobe ... very obviously he modelled basically his entire game off Jordan, because he's the best, etc. etc.).

If you could "create" a Jordan, the corporate powers that be would've done it ages ago -- they've tried desperately with different players. All these companies would love to clone Jordan so they could continue making millions off of him forever. The truth is no one has the substance to back up the hype like Jordan did and the public knows that.

That's because in sports at some point, you can't hide behind hype. That's the great thing about sport. At some point you have to prove you live up to the hype. Sports is cruel. Sports is vicious. It separates men from boys. And Jordan was tested again and again, and he proved his worth again and again. That's why the public still loves him.

[Freedom Kid7]

http://www.newscorpse.com/Pix/Caps/evangelist-beck.jpg

http://www.newscorpse.com/Pix/Caps/beck-jarrett.jpg
God, there will never be a man as nutty as Glenn Beck. Didn't he insult the victims of the Norway Tragedy last year (or something of the equivalent)?

[jongib369]

Yeah it does that's for sure...Take Wilt for example and how he was treated by the media in the 60's...and how that treatment has translated too today...If you give Wilt the same media praise Jordan got, or any other player for that matter things would look very different. Not dissing Jordan though hes my favorite player until last year...a CLOOOOOSE 2nd favorite now

[Horatio33]

Could say the same about Kobe. All the media say he is close to MJ because of rings, but forget the MVP disparity, FMVPs, DPOY, ROY, scoring titles, efficiency etc. Forget that Shaq was the main guy on Kobe's first 3 titles. But this seems swept under the rug more often by the media.

[DaHeezy]

Could say the same about Kobe. All the media say he is close to MJ because of rings, but forget the MVP disparity, FMVPs, DPOY, ROY, scoring titles, efficiency etc. Forget that Shaq was the main guy on Kobe's first 3 titles. But this seems swept under the rug more often by the media.

No it's not. It's always examplified by media, ESPECIALLY social media. Everyone loves to pull out this little asterix.