Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="tomcat, post: 3921753, member: 961"] Okay, so my response is going to be a double-dose of cynicism. I own that, but it's the product of someone who spent 20 years in the media and another 20 preparing people to deal with the media. It's not as simple as the reporters being ignorant. Yes, in some cases it's that, but in others, it just seems like laziness. Plus, it's a matter of being condescending, IMHO. I cannot tell you the number of questions reporters -- including Holly and the other ESPNers -- ask that are not only leading, but provide the athlete with the answer in the question, as if they don't trust the player to handle an actual probing question. So they ask questions like: "How much were you feeling the team really played together tonight?" Now, that's not a real question, but it's damn close to the kind of thing these women get asked almost every game. Then there is the ultimate non-question: "Talk about how you came back in the second half." These sorts of made-to-order questions are the laziest way to get a quote I've ever seen, and many if not most commentators now do it, instead of asking a real question. By the way, my definition of a question is a group of words that legitimately should have a question mark at the end of it. So let's unpack a question like the one above (playing together) for a second. There can only be one correct answer to that question, and that's "A lot." The commentator already has told the player that he or she believes the team played well tonight. so the player goes with it, because it's positive. And that's the answer the commentators (they are only reporters if they actually report things) wants to hear and wants the audience to hear. And of course the player goes along, even if she thinks they really didn't play well together. I am certain the players are coached to say certain things, because they all, very articulately, say the right things at the right time and (you'll notice) all wrap up their answers in the same way. God forbid the commentator should ask an open-ended question, like: Do you think the team played together tonight? So it's a dance. The commentators just want an answer that resonates with the audience, not a controversy and certainly not what the player actually feels. The player says what she has been coached to say, and says it again and again and again. All the answers end up in the same places. In the PR business, we call them "talking points." There is nothing wrong with this. In fact, I'm dead certain that such coaching allows some players who otherwise would be fearful of interviews to participate in them without serious stress. It's just that anyone who thinks the "questions" and the answers are spur-of-the-moment is delusional. The above points apply to media types who interview male basketball players as well. I cannot speak to whether those players have been coached on how to answer the "questions." [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach

Forum statistics

Threads: 164,474

Messages: 4,397,512

Members: 10,209

Latest member: noelle