Burke on TSN 1050: “Toronto media wants teams to fail.”

[Poe969]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Burke is flat out wrong. Toronto media don’t want their sport teams to fail, that city is starving for a winner of any kind. Just look at the Jays, they are beloved in that city. Burke just has a hard time taking any kind of criticism and loathes having his methods questioned.

This is the same guy who traded a 1st, 2nd and a 3rd just to move up a couple spots so he could draft a barely servicable defensive defenseman while missing out on a boatload of incredible defensemen including a generational talen in Erik Karlsson. He also didn’t trade Mike Cammalleri because of his pride and stubbornness or how about that draft pick we spent on one Lane MacDermid to add truculence only to have him retire from the sport a few months later. Maybe it’s just Burke making questionable moves that gets him into trouble with the media. As tough as he is, the man takes criticism poorly and that’s a character trait you must have in abundance as a gm in the NHL or in any other sport for that matter.

I think you're confused. The fans and the city want a winner the media want to sell papers and get clicks and what sells that more than negativity? That's mostly what the news is now-a-days, people don't want to hear about how the team made a minor league move that will help them long term, they want something they can relate to, they want to complain they want controversy, they want entertainment and unfortunately negative press creates more of a buzz. So at the end of the day, if you ask any major news outlet what they'd prefer between making money and their local sports team winning, it'll be the money.

[browna]

Burke is correct. In a roundabout way, he’s saying that the press is totally negative there, because negativity and controversy get articles noticed and more airtime.

Not all media want them to fail, as he said, but a large majority are looking to stir the pot or take things out of context on a day to day roller coaster basis, solely to be that contrarian or provide a “hot take” to get their viewpoint noticed in a saturated market.

Media members predicting how and why a team or player will fail seems to stir up a lot more interest in “hope” and positivity, and if the media is member is wrong and there is success, they’ll share in the joy and their admitting of being wrong is forgotten. If the player or team fails, the media member pats themselves in the back and considers themselves experts by having predicted the failure and will encourage them, and others, to take that approach with the next player or next years team etc.

Looks at the press calling up Reimers parents to get a medical update. The way the treated Kessel. Look at TSn and Leafs lunch. Every day or week is a roller coaster up and down because there is so much coverage, every possible scenario or viewpoint gets tossed out, and the more negative and controversial ones get more airtime or play because they stand out for discussion. That mentality of looking for thenflaws or negativity, and attention those topics get, causes, as mentioned above, certain members of the press to try and find that next, even more controversial topic to discuss, to stroke their own ego for bringing it up, and that topic is usually negative.

Always looking for the negative and dissecting every detail of a player or the team just breeds negativity, and I think that’s what he was gettting at. As he also said, Bennett would be curled in a corner if the Toronto press had his underachievement this season under the microscope day in and day out.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Selectively ignoring those facts that don't support your opinion, and exaggerating those that do – that's a bias.

verb
verb: bias; 3rd person present: biases; past tense: biased; past participle: biased; gerund or present participle: biasing
1.
cause to feel or show inclination or prejudice for or against someone or something.

Well, if you want to argue via dictionary, maybe look at all the definitions. "Showing inclination" towards an opinion is biased. You don't necessarily have to argue against the facts, or only embrace a subset of facts, to be biased, you just have to incline towards a position and then frame your arguments to reinforce that inclination.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

How dare you! Burke does NOT deserve that sort of comparison. He is critical when deserved and shows disdain when things go too far, yet he has no problem answering media questions and fully understand their role. Grumpy at times? Sure, no question. But you can't blame him with some of the things he's had to go through over the years (remember the lawsuit with the blogger?).

Trump would like to eliminate the 4th estate altogether and run a totalitarian government with propaganda.

It's an awful and hyperbolic comparison. Rein it in a little.

Was actually comparing how they both despise the media. If you don't believe that then you haven't been paying attention. Burke hates the media as does Trump.

[Poe969]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Was actually comparing how they both despise the media. If you don't believe that then you haven't been paying attention. Burke hates the media as does Trump.

That's a poor comparison, lots of people don't like the media. That's like saying Burke is like Genghis Kahn because they both hate Mondays.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Poe969

I think you're confused. The fans and the city want a winner the media want to sell papers and get clicks and what sells that more than negativity? That's mostly what the news is now-a-days, people don't want to hear about how the team made a minor league move that will help them long term, they want something they can relate to, they want to complain they want controversy, they want entertainment and unfortunately negative press creates more of a buzz. So at the end of the day, if you ask any major news outlet what they'd prefer between making money and their local sports team winning, it'll be the money.

If that was the case, then Shanahan and Lou would’ve been crucified by now for the terrible last place finish they had in 2016. Well they didn’t and they’re receiving tons of praise for how the team has been built. They want a winner, what they weren’t interested in was mediocrity and they let Burke know it. His questionable decisions and churlish attitude ultimately lead to his demise in Toronto and he was basically ran out of town. It ended on a bitter note so I’m not surprised he’s lashing out on them. But he certainly has his share of the blame as well in my opinion.

[Vinny01]

I listened to that interview because Like Fox mentioned on twittter that Burke spoke about the Flames almost signing Iggy this summer. Didn’t hear that mentioned at all but saw the story on Facebook this morning. Sounds like they chose Jagr instead which I think was the right call

[sketchyt]

Here is a near word-for-word transcription of what I overheard two prominent Toronto sports media types say when the Leafs were in Calgary several years ago:

A: "That Lupul kid isn't very good."
B: "Yeah, I mean... I'd take him on my beer league team but it doesn't go much further than that."
A&B: <arrogant laughing>
A: "It doesn't help Ron (Wilson) is awful."
B: "I think we should try to get him fired."
A: "Yeah, we could put some stuff together."

Me: <mind blown GIF>

I know Burke can be... a little much for some people sometimes, but I've heard him speak about dealing with the media and the ONLY time I've heard him complain about it is with Toronto.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Was actually comparing how they both despise the media. If you don't believe that then you haven't been paying attention. Burke hates the media as does Trump.

You were not nearly so explicit in your original post. Why didn't you just say this the first time?

[Steve Bozek]

Of course there must be some good objective media types in Toronto even if I can't name any (maybe Brunt, but he's from Hamilton). As noted above, stirring up dirt and controversy sells newspapers and media love controversy. Their nattering nabobs of negativism are perhaps best exemplified by Steve Simmons (Toronto's loss was Calgary's gain) and maybe Damien Cox. It's not all negative, though - Toronto also has its share of fanboys who can give the Edmonton group a good run for the honour of being the worst.

[Ryan Coke]

Originally Posted by jammies

Well, if you want to argue via dictionary, maybe look at all the definitions. "Showing inclination" towards an opinion is biased. You don't necessarily have to argue against the facts, or only embrace a subset of facts, to be biased, you just have to incline towards a position and then frame your arguments to reinforce that inclination.

So if your premise is that any opinion is biased, then there is no point in anyone saying another opinion is biased. Which is where this original issue came from in this thread.

Of course to be less pedantic about it would be that some opinions have greater amounts of bias, and some are able to eliminate most of their built in biases in order to rationally assess a situation and make a logical decision. And that having a different opinion does not inherently make one substantively biased and worthy of dismissal based on that.

I would argue that the opinions that are most worthy of dismissal are from people that dismiss other viewpoints, as they prove that their biases are so strong they are unable to see relative merit from a differing opinion.

[Young_Guns]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Derek Wills is the biggest homer in Calgary as are some other guys on fan960.

He truly is. I feel he is the Flames mouthpiece. This guy never seems to bash or criticize Brouwer, Bennett et al. He refers to Brouwer as a "puck retriever" on the powerplay and its pretty ridiculous. Seems like a puppet for the ownership if you ask me. Anyways, didn't mean to derail the thread, just thought I would chime in on Wills as he was brought up. Most of us probably took Peter Maher for granted, and now we realize how good we actually had it. We are lucky to have grown up with Maher & Whalen as the Flames voices.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Poe969

That's a poor comparison, lots of people don't like the media. That's like saying Burke is like Genghis Kahn because they both hate Mondays.

Not at all. Burke hates the media because they aren't nice to him or the picks he made over the years.

He somehow doesn't mind the soft Calgary media...i wonder why that is.

His hatred of the media is unfair in the same way trumps hatred of the media is unfair.

For all the homerism people accuse Edmonton media of having it's a little funny when people can't look into their own backyard.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Not at all. Burke hates the media because they aren't nice to him or the picks he made over the years.

He somehow doesn't mind the soft Calgary media...i wonder why that is.

His hatred of the media is unfair in the same way trumps hatred of the media is unfair.

For all the homerism people accuse Edmonton media of having it's a little funny when people can't look into their own backyard.

You are the exact opposite of a homer though...maybe look in your backyard

[bluejays]

Not to derail from Burke's original argument, Toronto media can be negative if it means they'll get more hits on their articles, though when things are going well, they kiss managements' butt, as all media tend to do as it generally benefits them to keep their jobs. In Toronto though, generally speaking, Simmons and Cox are the two more controversial for the sake of it, media people out there. Others tend to be more vanilla, and more leaning toward team apologists. Guys like Andy Frost (the now ex-ACC goal announcer) were extremist in their defending of everything Leafs to the point where it was insulting to anyone listening to their drivel. As for if Burke believes this himself, who knows? The guy loves media attention and in a lot of ways is a bully to a cause he can't fully win with (controlling the media). He courts attention and with it comes followers and detractors and because he's such a polarizing figure, the media accordingly becomes polarized according how they feel toward him. He can't complain about that as it rubs many people the wrong way.

As for Burke's management of the Leafs, I personally think he did well in almost every regard. The Kessel deal was a decent one at the time as it wasn't completely foreseeable they'd be such a bad team at the team. They should have protected themselves by conditionally protecting the pick but it didn't happen (hindsight is 20/20 as they say). I'd argue it was a necessary deal as they could rebuild and rely on rookies to carry the team in a place like Toronto and so bringing in a scorer was needed. He refused to tank, which I think in the modern NHL should have been done to get a #1 or #2 overall.

Currently Leafs management has done a good job, beyond anyone could have expected. I don't like their defense (I frankly think it's awful). Their forwards have done well. How much of that was luck, we can argue, but you can't argue that its worked out so it can't be all luck. The Kessel deal for them I think was awful as well - you can't give up 40 goal scorers for nothing. It worked out for them to tank though.

Edit: I really hate Burke's insistence on "truculence". It became a buzzword for awhile, and while most could argue he was right, he at times brought in such characters who had just that and nothing else. In the new NHL you needed more than grit, you needed skill, and to get such characters was a waste of a bench spot.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Not at all. Burke hates the media because they aren't nice to him or the picks he made over the years.

He somehow doesn't mind the soft Calgary media...i wonder why that is.

His hatred of the media is unfair in the same way trumps hatred of the media is unfair.

For all the homerism people accuse Edmonton media of having it's a little funny when people can't look into their own backyard.

At least no one here is worse than that Bob Stauffer up north. Guy may be the biggest reason the word homerism exists. I remember listening to some clips of him with Mark Spector and Elliot Friedman during the bad years and the guy just could not stop defending Lowe, McTavish, Katz, all the players, everyone. Guy is a joke of a journalist and I use that term very loosely.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by dino7c

You are the exact opposite of a homer though...maybe look in your backyard

And your point? Rather see the issues than be a blind homer like Oiler fans.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by I_H8_Crawford

Calgary is pretty soft, but the Edmonton media is like USSR-era ministry of propaganda stuff.

That's giving a bad name to the USSR media.

And I'm being serious

(It wasn't half as bad as people tend to imagine.)

[Savvy27]

Originally Posted by Young_Guns

He truly is. I feel he is the Flames mouthpiece. This guy never seems to bash or criticize Brouwer, Bennett et al. He refers to Brouwer as a "puck retriever" on the powerplay and its pretty ridiculous. Seems like a puppet for the ownership if you ask me. Anyways, didn't mean to derail the thread, just thought I would chime in on Wills as he was brought up. Most of us probably took Peter Maher for granted, and now we realize how good we actually had it. We are lucky to have grown up with Maher & Whalen as the Flames voices.

I don't remember Peter Maher ever criticizing a player. It might have happened but certainly not often or harshly enough that Wills should be getting heat over the comparison.

It might just be me, but I don't really expect the play-by-play guy to go on the radio and call out players for under-performing. A columnist or analyst is a bit different in my mind because their role is to discuss the performance of the team and stir up discussion. Since I don't see this as his role, I think it is pretty reasonable that he wouldn't want to do it when these are players he sees every day and travels with.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by I_H8_Crawford

Calgary is pretty soft, but the Edmonton media is like USSR-era ministry of propaganda stuff.

The Edmonton market is different than most markets because a lot of their media particularly the radio stations are bought and paid for. The radio guys have to mind what they say or they get fired. They have that Staples guy who's not even a proper sports writer cheerleading for them and after that Terry Jones who's like a fan in that when the Oilers are doing good he's predicting multiple cup wins and when they are down he's calling for everyone to be fired. We know they had Oilers employees make accounts on HF to try and put positive spins on the Lowe/McTavish show. It's as you say more propaganda than media.

Originally Posted by browna

Burke is correct. In a roundabout way, he’s saying that the press is totally negative there, because negativity and controversy get articles noticed and more airtime.

Not all media want them to fail, as he said, but a large majority are looking to stir the pot or take things out of context on a day to day roller coaster basis, solely to be that contrarian or provide a “hot take” to get their viewpoint noticed in a saturated market.

Media members predicting how and why a team or player will fail seems to stir up a lot more interest in “hope” and positivity, and if the media is member is wrong and there is success, they’ll share in the joy and their admitting of being wrong is forgotten. If the player or team fails, the media member pats themselves in the back and considers themselves experts by having predicted the failure and will encourage them, and others, to take that approach with the next player or next years team etc.

Looks at the press calling up Reimers parents to get a medical update. The way the treated Kessel. Look at TSn and Leafs lunch. Every day or week is a roller coaster up and down because there is so much coverage, every possible scenario or viewpoint gets tossed out, and the more negative and controversial ones get more airtime or play because they stand out for discussion. That mentality of looking for thenflaws or negativity, and attention those topics get, causes, as mentioned above, certain members of the press to try and find that next, even more controversial topic to discuss, to stroke their own ego for bringing it up, and that topic is usually negative.

Always looking for the negative and dissecting every detail of a player or the team just breeds negativity, and I think that’s what he was getting at. As he also said, Bennett would be curled in a corner if the Toronto press had his underachievement this season under the microscope day in and day out.

I agree with this. In a large market if a sports writer wants to get noticed he/she has to stand out and making accusations of incompetence or writing overly negative stuff will get noticed more than positive spin. That's why universally hated writers like Al Strachan (burned most of his bridges), Steve Simmons have be or still are employed as long as they have as their stuff gets attention in the Toronto market. They are already turning up the heat on Marner.