PDA

View Full Version : Dunn vs Cunningham, Round 2



KittyDuran
09-04-2007, 07:13 PM
This was the thread on The Sun Deck:

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=62055
I wanted to comment (but couldn't) that methinks Willie wants another "suspension" [read: vacation]. ;)

The Enquirer is running this piece on their website now..
http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070904/SPT04/309040070

Dunn: Cunningham out of line
BY JOHN FAY | JFAY@ENQUIRER.COM

Reds outfielder Adam Dunn said Tuesday that recent remarks by WLW’s Bill Cunningham suggesting Dunn played while drunk crossed the line.

Last Friday, following the Reds’ victory over Pittsburgh, Cunningham singled out Dunn and outfielder Ken Griffey Jr. for what he called a lack of hustle.

In the game, a base-running error by Dunn cost the Reds two runs in the fourth inning. And Griffey was criticized by Reds announcer Thom Brennaman for not making it to second base after a bloop single dropped between three Pirates.

The next day, Cunningham said Griffey should never wear a Reds uniform again, and said Dunn was drunk during the game.

“Adam Dunn looks like a monkey with a football in left field,” Cunningham said. “He has to have consequences for what he does. That is again a loafing ball player who … would have blew a .15 if someone gave (him) the intoxilizer last night. I say .15. The son of a gun is drunk. And he’s playing baseball in left field for the Redlegs.”

Before Tuesday’s game against the New York Mets, Dunn said Cunningham’s comments were out of bounds.

“Isn’t there a line?” Dunn said. “I think that goes over the line. We might want to do something about that.”

Rob Butcher, the Reds media relations director, said he’s trying to obtain a tape of the show.

Cunningham said Tuesday that his comments were in good fun.

“It was hyperbole,” he said. “I play a lot of softball. I play with guys who drink beer.

They treat a fly ball like a hand grenade and miss bases.”

Cunningham said he has no facts to support that Dunn was drunk during the game. “It was simply a sarcastic comment made tongue-in-cheek,” Cunningham said.

Dunn found nothing amusing about Cunningham’s statement.

“That’s pretty bad,” he said.

Matt700wlw
09-04-2007, 07:14 PM
“Isn’t there a line?” Dunn said

Good question.

There is one...we can't cross it, but nobody defines it...

pedro
09-04-2007, 07:17 PM
If I was the Reds I'd want the guy fired or I wouldn't renew when the contract was up.

Jpup
09-04-2007, 07:18 PM
Does anyone really listen to him anyway? How could anyone take this stuff serious. It's too bad we can't talk about baseball in September instead of a radio announcer creating news by calling the Reds best player a drunk. :(

RFS62
09-04-2007, 07:18 PM
WLW seems determined to run Dunn out of town.

Dom Heffner
09-04-2007, 07:23 PM
It's always been the same in Cincy: Blame the pitfalls of your team on the best player.

Team Clark
09-04-2007, 07:24 PM
Good question.

There is one...we can't cross it, but nobody defines it...

Why would Dunn bother taking Cunningham seriously?

I do agree with Adam that the comments were a bit much. It's not like Cunningham is on a station no one listens to. Granted, Dunn does look like a monkey with a football in LF. :D Maybe, he was just mad that Cunningham called him out on a night where he wasn't drunk.. JUST KIDDING. I am sure, his royal highness, Rob Butcher will handle this appropriately.

KronoRed
09-04-2007, 07:24 PM
WLW, doing more to hurt the Reds then help

KittyDuran
09-04-2007, 07:24 PM
If I was the Reds I'd want the guy fired or I wouldn't renew when the contract was up.I was trying to find when the contract was actually up and found this article from 2005...:

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2005/11/28/story1.html


Reds could hear new media pitch
Radio, other deals could be on table
Business Courier of Cincinnati - November 25, 2005
by Dan MonkSenior Staff Reporter

A player to be named later in the Cincinnati Reds' new ownership group could help baseball's oldest franchise lock in future profits with a savvy new media strategy.

Robert Lawrence is a former Taft Broadcasting executive who helped the St. Louis Cardinals team this year buy its own radio station. Now, the Indian Hill resident is said to be pursuing a similar deal for the Reds on behalf of his friend and soon-to-be controlling owner, Robert Castellini.

Lawrence won't discuss his plans, except to say, "It's every kid's dream to be part of a Major League baseball team."

Castellini, through a spokesman, also declined comment on whether Lawrence will join the Reds investment group.

On Nov. 2, Castellini announced plans to buy a controlling interest in the Reds from Cincinnati financier Carl Lindner Jr. Terms of the deal weren't announced but are based on a franchise value for the Reds of $270 million. Castellini is joined in the deal by Thomas and W. Joseph Williams, the son and nephew of former Reds owner William J. Williams. Other investors are expected to join the Castellini group but so far have not been identified.

Local media observers speculate that Lawrence will join the ownership group with the goal of revamping the team's approach to media and marketing,

"He's a creative genius," said Rob Riggsbee, owner of Inside Media, a Newtown-based media-buying consultant. "He knows sports marketing better than anybody. I believe big changes will come."

Lawrence is a local media investor who built a fortune while merging local radio stations over a two-decade span that ended with Clear Channel Communications Inc. as the dominant player in the Cincinnati market.

[B]A few months ago, Lawrence put together a deal in which the Cardinals bought a 50 percent stake in a St. Louis radio station, KTRS-AM 550. As part of the deal, the Cardinals signed an eight-year contract to broadcast Cardinals games. The move was controversial in St. Louis, where Cardinals games had been broadcast on KMOX-AM 1120 for more than 50 years. The relationship had become part of the cultural fabric of St. Louis and produced some of baseball's best play callers: Jack Buck, Harry Caray and Bob Costas among them.

The Reds' ties to WLW date back to 1969 and also have featured some of the game's great broadcasters, including Waite Hoyt, Marty Brennaman and Al Michaels. The team's contract with WLW expires in 2007. The relationship has been strained in recent years, first when Major League Baseball signed a national distribution deal last fall with XM Satellite Radio. More recently, the Reds this year angered WLW's parent, Clear Channel Cincinnati, when it hired away one of WLW's top sales executives, Dave Collins.

Matt700wlw
09-04-2007, 07:24 PM
Why would Dunn bother taking Cunningham seriously?



Those who do have no one to blame but themselves... :)

pedro
09-04-2007, 07:29 PM
That's interesting Kitty.

Matt700wlw
09-04-2007, 07:30 PM
I think a new contract is in the works, or done.

I think.

I don't know for sure because nobody tells me anything :)

Team Clark
09-04-2007, 07:31 PM
Those who do have no one to blame but themselves... :)

Exactamundo! :laugh:

flyer85
09-04-2007, 07:35 PM
Likely a publicity ploy for his upcoming syndication. Cunningham is hoping for some national attention.

The proper response is don't listen, just ignore it.

flyer85
09-04-2007, 07:37 PM
Why would Dunn bother taking Cunningham seriously?there are people that do.

KittyDuran
09-04-2007, 07:39 PM
Likely a publicity ploy for his upcoming syndication. Cunningham is hoping for some national attention.

The proper response is don't listen, just ignore it.That's on the front page of the Enqurier as well...:p:

KittyDuran
09-04-2007, 07:40 PM
there are people that do.I know some personally... very sad...:(

TOBTTReds
09-04-2007, 07:45 PM
Some people will listen to anyone in the media. Rush, Coulter, so on... Sorry to get political.

KittyDuran
09-04-2007, 07:47 PM
Some people will listen to anyone in the media. Rush, Coulter, so on... Sorry to get political.Hey...stop that! :nono: [esp. since I started this thread]

Ltlabner
09-04-2007, 07:50 PM
You can either squelch an opinion, no matter how foolish, that doesn't gell with your own...or you take it for what it is and move along. No sense giving any more attention to something designed to soley get attention. Yet, somehow, people continue to get up-in-arms and do nothing but pour fuel on the fire by responding.

Cunningham is an entertaining goof that once in a while has something interesting to say. Scattered in between is a bunch on non-sense aimed at getting people fired up and eliciting a responce (ie. people calling in, and people listening).

Once again it appears to be working.

letsgojunior
09-04-2007, 07:58 PM
I wonder how funny a nice defamation suit would be.

mbgrayson
09-04-2007, 07:59 PM
I can see Dunn being pissed off.

First of all, he signs a two year deal for what some have called 'below market' money to stay in Cincinnati. Now all the talk is whether the Reds should pick up the option and spend the money. Marty has asked every one of the beat writers their opinion on this question, like it is a big, controversial issue, rather than an obvious 'of course we should'. Dunn has produced at least as well as he ever has before. Why wouldn't we pick up the option? The market has gone up for power hitting players, not down....

Then he has Marty Brennamen ripping him left and right. Marty being a Reds employee, and the 'voice' of the Reds on radio. I listen to the Reds on XM fairly often, and when you have the other teams announcer calling the game, you NEVER here them rip their own players. Never. Throw in the crap he gets from fans about strikeouts...with zero understanding about OBP and the huge number of walks and runs Dunn puts up......

Now top it off with another broadcaster, on WLW "The home of the Reds" saying he "looked like a monkey" and was drunk at a game. I'm sorry, I really can't blame him for being mad. These kinds of lies about playing drunk get around town, and hurt a guy's reputation.

I watched the game where Dunn missed third, and made an error. They were clearly mistakes, which Dunn took responsibility for making. That is all I ask. He showed no sign of being drunk; he was running too hard and missed third. Period.

Saying Dunn was drunk is not a joke, it is not funny. It IS unprofessional for any broadcaster to do this, and helps explain why we have trouble recruiting good free agent players to come here. Who wants to come to Cincinnati and get ripped by the media, when they can be appreciated (and make more $$) in Houston or St. Louis or Chicago, to name three.

If Bill Cunningham worked for me, I would suspend him for a week without pay, and make him apologize 'on air' to Adam Dunn. If he ever did anything like this again, he would be fired. If I was the Reds, I would make sure that something like this happened through WLW as well.

RedsBaron
09-04-2007, 08:00 PM
Does anyone in the Cincinnati area media have even a room temperature IQ? It appears that if you list "village idiot" on your resume, WLW and the Enquirer will make you a job offer.

RedsBaron
09-04-2007, 08:13 PM
I can see Dunn being pissed off.

First of all, he signs a two year deal for what some have called 'below market' money to stay in Cincinnati. Now all the talk is whether the Reds should pick up the option and spend the money. Marty has asked every one of the beat writers their opinion on this question, like it is a big, controversial issue, rather than an obvious 'of course we should'. Dunn has produced at least as well as he ever has before. Why wouldn't we pick up the option? The market has gone up for power hitting players, not down....

Then he has Marty Brennamen ripping him left and right. Marty being a Reds employee, and the 'voice' of the Reds on radio. I listen to the Reds on XM fairly often, and when you have the other teams announcer calling the game, you NEVER here them rip their own players. Never. Throw in the crap he gets from fans about strikeouts...with zero understanding about OBP and the huge number of walks and runs Dunn puts up......

Now top it off with another broadcaster, on WLW "The home of the Reds" saying he "looked like a monkey" and was drunk at a game. I'm sorry, I really can't blame him for being mad. These kinds of lies about playing drunk get around town, and hurt a guy's reputation.

I watched the game where Dunn missed third, and made an error. They were clearly mistakes, which Dunn took responsibility for making. That is all I ask. He showed no sign of being drunk; he was running too hard and missed third. Period.

Saying Dunn was drunk is not a joke, it is not funny. It IS unprofessional for any broadcaster to do this, and helps explain why we have trouble recruiting good free agent players to come here. Who wants to come to Cincinnati and get ripped by the media, when they can be appreciated (and make more $$) in Houston or St. Louis or Chicago, to name three.

If Bill Cunningham worked for me, I would suspend him for a week without pay, and make him apologize 'on air' to Adam Dunn. If he ever did anything like this again, he would be fired. If I was the Reds, I would make sure that something like this happened through WLW as well.

If we still gave out "rep points" I would give you some. :thumbup:
If Cunningham worked for me, I'd fire him on the spot.

Matt700wlw
09-04-2007, 08:14 PM
If we still gave out "rep points" I would give you some. :thumbup:
If Cunningham worked for me, I'd fire him on the spot.

This is a different beast than your standard job.

flyer85
09-04-2007, 08:19 PM
I wonder how funny a nice defamation suit would be.all depends on if Clear Channel would pay for his lawyers

redsmetz
09-04-2007, 08:19 PM
I wonder how funny a nice defamation suit would be.

Forget Rob Butcher, Dunner and his agents ought to be talking to an attorney. I'd love it because Bill Cunningham hides behind his little cloak of "entertainment" and does so much harm in this community.

Ltlabner
09-04-2007, 08:24 PM
I wonder how funny a nice defamation suit would be.

And what "harm" is Dunner facing really? ....a bunch of lug-nuts who already thought Dunn was a waste of time *might* think that Dunn was really drunk on the field. Any reasonable person is going to roll their eyes and ignore Willies comments, or perhaps not even hear them in the first place. It's a strech to think that a real Dunn fan would hear Willies comments and serriously consider them as "fact" and begin to waiver in their support of Dunn.

Willie's comments, while silly, have no impact on Dunn's ability to make money. They don't harm his family. They don't prevent Dunn from maintaining his gainfull employment. They haven't caused him to lose any endorsement deals. They haven't triggered an "investigation" by law enforcement officals or MLB for that matter.

I'm sure some laywer-type could twist some agrument together that Willie was "a big meenie" or "hurt Dunner's fealings". But Dunn really isn't suffering any real harm because Willies comments.

Without harm or damages, I think you have a tough time winning a defemation of charicter suit.

KittyDuran
09-04-2007, 08:24 PM
all depends on if Clear Channel would pay for his lawyersHe could save money and hire himself...;)

harangatang
09-04-2007, 08:32 PM
It's always been the same in Cincy: Blame the pitfalls of your team on the best player.New York wants A-Rod gone, same thing in a different place. It's not just a Cincinnati thing.

flyer85
09-04-2007, 08:34 PM
He could save money and hire himself...;)that all depends

BoydsOfSummer
09-04-2007, 08:35 PM
WLW seems determined to run Dunn out of town.

And who could blame Dunn if he did leave running? I'm positive it would be better to be appreciated.

mbgrayson
09-04-2007, 08:35 PM
I wonder how funny a nice defamation suit would be.

The problem is a defamation suit goes absoutely nowhere. It is talk radio, and will be claimed to be parody or a 'joke'.

To win a defamation suit there are two components:
1. Liability
2. Damages.

To prove liability for defamation, you have to prove that the person who you claim defamed you made a 'false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may harm your reputation'.

Then to get more than nominal damages (i.e. $1), you need to prove how that false statement damaged you.

For example, if the false claim that Dunn was drunk at work caused his option to not get picked up, and Dunn could prove it, then he might have damages to be worth talking about. In fact, I doubt there is any real damage that can be proved. It simply hurt feelings.....

What I would be worried about if I was WLW management would not be litigation. I would be concerned about harming my contractual relationship with the Reds. If the Reds decided not to renew their contract, WLW would be out some serious business.

letsgojunior
09-04-2007, 08:35 PM
And what "harm" is Dunner facing really? ....a bunch of lug-nuts who already thought Dunn was a waste of time *might* think that Dunn was really drunk on the field. Any reasonable person is going to roll their eyes and ignore Willies comments, or perhaps not even hear them in the first place.

Willie's comments, while silly, have no impact on Dunn's ability to make money. They don't harm his family. They don't prevent Dunn from maintaining his gainfull employment.

I'm sure some laywer-type could twist some agrument together that Willie was "a big meenie" or "hurt Dunner's fealings". But Dunn really isn't suffering any real harm from Willies comments.

Without harm, I think you have a tough time winning a defimation of chaircter suit.

The relevant legal standard...

1) A defamatory communication 2) which is false 3) which is of and concerning the plaintiff 4) if slander must prove special damages 5) requisite publicity, 6) and the requisite level of intent as required by the Constitution.

(2), (3) and (5) are easily satisfied, as it was a comment made on the radio to a large crowd regarding Adam Dunn, which is pretty obviously false. (1) would not be that tough of a case to establish given that defamatory communications are defined as harming one's reputation in the community, and asserting that one was drunk on the job, and going so far as to provide a blood alcohol level, would likely be seen as harming his reputation. (4) could work in Dunn's favor, as I recall a case which has held that discourse on the radio is classified as libel rather than slander, which would remove the need to establish pecuniary loss. Finally, I'd have to look up Ohio standards on the requisite intent level, but if Dunn were to manage to escape being classified as a public or limited purpose public figure, he could possibily establish the prima facie case via negligence rather than knowledge or reckless disregard.

Not saying it's a slam dunk, but in this day and age blatantly false statements on the radio are not only unintelligent but dangerous.

Ltlabner
09-04-2007, 08:43 PM
The relevant legal standard...

1) A defamatory communication 2) which is false 3) which is of and concerning the plaintiff 4) if slander must prove special damages 5) requisite publicity, 6) and the requisite level of intent as required by the Constitution..

As I said, someone could get cute and try to twist this into a legal case. Then again, some lawyers are willing to twist anything into a case even if one has to suspend relality to do so.

Fact remains, Dunn has suffered no damages of substance (at least at this point in time). Without them, you are tilting at windmills, IMO.

jojo
09-04-2007, 08:45 PM
The relevant legal standard...

1) A defamatory communication 2) which is false 3) which is of and concerning the plaintiff 4) if slander must prove special damages 5) requisite publicity, 6) and the requisite level of intent as required by the Constitution.

(2), (3) and (5) are easily satisfied, as it was a comment made on the radio to a large crowd regarding Adam Dunn, which is pretty obviously false. (1) would not be that tough of a case to establish given that defamatory communications are defined as harming one's reputation in the community, and asserting that one was drunk on the job, and going so far as to provide a blood alcohol level, would likely be seen as harming his reputation. (4) could work in Dunn's favor, as I recall a case which has held that discourse on the radio is classified as libel rather than slander, which would remove the need to establish pecuniary loss. Finally, I'd have to look up Ohio standards on the requisite intent level, but if Dunn were to manage to escape being classified as a public or limited purpose public figure, he could possibily establish the prima facie case via negligence rather than knowledge or reckless disregard.

Not saying it's a slam dunk, but in this day and age blatantly false statements on the radio are not only unintelligent but dangerous.

Based upon his own comments, BC plays a lot of softball. Couldn't he then be qualified to call himself as an expert witness in his own defense? :cool:

harangatang
09-04-2007, 08:46 PM
The relevant legal standard...

1) A defamatory communication 2) which is false 3) which is of and concerning the plaintiff 4) if slander must prove special damages 5) requisite publicity, 6) and the requisite level of intent as required by the Constitution.

I highly suggest reading the lawsuit between Jerry Falwell and Larry Flynt if you seriously think that has any substance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hustler_Magazine_v._Falwell

Ltlabner
09-04-2007, 08:47 PM
Based upon his own comments, BC plays a lot of softball. Couldn't he then be qualified to call himself as an expert witness in his own defense?


Willie could call Tracey Jones to the stand. I hear he played the game once or twice.

letsgojunior
09-04-2007, 08:48 PM
Fact remains, Dunn has suffered no damages of substance (at least at this point in time). Without them, you are tilting at windmills, IMO.

Who says you need damages of substance? You can recover nominal damages, general damages, and in some rare cases, punitive damages from defamation claims. And the recovery is more the $1 - the law will presume that plaintiffs have incurred damages based upon their loss of esteem in the community.

Matt700wlw
09-04-2007, 08:50 PM
I think they should have a steel cage match.

letsgojunior
09-04-2007, 08:50 PM
I highly suggest reading the lawsuit between Jerry Falwell and Larry Flynt if you seriously think that has any substance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hustler_Magazine_v._Falwell

Defamation versus intentional infliction of emotional distress - two different things. Not to mention, Dunn being classified as a public figure is not a given by any stretch.

mbgrayson
09-04-2007, 08:50 PM
The Ohio Bar Association has a page on libel and slander law. It is found HERE (http://www.ohiobar.org/pub/lycu/index.asp?articleid=184).

As I stated above, I would be shocked if there was any defamation related litigation. Dunn is clearly a public figure, and he will have no damages.

mbgrayson
09-04-2007, 08:54 PM
Not to mention, Dunn being classified as a public figure is not a given by any stretch.

Are you kidding? THere isn't a Court in Ohio or any other state that would say a MLB baseball player, let alone a star like Adam Dunn, isn't a public figure.

jojo
09-04-2007, 08:57 PM
Are you kidding? THere isn't a Court in Ohio or any other state that would say a MLB baseball player, let alone a star like Adam Dunn, isn't a public figure.

Who is Adam Dunn?

Ltlabner
09-04-2007, 08:58 PM
Who says you need damages of substance?

I guess if you just get off on suing people damages aren't really that important.

But if he suffered no real harm, especially at the hands of an opinion, and he operates in the public domain, it seems to me to be a very weak case.

letsgojunior
09-04-2007, 09:01 PM
Are you kidding? THere isn't a Court in Ohio or any other state that would say a MLB baseball player, let alone a star like Adam Dunn, isn't a public figure.

Public figure in the legal context is different from it is in ordinary parlance - I'd guess based on the Gertz standard that Dunn may be classified as a limited purpose public figure, and thus would have to prove actual malice. Nonetheless, that is not an awful position to be in, as BC made his assertion without, per his own contention, any evidence whatsoever that Dunn was drunk on the job. I'm not sure that that's reckless disregard, but I don't think it's out of the question that it is (though it would require some research which I don't have time to do).

letsgojunior
09-04-2007, 09:06 PM
I guess if you just get off on suing people damages aren't really that important.



If you have a problem with me or my profession, why not be at least polite enough to PM me or respond substantively rather than via continued thinly veiled digs.

Moreover, I wasn't necessariy advocating bringing a suit - defamation suits are hard to win. I was merely suggesting that BC better be extraordinarily careful making false statements on the radio, because the consequences can be severe.

Ltlabner
09-04-2007, 09:22 PM
If you have a problem with me or my profession, why not be at least polite enough to PM me or respond substantively rather than via continued thinly veiled digs.

Moreover, I wasn't necessariy advocating bringing a suit - defamation suits are hard to win. I was merely suggesting that BC better be extraordinarily careful making false statements on the radio, because the consequences can be severe.

I have zero problems with you or your profession counslor.

However, there are no "continued thinly veiled digs". You stated "who needs damages". I responded (rather substantivley I might ad) with pointing out that unless you (as in the general you, not letsgojounior specifically) enjoy suing people for kicks, actually proving damages, especially in light of opinions offered up by a media figure about a person in the public domain might come in handy for having a good case.

These are only my opinions. The opinions are only offered for entertainment value and are not intented to offer any warrenty either expressly or implied. Do not make any judgements about these opinions without first consulting a legal respources liscened to practice in your jursdiction. Not valid where prohibitive. These opinions can not be re-broadcast without the express written consent of Ltlabner Enterprises. If anyone knows any good laywer jokes, please forward them to Nate c/o 'get bent incorporated'. Use The Force You Knob.

redsfan4445
09-04-2007, 09:25 PM
WLW seems determined to run Dunn out of town.

Same with Griffey sadly

Matt700wlw
09-04-2007, 09:26 PM
Same with Griffey sadly

Griffey will determine that. It's in his contract - accept trade or deny trade.

Team Clark
09-04-2007, 09:29 PM
The relevant legal standard...

1) A defamatory communication 2) which is false 3) which is of and concerning the plaintiff 4) if slander must prove special damages 5) requisite publicity, 6) and the requisite level of intent as required by the Constitution.

(2), (3) and (5) are easily satisfied, as it was a comment made on the radio to a large crowd regarding Adam Dunn, which is pretty obviously false. (1) would not be that tough of a case to establish given that defamatory communications are defined as harming one's reputation in the community, and asserting that one was drunk on the job, and going so far as to provide a blood alcohol level, would likely be seen as harming his reputation. (4) could work in Dunn's favor, as I recall a case which has held that discourse on the radio is classified as libel rather than slander, which would remove the need to establish pecuniary loss. Finally, I'd have to look up Ohio standards on the requisite intent level, but if Dunn were to manage to escape being classified as a public or limited purpose public figure, he could possibily establish the prima facie case via negligence rather than knowledge or reckless disregard.

Not saying it's a slam dunk, but in this day and age blatantly false statements on the radio are not only unintelligent but dangerous.

You just shot my dreams of going to Law School all to hell! :laugh: Guess I better stick to stop watches and free baseball tickets. :D

KronoRed
09-04-2007, 09:30 PM
Same with Griffey sadly

Yep, maybe Bruce should not be too good, he'll be next

MWM
09-04-2007, 09:34 PM
I bet Adam Dunn is counting down the days until he can get the hell out of Cincinnati.

Matt700wlw
09-04-2007, 09:35 PM
Dunn and Griffey think the media's tough on them here?

Try New York, Chicago, Boston.....





(I honestly don't think Dunn really cares what the media says, honestly, more or less.)

mbgrayson
09-04-2007, 09:37 PM
I honestly don't think Dunn really cares what the media says, honestly, more or less.

I think he does. Didn't he comment earlier this year about how his parents couldn't bear to listen to Marty on the radio because of all the negativism?

Matt700wlw
09-04-2007, 09:38 PM
His parents might care, but I don't think Adam pays all that much attention to it.

RedFanAlways1966
09-04-2007, 09:46 PM
Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words will never hurt me. Thick skin... I'd like to see it.

Cunningham? Has made a good living off being a joker. I do not think much of his program. And I also never take anything he says serious. I consider the source... as others should do. Same when Andy Furman worked at WLW. Consider the source.

Should the flagship have higher standards? That can be argued. But the players for my fav team (and the media director) should ignore it and have more important things on their mind. I really do not see that Adam Dunn is that put out by it. He was told about it and asked about it. He made a few comments (b/c he tends to be honest), but nothing major. I'd rather he just say, "Who is Bill Cunningham and why should I care what he says?"

Let stupid things be said by the media. Ignore it and play baseball.

letsgojunior
09-04-2007, 10:01 PM
I have zero problems with you or your profession counslor.

However, there are no "continued thinly veiled digs". You stated "who needs damages". I responded (rather substantivley I might ad) with pointing out that unless you (as in the general you, not letsgojounior specifically) enjoy suing people for kicks, actually proving damages, especially in light of opinions offered up by a media figure about a person in the public domain might come in handy for having a good case.

Damages are not necessary to bring a defamation case forward, as damages are presumed in defamation. And it wouldn't be "suing for kicks," it would be suing for the broader purpose of penalizing media personalities who do not contribute to informed discourse at all and who make remarks which are patently untrue and damaging to the reputations of others. There are plenty of cases out there that don't have a lot of $$$ at stake - people are suing for broader purposes of changing doctrine that they view as unfair.

pedro
09-04-2007, 10:47 PM
I bet Adam Dunn is counting down the days until he can get the hell out of Cincinnati.

I get the impression he kind of likes it there.

If they would offer him an extension I bet he give it fair consideration.

OnBaseMachine
09-04-2007, 10:59 PM
I get the impression he kind of likes it there.

If they would offer him an extension I bet he give it fair consideration.

Me too. I've read quotes before where he has stated that he likes playing in Cincy and would like to play here for a long time. Things could have changed since then, however.

paintmered
09-04-2007, 11:09 PM
Flipping through WLW, I caught some of Cunningham's rant against Griffey and Dunn. I turned it off after about 30 seconds.

Matt, how is that good for your business?

Cyclone792
09-04-2007, 11:24 PM
It's always been the same in Cincy: Blame the pitfalls of your team on the best player.

Yep, there's a large group within the local Cincy media who are nothing but a bunch of idiots, and there's a large group of fans within the Cincy area who are nothing but a bunch of idiots.

I've sat in the left field terrace seats plenty of times the past few seasons, and each game there's one or more Reds fans out there riding the hell out of Dunn. In all the games I've been to, Dunn's been heckled more out in left field at GABP than any visiting player out in left field. Dunn just looks up in the seats and shakes his head at what's being tossed his way.

Meanwhile, here's the Reds' runs allowed per game figures and NL ranks since Dunn came up in 2001 ...

2001: 5.25 runs allowed per game (14th in NL)
2002: 4.78 runs allowed per game (11th in NL)
2003: 5.47 runs allowed per game (15th in NL)
2004: 5.60 runs allowed per game (15th in NL)
2005: 5.45 runs allowed per game (16th in NL)
2006: 4.62 runs allowed per game (10th in NL)
2007: 5.40 runs allowed per game (16th in NL)

But ask some of the clowns in the local Cincy media or some of the clowns who walk through the gates, and the Reds have stunk mostly because Dunn apparently stinks and makes too much money.

Nevermind the fact, of course, that the primary reason the Reds stink is because their collective pitching and defense blows serious chunks (of which Dunn is only to blame for an extremely small percentage of that).

smith288
09-04-2007, 11:39 PM
Dunn wasn't drunk? He should say he was to excuse that play...jk

Cunningham is a guy on radio spouting off his opinions. If any one of us had a mic in our face we would say a few things that would be classified over the line or out of bounds.

Its what makes our country what it is. We have the right to open our mouths and remove all doubt of our idiocy.

To scream lawsuit is just a small anecdotal sample of what has happened to our country. You get called out, rightly or wrongly and the first thing people want is to sue somebody or have them removed because of a differing opinion or feelings being hurt.

Our greatest generation scoffs at how easily feelings ours seem to get hurt.

Balls up people.

Blitz Dorsey
09-04-2007, 11:46 PM
Hey, it's not like he called Dunn a nappy-headed ho or anything. I don't see what all the fuss is about.

johngalt
09-04-2007, 11:51 PM
Dunn and Griffey think the media's tough on them here?

Try New York, Chicago, Boston.....


A lot of people will give this argument, but I think it's a different kind of criticism.

The biggest difference in those cities is there is MORE media covering the players and the games. More TV stations, more newspapers, more reporters - it's a matter of quantity.

Sure, if you go on a short slump, the NY papers will eat you up and start questioning your play. They'll take pictures of you partying it up at a club at 3 am the night before a game. Have an affair? They're all over that.

But they don't nitpick about the smallest, most inconsequential details the way the media here does. I am continually shocked by how much people around here get caught up on the way someone goes after a flyball or how fast someone runs to first base or what kind of effort they show running out to the field between innings. That's what is different.

If Adam Dunn goes to New York and hits 40 homers with 100 RBIs, 100 walks and 100 runs scored, trust me, they won't nitpick him for not making it to 2nd base on some random hit in May the way people around here do.

Caveat Emperor
09-04-2007, 11:54 PM
I bet Adam Dunn is counting down the days until he can get the hell out of Cincinnati.

I sometimes wonder...

A lot of this stuff is non-story material on a winning team. When you're on the way to a 8th consecutive season with no postseason, there really isn't a lot to talk about. Stuff like what Bill Cunningham says get blown out of proportion because there's a reporter with a microphone that needs a quote on something.

johngalt
09-04-2007, 11:56 PM
Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words will never hurt me. Thick skin... I'd like to see it.


I agree with you and this isn't necessarily a response in your direction per se, but the problem I have is that one thing people have been railing on for the last few years with Dunn is that they want him to show he cares. They want him to show he has some pride and he has some kind of personal investment in himself on the field.

So now he responds to someone questioning him and takes offense to someone implying he isn't giving his all - in fact showing that he does care - and people are saying he should just let it go and ignore it, that it's just free speech, etc.

Bill Cunningham went on the public airwaves and took advantage of his spot to make a joke out of Adam Dunn's professional performance by making patently false and outrageous claims. Whether there can be - or should be - any legal consequence or not and whether it was truly in jest or not, that crosses a line and attacks Adam Dunn personally. I don't blame Dunn for one second for responding to that publicly himself. In fact, I think that shows some character on his part to not just sit idly by and not care.

SteelSD
09-05-2007, 12:30 AM
Damages are not necessary to bring a defamation case forward, as damages are presumed in defamation. And it wouldn't be "suing for kicks," it would be suing for the broader purpose of penalizing media personalities who do not contribute to informed discourse at all and who make remarks which are patently untrue and damaging to the reputations of others. There are plenty of cases out there that don't have a lot of $$$ at stake - people are suing for broader purposes of changing doctrine that they view as unfair.

Now, I'm not an attorney, nor have I recently stayed at a Holiday Inn Express, but thank you.

Based on my neophyte-level understanding of the law, an individual has defamation recourse if it can be reasonably assumed that false statements may cause harm to reputation and, as a result, may cause potential future earnings to be lessened as an assumed result of said false statements.

Please correct me if I'm wrong on that.

mbgrayson
09-05-2007, 01:10 AM
Cunningham is a guy on radio spouting off his opinions. If any one of us had a mic in our face we would say a few things that would be classified over the line or out of bounds.

Its what makes our country what it is. We have the right to open our mouths and remove all doubt of our idiocy.

I agree that he has a right to his opinion. What he does not have a right to do is to lie about someone in a way that harms them. That is what he did when he said "Adam Dunn … would have blew a .15 if someone gave (him) the intoxilizer last night. I say .15. The son of a gun is drunk. And he’s playing baseball in left field for the Redlegs.”



To scream lawsuit is just a small anecdotal sample of what has happened to our country. You get called out, rightly or wrongly and the first thing people want is to sue somebody or have them removed because of a differing opinion or feelings being hurt. Our greatest generation scoffs at how easily feelings ours seem to get hurt.

Dunn never screamed lawsuit. Nobody here 'screamed' lawsuit. One poster mentioned it on this thread, and we had a discussion about whether a lawsuit would be viable. The consensus was, I think, that a lawsuit is not viable. No screaming at all....and no need for you to attack this discussion about a possible lawsuit by using incendiary words and implying that we were 'screaming'.

However, please understand that when someone falsely says on public airwaves, that someone is working drunk, and that false statement harms their reputation, that is indeed actionable. It is well beyond opinion or hyperbole, it is simply wrong. It is more than just hurt feelings...it is is damaged reputation and reduced marketability of their name.

If someone wants to criticize Adam Dunn for any number of perceived shortcomings, that is their right. When it is an opinion, that is their right. I think there is a big difference between saying Adam Dunn 'played a terrible left field last night' and claiming he 'played drunk'.

You mention the 'greatest generation', and how they scoff at how easily our feelings get hurt. This is utter nonsense. Libel and slander claims were far more common in the 40s, 50s, and 60's than they are now. Many states used to enforce criminal libel and defamation laws; people actually went to jail for libel and slander. In Montana, we still have a 'criminal defamation' law on the books. SEE HERE (http://law.justia.com/montana/codes/45/45-8-212.html). Ours was first adopted in the 1947 revised codes of Montana.

And on the other hand, there is this:
"The price of freedom of religion, or of speech, or of the press, is that we must put up with a good deal of rubbish." Robert H. Jackson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_H._Jackson)"

And what Bill Cunningham said about Adam Dunn on WLW is exactly that: rubbish.

cincinnati chili
09-05-2007, 02:19 AM
Now, I'm not an attorney, nor have I recently stayed at a Holiday Inn Express, but thank you.

Based on my neophyte-level understanding of the law, an individual has defamation recourse if it can be reasonably assumed that false statements may cause harm to reputation and, as a result, may cause potential future earnings to be lessened as an assumed result of said false statements.

Please correct me if I'm wrong on that.

Defamation suits brought by public figures are tough to win.

A "reasonable person" would have to believe that Adam Dunn was drunk during the game, and these reasonable people would have to think less of Adam Dunn because of that. (see Falwell v. Hustler Magazine).

If anyone believed Cunningham's comments, and thought less of Dunn as a result of those comments, they probably have changed their mind's after Cunningham's insistence that it was all a joke.

No damages = no winning lawsuit.

It's still completely irresponsible journalism, and like the rest of you, I'm frustrated with the media's torching of our best player.

creek14
09-05-2007, 03:11 AM
Just as good comics don't have to resort to dropping the F-bomb to get laughs, a good radio host doesn't have to resort to slander to get ratings.

Bill C is a small man with nothing of substance to say, so he turns to garbage like this. His words say a lot more about him than they do about Dunn.

puca
09-05-2007, 05:57 AM
Me too. I've read quotes before where he has stated that he likes playing in Cincy and would like to play here for a long time. Things could have changed since then, however.

Its been a while since I heard anything remotely resembling that coming from Adam Dunn. The fact that his last contract only sold out his arbitration years and he hasn't been lobbying for a LTC going into an option year tells me something.

Dunn is the type of guy that jokes off adversity. Don't take that to mean that criticism doesn't cut him.

GAC
09-05-2007, 06:02 AM
To be fair to Thom Brennanman, and I listened to the broadcast, he wasn't raggin' on Jr and even emphasized that. He simply felt, in that particular situation, that Jr should have been more alert (since Gonzo scored all the way from 1B) and could have been standing at 2B. He didn't really belabor the point.

But Jr has been praised and given all due respect this year far more than he has been criticized by this broadcast team.

As for Cunningham..... he's an idiot and paid to be controversial. Isn't he the GM of WLW now?

GAC
09-05-2007, 06:08 AM
WLW, doing more to hurt the Reds then help

So you're saying they can't be as critical about this team on the field than we, the fans, already are?

And I'm not specifically referring to this situation, but all the articles, editorials, talk shows, etc., over the past several years where this team's "diffeciancies" are discussed and thrown back in the face of this organization.

Why is it we can be fed up and point these items out; but the local sports media can't?

RedsBaron
09-05-2007, 06:11 AM
Defamation suits brought by public figures are tough to win.

A "reasonable person" would have to believe that Adam Dunn was drunk during the game, and these reasonable people would have to think less of Adam Dunn because of that. (see Falwell v. Hustler Magazine).

If anyone believed Cunningham's comments, and thought less of Dunn as a result of those comments, they probably have changed their mind's after Cunningham's insistence that it was all a joke.

No damages = no winning lawsuit.

It's still completely irresponsible journalism, and like the rest of you, I'm frustrated with the media's torching of our best player.
You are correct. What Cunningham said was inexcusable, but Dunn would have a hard time winning a lawsuit, and probably would only receive nominal damages if he won, while Cunningham would receive publicity and would wrap himself around the First Amendment.

RedsBaron
09-05-2007, 06:14 AM
To scream lawsuit is just a small anecdotal sample of what has happened to our country. You get called out, rightly or wrongly and the first thing people want is to sue somebody or have them removed because of a differing opinion or feelings being hurt.

Our greatest generation scoffs at how easily feelings ours seem to get hurt.

Balls up people.

I don't recall reading stories about how the so-called "greatest generation" thought it was okay to libel and slander other people. "Balls up"?-Someone in that generation would have been more likely to kick Cunningham in the balls, assuming that he has any.

GAC
09-05-2007, 06:20 AM
Me too. I've read quotes before where he has stated that he likes playing in Cincy and would like to play here for a long time. Things could have changed since then, however.

I think Adam Dunn is smart enough to realize that the overwhelming majority support him here in Cincy (fans especially), and that he can't let media types like Marty and Cunningham get under his skin.

Simply look at the responses by the fans coming to his defense and condemning the remarks made, while calling for the offenders head.

The remarks were inappropriate. But anyone who knows Willy, knows he says this stuff to draw attention and get a rise out of people.

Mission accomplished.

As far as mentioning lawsuits and such? IMHO that is absurd and you're probably playing into Cunningham's hand. What good is really going to come out of it.

The only court that matters, in situations like this, is the court of public opinion. And Dunn won, while Willy looks silly. ;)

Ltlabner
09-05-2007, 06:36 AM
All of our concern for hurt fealings and suing for a broader purprose asside, it would be interesting to know how Dunn really feals about all of the flak he takes from the local media.

I do agree with the other poster; Dunn is fooling himself if he thinks he can go to NY or another team and it will all milk and honey. Sluggers who make the big bucks take flack just and otherwise for their every move all across MLB.

puca
09-05-2007, 06:44 AM
I think Adam Dunn is smart enough to realize that the overwhelming majority support him here in Cincy (fans especially), and that he can't let media types like Marty and Cunningham get under his skin.

Simply look at the responses by the fans coming to his defense and condemning the remarks made, while calling for the offenders head.


Has the Reds front office come to Dunn's defense? I don't live in the area, so I'm not privy to all of the stories, but I haven't heard a peep from Mac or Wayne. If not, that is kind of disturbing.

If you have a choice, why would you choose to work in such an environment? Sure New York and Boston meida can be tough, but this isn't New York or Boston. This is not even Philadelphia for heaven's sake. Do you think for a moment Dunn would be treated this way in St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Houston, or even Cleveland? I don't.

Speaking of Boston, does Manny really get hammered on this badly?

GAC
09-05-2007, 07:13 AM
Has the Reds front office come to Dunn's defense? I don't live in the area, so I'm not privy to all of the stories, but I haven't heard a peep from Mac or Wayne. If not, that is kind of disturbing.

What are they suppose to do? Every time a media speak says something stupid about one of their players they're suppose to call a press conference and condemn what was said? File a complaint with the FCC?

Their job is to run the ballclub.

And I don't think Mac and/or Wayne want to waste their time getting in a pissin' match with the likes of Willie. You're just playing into his hand.

And how do we know they haven't come to Dunn's defense and said something to WLW management? Of course if they did then a blabber-mouth like Cunningham would then run to the mike and try to make them look bad. It's a lose-lose situation for them IMO.


If you have a choice, why would you choose to work in such an environment? Sure New York and Boston meida can be tough, but this isn't New York or Boston.

But the media/fans are pretty much the same everywhere.


This is not even Philadelphia for heaven's sake. Do you think for a moment Dunn would be treated this way in St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Houston, or even Cleveland? I don't.

He sure would. I don't care where you play, high-profile/highly paid players are "icons" to the local fans, and always scrutinized and under the fan's microscope. And living in central Ohio and also following the Indians, I have especially seen it in Cleveland and with their fans.

puca
09-05-2007, 07:59 AM
What are they suppose to do? Every time a media speak says something stupid about one of their players they're suppose to call a press conference and condemn what was said? File a complaint with the FCC?

Their job is to run the ballclub.

And I don't think Mac and/or Wayne want to waste their time getting in a pissin' match with the likes of Willie. You're just playing into his hand.

And how do we know they haven't come to Dunn's defense and said something to WLW management? Of course if they did then a blabber-mouth like Cunningham would then run to the mike and try to make them look bad. It's a lose-lose situation for them IMO.



But the media/fans are pretty much the same everywhere.



He sure would. I don't care where you play, high-profile/highly paid players are "icons" to the local fans, and always scrutinized and under the fan's microscope. And living in central Ohio and also following the Indians, I have especially seen it in Cleveland and with their fans.


I pretty much guarantee that LaRussa would have taken him to task for such unfounded accusations. A least a simple comment by Mac discarding the credibility of Cunningham would seem to be warrented. The last thing you want is the player in a pissing match with the media.

You can't lump all of the media and the fans together. Sure the call-in talk show hosts and the fans that call in will say some idiotic things. Fans will be hard on certain players. That stuff is pretty much universal. There may even be cretins like Cunningham in every city. But as far as I know the Reds are the only team whose announcers openly criticize the team and the individual players. And Dunn is the absolute lightening rod for that criticism.

osuceltic
09-05-2007, 08:37 AM
If you think the Cincinnati media is tough on Dunn, you haven't spent much time in places like New York, Boston or Philadelphia. Here, he's a talk radio topic a few times a season. The beat writers largely defend him. That's tough? If he can't take it here, he'll be in for a rude awakening in a bigger market.

This whole dust-up is ridiculous. Dunn screwed up, Cunningham called him out in his typically hyperbolic fashion and Dunn overreacted. He's getting rabbit ears like Junior. There's no personal responsibility, just this belief that everyone is out to get them. Here's a tip: Don't miss bases and botch plays in the outfield and don't turn doubles into singles by loafing and no one will say those mean things about you.

MWM
09-05-2007, 08:57 AM
To be fair to Thom Brennanman, and I listened to the broadcast, he wasn't raggin' on Jr and even emphasized that. He simply felt, in that particular situation, that Jr should have been more alert (since Gonzo scored all the way from 1B) and could have been standing at 2B. He didn't really belabor the point.

But Jr has been praised and given all due respect this year far more than he has been criticized by this broadcast team.

As for Cunningham..... he's an idiot and paid to be controversial. Isn't he the GM of WLW now?

I respectfully disagree. It's one of only two times I've listened to Thom for an extended period of time. I hade just flown into Cincy and was waiting for almost 3 hours for my bags to arrive. I sat in my car and listened to the game. Thom railed on Junior for what seemed an eternity. Now you mightbe referring to his, "I'm not trying to rag on Griffey, but..." comment. Because that's what got me actually laughing a little. He went on and on and on and on about it. It was incredibly annoying. Honstly, Thom was just horrible that entire night. Marty was fine. Didn't bother me a bit. But Thom is just bad.

redsmetz
09-05-2007, 08:57 AM
If you think the Cincinnati media is tough on Dunn, you haven't spent much time in places like New York, Boston or Philadelphia. Here, he's a talk radio topic a few times a season. The beat writers largely defend him. That's tough? If he can't take it here, he'll be in for a rude awakening in a bigger market.

This whole dust-up is ridiculous. Dunn screwed up, Cunningham called him out in his typically hyperbolic fashion and Dunn overreacted. He's getting rabbit ears like Junior. There's no personal responsibility, just this belief that everyone is out to get them. Here's a tip: Don't miss bases and botch plays in the outfield and don't turn doubles into singles by loafing and no one will say those mean things about you.

It's absurd to say Cunningham called him out. Bill Cunningham is a loudmouth [I can't find the right word to pass muster with board rules] - he adds nothing to the city's wellbeing, IMO. It's actually ironic that Cunningham said Dunn should be accountable and yet, somehow, he's not to be accountable for his own actions. Ballplayers mess up all of the time. It's crass and unprofessional to say on a 50,000 Watt station that he's drunk on the job. I'm not surprised Dunn spoke up - he should. I'd hope this fracas would lead to the Reds elsewhere for their next broadcasting contract, but unfortunately, I suspect now that radio companies can own most of a town, there's little that gives the broadcast coverage that WLW gives - and we're stuck with dopes like Cunningham. He's the furthest thing from funny.

Roy Tucker
09-05-2007, 09:10 AM
Cunningham is an idiot and spews out a lot of blather and trash because it gets ratings. I never listen to the guy. And from the smatterings I have heard from him, I can't see how anyone can take him seriously. Like Tracey Jones' post-game show, I obviously am not the market they are going after.

That WLW allows Cunningham, Jones, et al to continue doesn't speak well of WLW. I suppose all stations are ratings *****s any more and will do whatever it takes, no matter how tasteless, to get them.

The fact that they are simultaneously the Reds flagship radio station and tearing down the Reds seems ... schizophrenic but mostly stupid.

Unfortunately, since the Reds have been losers for several seasons straight now, they have replaced the Bengals as the laughing stock of Cincinnati sports. They will be the butt of a lot of jokes, many of them low-spirited and mean and otherwise tasteless. Becoming a winning team would go along ways towards lessening all that.

I can understand Dunn getting upset and if I were in his shoes, I probably would too. Having said that, his best move probably would have shrugged it off with "how can Willie tell, he's drunk too" and laughed it off. But that's easy for me to say when I'm not the one in the crosshairs.

wolfboy
09-05-2007, 10:38 AM
As I said, someone could get cute and try to twist this into a legal case. Then again, some lawyers are willing to twist anything into a case even if one has to suspend relality to do so.

Fact remains, Dunn has suffered no damages of substance (at least at this point in time). Without them, you are tilting at windmills, IMO.

There's nothing "cute" about representing your client's best interests. It's called doing your job.

We have a competent legal system in place that determines whether someone has suffered damages. If you don't believe me, try going to law school. You'll learn all about it.

registerthis
09-05-2007, 10:39 AM
Dunn screwed up, Cunningham called him out in his typically hyperbolic fashion and Dunn overreacted.


“Isn’t there a line?” Dunn said. “I think that goes over the line. We might want to do something about that.”

What about that, exactly, do you consider to be overreacting? What do you consider an appropriate response to someone who publicly accused you of being drunk on the job?

registerthis
09-05-2007, 10:40 AM
There's nothing "cute" about representing your client's best interests. It's called doing your job.

Everyone hates lawyers until they have to hire one.

Redsland
09-05-2007, 11:24 AM
Per Fay (http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/redsinsider/default.asp):

Cunningham apologizes

WLW host Bill Cunningham visited the Reds clubhouse today to apologize to Adam Dunn for a remark Cunningham made on his show Friday.

"I apologized," Cunningham said. "That's all I'm going to say about it. I made a mistake."

Cunningham said Dunn was "drunk" when he missed a base and misplayed a ball in a game in Pittsburgh.

Dunn pretty takes all criticism.

"Say I stink, I suck whatever," Dunn said. "But when my mom's friend hears and it calls her. Then she calls me crying her eyes out . . . That's over the line. People believe that stuff."

RFS62
09-05-2007, 11:51 AM
Two things I know about Texas boys.

Don't mess with their mamas, and don't mess with their horse.

15fan
09-05-2007, 12:21 PM
Got a blathering idiot on your hands? Deal with them Tim Duncan style.

In college, Duncan beat Duke the first 8 times he played them, going 8-1 overall. Greg Newton was Duke's post-player for most of that time. Greg had this...problem...of running his mouth. He'd get asked about playing Timmy D and say something to the effect of "he's good...but not that good. If we put a body on him we should be able to take care of him."

Then Tim would proceed to put on a clinic against Newton. Spin moves, fade away jumpers, up & under, power moves to the basket, etc. 20+ points, 12 or so rebounds, and a W. Game in, game out. After the game, Newton would keep running his mouth. "Didn't play my game, should have been in better position, etc."

Tim's senior year, someone in the media asked Duncan about Newton, hoping to work Duncan into a lather. In typical Duncan fashion, he looked at the reporter and calmly said "Greg Newton is the greatest basketball player I've ever seen."

And he left it at that.

I wish more athletes would take that approach. Instead, they seem to give fuel to the fire that keeps shock jocks on the air & in the papers.

If you stop the flow of oxygen, the fire will burn itself out.

KronoRed
09-05-2007, 01:19 PM
Hopefully the Reds leaned on 700, contrary to what some may believe, 700 needs the Reds more then the Reds need them.

Unassisted
09-05-2007, 01:59 PM
Per Fay (http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/redsinsider/default.asp):

The comments posted there are quite a hoot.

Roy Tucker
09-05-2007, 02:21 PM
Got a blathering idiot on your hands? Deal with them Tim Duncan style.

In college, Duncan beat Duke the first 8 times he played them, going 8-1 overall. Greg Newton was Duke's post-player for most of that time. Greg had this...problem...of running his mouth. He'd get asked about playing Timmy D and say something to the effect of "he's good...but not that good. If we put a body on him we should be able to take care of him."

Then Tim would proceed to put on a clinic against Newton. Spin moves, fade away jumpers, up & under, power moves to the basket, etc. 20+ points, 12 or so rebounds, and a W. Game in, game out. After the game, Newton would keep running his mouth. "Didn't play my game, should have been in better position, etc."

Tim's senior year, someone in the media asked Duncan about Newton, hoping to work Duncan into a lather. In typical Duncan fashion, he looked at the reporter and calmly said "Greg Newton is the greatest basketball player I've ever seen."

And he left it at that.

I wish more athletes would take that approach. Instead, they seem to give fuel to the fire that keeps shock jocks on the air & in the papers.

If you stop the flow of oxygen, the fire will burn itself out.

A brief aside that nothing to do with Cunningham/Dunn..,

I'm just finishing up reading John Feinstein's "A March to Madness" and I read that Duncan/Newton story over the weekend. I read your note and thought "deja vu".

(cue theramin noise)

Roy Tucker
09-05-2007, 02:25 PM
As the Reds World Turns.... From Daugherty's blog...

http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/daugherty/



Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Willie and The Dunner

Just spoke with Bill Cunningham... he apologized this morning personally to ADunn, for saying on the air last Friday that Dunn was drunk during the previous night's game in Pittsburgh... Cunningham seemed truly contrite, said in 24 years of radio, he'd never before apologized to a Reds player for anything he'd said on the air. Dunn was not impressed. "Pathetic. You'll be hearing from me,'' was Dunn's response, according to Cunningham.

A few things: You can't say someone is drunk,not on the air, unless you know it's true. You can say he "looked'' like he was drunk or "played'' like he was drunk, not that he was drunk. It was good that Cunningham had the integrity to apologize in person; it was reckless that he said what he said. Talk radio allows a lot more leeway when it comes to passing harsh judgment on public figures. But there is a line.

I talked this morning with Enquirer attorney Jack Greiner, who said Cunningham's words probably were not slanderous. The irony is, the more hyperbolic the rhetoric, the better the slander defense. The theory is, if you make the words ridiculous enough, everyone listening will know you're not serious. So, if you're on the radio and you feel like assassinating someone's character, go overboard with it and you won't get anything but a fat lip from the assassinated.

I'm having Cunningham on Sports Talk tonight at 630, 700 WLW... we'll talk more about it.

BRM
09-05-2007, 02:30 PM
"Pathetic. You'll be hearing from me,'' was Dunn's response, according to Cunningham.


Interesting development.

flyer85
09-05-2007, 02:30 PM
The irony is, the more hyperbolic the rhetoric, the better the slander defensehard to see how claiming he was actually drunk is hyberbole. Hyperbole would be saying he acted like he was so drunk that ...

Ragging on a guy for not hustling, poor defense, poor offense, etc is one thing. But claiming a player was drunk on the field during a game is way over the line unless you have proof

Chip R
09-05-2007, 03:07 PM
Cunningham seemed truly contrite, said in 24 years of radio, he'd never before apologized to a Reds player for anything he'd said on the air. Dunn was not impressed. "Pathetic. You'll be hearing from me,'' was Dunn's response, according to Cunningham.

I happened to hear him talking about apologizing this morning to Eggers and Doyle and contrite was hardly the word I would use. He said things like, "If I call you an idiot, I don't think anyone believes you're mentally ill." It sounded like he was forced into it but even if he wasn't, his apology seemed as tongue in cheek as his original statement about Dunn.

There's an old saying, "Don't get in an argument with anyone who buys ink by the barrel." I know Willie's not a writer but it's the same principle. It's not a good idea to get into a dfeud with someone who can get on the radio for a few hours every day and trash you. The more you respond, the more ammunition you give him.

Should Dunn have just ignored him or taken care of it privately? Perhaps, but put yourself in his shoes. Dunn is not the most gifted outfielder in the world and he had a bad night. That doesn't mean he wasn't trying his hardest out there. Maybe it doesn't look like it but I think he gives maximum effort out there. That doesn't always translate into results but all you can ask is that he tries hard out there. He also missed a base but, again, that was an error of comission not of omission. If he had jogged to 3rd from 2nd and been thrown out then you could rip him for not playing hard. So he hears that some guy on the radio said he was drunk that night. I know if someone accused me of being drunk on the job if I made a few mistakes, I'd be angry.

Being a public figure doesn't mean people have the right to say anything about you and if you decide to take legal action, that's your right. I don't think Jerry Falwell was wrong to sue Hustler and Larry Flynt. His suit was eventually thrown out but it doesn't mean he was wrong to sue.

BCubb2003
09-05-2007, 03:25 PM
Bill "My words have no meaning; I'm just a troll" Cunningham

MartyFan
09-05-2007, 03:58 PM
Bill Cunningham and pretty much everyone who opens their pie hole on WLW continue to confirm more and more why the Reds should buy a station of their own.

IMHO, they also confirm with nearly every syllable that escapes from their mouth exactly why they (Clear Channel) should turn off the mics and step away from the business as they are providing a "service" even more distasteful than what Jerry Springer acquired with a check when he was Mayor of Cincinnati.

flyer85
09-05-2007, 04:00 PM
Bill Cunningham and pretty much everyone who opens their pie hole on WLW continue to confirm more and more why the Reds should buy a station of their own.Bill is tuning up to go nationwide.

Ltlabner
09-05-2007, 04:23 PM
There's nothing "cute" about representing your client's best interests. It's called doing your job.

We have a competent legal system in place that determines whether someone has suffered damages. If you don't believe me, try going to law school. You'll learn all about it.

Do they teach reading comprehension in law school?

Never said defending your client was "cute". Said that I thought it would take some "cute" lawyering to twist what transpired into an actionable case that had a real chance of being won. Apparently several laywer-types here agree with me.

And no, you don't need a law degree to excersize common sense. And other than amoungsts some lunitics around the water cooler, Dunn's reputation suffered exactly zero damage from Willies comments (let alone financially).

cincinnati chili
09-05-2007, 04:30 PM
Chip,

Not to get political, but I think it was wrong for Falwell to sue. The uaninmous Supreme Court, with Mr. Archconservative Antonin Scalia penning the opinion, agrees with me.

I can see how it would offend his sensibilities. But nobody on earth really believed that Jerry Falwell lost his virginity with his mother in an outhouse (which is what the satirical story was about).

I think it's a closer call here. There are SOME baseball players who come to work drunk. If Dunn is worried that some fans actually believed Cunningham, and if it caused him distress, I'd have more sympathy for him, than for Falwell.

Ltlabner
09-05-2007, 04:39 PM
Interesting development.


"Pathetic. You'll be hearing from me,'' was Dunn's response, according to Cunningham.

Yikes. Not exactly the laid back Texas boy we've come to know and love.

Now, why can't be this firey after he strikes out? ;)

Unassisted
09-05-2007, 04:43 PM
Dunn was not impressed. "Pathetic. You'll be hearing from me,'' was Dunn's response, according to Cunningham.

Cunningham should have reached out to Mama Dunn first. He could probably still make this go away if he did.

wolfboy
09-05-2007, 04:44 PM
Do they teach reading comprehension in law school?

Never said defending your client was "cute". Said that I thought it would take some "cute" lawyering to twist what transpired into an actionable case that had a real chance of being won.

Does this "cute" lawyering involve smiling babies and puppy dogs?

Team Clark
09-05-2007, 04:47 PM
Yikes. Not exactly the laid back Texas boy we've come to know and love.

Now, why can't be this firey after he strikes out? ;)

LOL! Now maybe he'll steal some more bases...:D

Chip R
09-05-2007, 05:06 PM
Chip,

Not to get political, but I think it was wrong for Falwell to sue.


I don't think Falwell believed it was wrong and that's really all that matters. Isn't it everybody's right to sue if they feel they have been wronged?

Ltlabner
09-05-2007, 05:14 PM
Does this "cute" lawyering involve smiling babies and puppy dogs?

Well, I was thinking more along the lines of Jenna Van Oy cute, but I suppose in a pinch smiling babies and puppy dogs would work.

M2
09-05-2007, 05:20 PM
If you think the Cincinnati media is tough on Dunn, you haven't spent much time in places like New York, Boston or Philadelphia.

I was born in Philly and grew up around there. Spent my high school years and some time after that living in the NYC area. I've lived most of my adult life in the Boston area.

Philly's by far the worst of the three. If a team is losing, Philadelphians often assume the best player is responsible. Yet what's staggering about the Cincinnati treatment of Dunn is that the reasons why the club has been so poor get largely ignored. Yeah, the East Coast media puts everything under a microscope, but the empasis there is on everything. I've never seen anything remotely like the ridiculous bashing Dunn takes while a conga line of lousy players, inept managers and bumbling executives get free passes. No way in blue hades would that happen in New York, Boston and Philly.

M2
09-05-2007, 05:45 PM
Well, I was thinking more along the lines of Jenna Van Oy cute

Though I can't prove this, I believe Jenna von Oy holds the record for most years spent playing a high schooler on television, shattering the previous mark held by Michael J. Fox.

westofyou
09-05-2007, 05:56 PM
I was born in Philly and grew up around there. Spent my high school years and some time after that living in the NYC area. I've lived most of my adult life in the Boston area.

Philly's by far the worst of the three. If a team is losing, Philadelphians often assume the best player is responsible. Yet what's staggering about the Cincinnati treatment of Dunn is that the reasons why the club has been so poor get largely ignored. Yeah, the East Coast media puts everything under a microscope, but the empasis there is on everything. I've never seen anything remotely like the ridiculous bashing Dunn takes while a conga line of lousy players, inept managers and bumbling executives get free passes. No way in blue hades would that happen in New York, Boston and Philly.

Wait.. an actual opinion from someone who's lived somewhere else besides Cincinnati on the medias approach to Reds baseball.

Wow.. that's what I call a real examination of the subject, as opposed to the usual conjecture and BS that pours out of WLW and anyone who wastes ones and zeros trying to defend them.

As for shock jocks and AM radio, KNBR and Krueger experienced the same issue two years ago with the Latin player and intelligence snafu that came out of the post game show.

Matt700wlw
09-05-2007, 07:20 PM
As for Cunningham..... he's an idiot and paid to be controversial. Isn't he the GM of WLW now?

No. He's just a talk show host now.

He used to be the PD, but that was years ago...in the Jacor days, I believe...

Matt700wlw
09-05-2007, 07:24 PM
For anyone who cares, Willie went to the ballpark, into the clubhouse, and appologized to Dunn today, face to face, before the game. It was done on his own after he saw his quotes in the paper, and the reaction from Dunn and his family.

His intent was hyperbole and sarcasm, but it didn't work. His intent was NOT to hurt anyone's feelings.

And no, the radio station did not make him appologize...

It doesn't make what he said right, and he'll admit that.

RedLegSuperStar
09-05-2007, 07:37 PM
Dunn's family has yet to learn to stop listening to the radio and the broadcasts..

KronoRed
09-05-2007, 07:39 PM
Dunn's family has yet to learn to stop listening to the radio and the broadcasts..

or...the Reds flagship radio station should put a lid on needlessly attacking the Reds best player

mbgrayson
09-05-2007, 08:09 PM
or...the Reds flagship radio station should put a lid on needlessly attacking the Reds best player

It is really amazing if you back up and think about it. Here is Adam Dunn, he of the 36 HRs, 95 RBIs, 91 runs scored, and a .267/.384/.553 line for an OPS of .937, (and all of Dunn's numbers are better than last year)....on a Reds team that sits 14 games below .500.

And who gets the most blame for the Reds bad year? Why Adam Dunn, of course. He DID make a couple mistakes, and Lord knows he should never do that.....and there is that pesky RISP issue....but still.

It makes me sick to even hear Adam buy into the garbage and beat himself up ....saying it is o.k. to say "I stink".....

For Pete's sake: Adam Dunn is a top notch player. I think he is great asset to the Reds, and I want him to stay around. No more apologies here. If we have to always apologize for every perceived flaw of each Red, we will never get anywhere.

Raisor
09-05-2007, 08:56 PM
and there is that pesky RISP issue....but still.




Adam Dunn, career OPS w/RISP 878

puca
09-05-2007, 09:15 PM
Adam Dunn, career OPS w/RISP 878

But that just can't be. The Reds own announcers say he isn't clutch.

Topcat
09-06-2007, 01:41 AM
Dunn's a butcher in the outfield and his range is well um not good, but to deny his ability's as the most serious factor in the Red's offense is a bloody crime. Adam will never get his due from the casual Red's fan and I support trading him if Value comes back in the form of Top prospects and pitching. But to deny what he contributes is to flat out stand up and raise your hand and state that your an idiot.

BCubb2003
09-06-2007, 02:08 AM
"He's an old 27."

And I heard he anticipated a double play. And you just can't do that.

RedsBaron
09-06-2007, 04:35 AM
Dunn's a butcher in the outfield and his range is well um not good, but to deny his ability's as the most serious factor in the Red's offense is a bloody crime. Adam will never get his due from the casual Red's fan and I support trading him if Value comes back in the form of Top prospects and pitching. But to deny what he contributes is to flat out stand up and raise your hand and state that your an idiot.

A lot of casual fans argue that (1) Dunn is worthless and (2) the Reds should trade Dunn to get ace starting pitching. Somehow it is never explained why other teams will give the Reds ace pitching for a player who supposedly is worthless.

LoganBuck
09-06-2007, 06:43 AM
A lot of casual fans argue that (1) Dunn is worthless and (2) the Reds should trade Dunn to get ace starting pitching. Somehow it is never explained why other teams will give the Reds ace pitching for a player who supposedly is worthless.

You apparently haven't heard that same group of people saying that Dunn is worthless, and they wonder if they might be able to get a bullpen arm like Scott Proctor for him. The other one right now is that the Reds should let him walk, and get the two first round draft picks. Which is a horribly flawed arguement, because I could see Dunn land in Houston or Texas, who will probably finish in the bottom 15 of the league, and then their first round picks will be protected from Type A comp.

As for Dunn v Cunningham, Cunningham was wrong, but Dunn's play was inexcusable during that game, he needed to get his head out of his butt.

GAC
09-06-2007, 08:04 AM
As for Dunn v Cunningham, Cunningham was wrong, but Dunn's play was inexcusable during that game, he needed to get his head out of his butt.

So that is why he missed 3rd base! :D

redsmetz
09-06-2007, 08:09 AM
"He's an old 27."



Yikes, I'm in big trouble of "old" keeps getting defined younger and younger!

GAC
09-06-2007, 08:15 AM
Yikes, I'm in big trouble of "old" keeps getting defined younger and younger!

I'm a young 50 something. http://www.freesmileys.org/emo/sex023.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org)

Matt700wlw
09-06-2007, 02:18 PM
Dunn's family has yet to learn to stop listening to the radio and the broadcasts..

They'd probably be better off...

Matt700wlw
09-06-2007, 02:20 PM
or...the Reds flagship radio station should put a lid on needlessly attacking the Reds best player

There's been very little, if any, Dunn negativity as late from the boys...except for maybe the other day.

He deserved that.

puca
09-06-2007, 02:22 PM
There's been very little, if any, Dunn negativity as late from the boys...except for maybe the other day.

He deserved that.

Me guesses the damage has been done.

pedro
09-06-2007, 02:25 PM
There's been very little, if any, Dunn negativity as late from the boys...except for maybe the other day.

He deserved that.

He deserved to be called a drunk?

KittyDuran
09-06-2007, 02:27 PM
He deserved to be called a drunk?I believe Matt's talking about the Brennemans and Brantley - not Willie...

Wheelhouse
09-06-2007, 09:34 PM
I think the odds are better Cunningham was drunk when he made that idiotic comment...

MartyFan
09-06-2007, 10:51 PM
Bill is tuning up to go nationwide.

Not surprising...he still SUCKS.

redsmetz
09-07-2007, 08:40 AM
Unfortunately, Dunn needs to get out of this city. He's not appreciated and he constantly gets blasted by the media here. At this point in time, with the money he's going to make, the atmosphere in the clubhouse, and the angst going on with him, I believe it'd be best if he and the Reds parted ways after the season. It's not going to be fun when that happens. I just hope the Reds at least get a decent return for him.

I caught this comment over on The Sun Deck in a similar thread. I couldn't help but think of how Ted Williams was treated in Boston. I think I'd rather put up with the acrimony (misplaced as it is) and still have the player on our team. I would be willing to trade Cunningham for anything, even a broken microphone!

Guacarock
09-07-2007, 10:54 AM
WLW isn't a radio station anymore but a three-ring circus where each clown (Cunningham, Brennamen, etc., etc.) is just a little bit bigger, brasher and more obnoxious than the next. Castellini should exercise some good sense and show some guts by severing the Reds' ties with that pathetic excuse for a media outlet.

And if not, us fans need to take matters into our our hands and pummel Cunningham and Company with peanut shells the next time we spot them lurking around the shadows of the stadium. Kinda like Patches O'Houlihan in DODGEBALL, although unfortunately we can't sling wrenches at these bozos without facing assault and battery charges.

Will this tactic shut them up for good? Probably not, but maybe the next time they exercise their "free speech" they'll consider the consequences pouring down upon them from the peanut gallery. And at least it will do our hearts good to watch them squirm. Remember Patches' motto: Dodge, duck, dip, dive and dodge.

dabvu2498
09-07-2007, 11:10 AM
WLW isn't a radio station anymore but a three-ring circus where each clown (Cunningham, Brennamen, etc., etc.) is just a little bit bigger, brasher and more obnoxious than the next. Castellini should exercise some good sense and show some guts by severing the Reds' ties with that pathetic excuse for a media outlet.

I can hear the WLW promos now, with the smarmy-voiced promo guy...

"So we lost the Reds? So what? They suck anyway... And all because Adam Dunn's mommy couldn't take a little criticism of her big baby boy. Who cares? We still have the Bengals, Bearcats and Musketeers."

Or something to that effect.

Not sure that would help with the Reds' "public relations" either.

Chip R
09-07-2007, 11:24 AM
I can hear the WLW promos now, with the smarmy-voiced promo guy...

"So we lost the Reds? So what? They suck anyway... And all because Adam Dunn's mommy couldn't take a little criticism of her big baby boy. Who cares? We still have the Bengals, Bearcats and Musketeers."

Or something to that effect.

Not sure that would help with the Reds' "public relations" either.


You're probably not too far off with that.

Always Red
09-07-2007, 11:33 AM
I read "Crosley" this past summer, and I can't help but think that Powell and Lewis Crosley are both turning in their graves over what their station has become.

registerthis
09-07-2007, 12:29 PM
WLW isn't a radio station anymore but a three-ring circus where each clown (Cunningham, Brennamen, etc., etc.)

I'm not Brennamen apologist, but he and Cunningham are miles apart on the clown-o-meter. People may disagree with Marty's opinions, but he's no clown.

Matt700wlw
09-07-2007, 12:58 PM
You guys do realize that a 10 paged thread about what Willie said only helps us, right?

Matt700wlw
09-07-2007, 12:58 PM
He deserved to be called a drunk?

No...Willie was out of line. He admits that.

Marty would never do that. He may criticize his play on the field, or voice an opinion about him that you disagree with...but that's as far as it would go.

KronoRed
09-07-2007, 01:30 PM
You guys do realize that a 10 paged thread about what Willie said only helps us, right?

Really? how many people in here are now listening to 700 because of this thread? not very many I bet, in fact I bet more are stopping.

Matt700wlw
09-07-2007, 01:32 PM
Really? how many people in here are now listening to 700 because of this thread? not very many I bet, in fact I bet more are stopping.

A 10 page thread about it shows that somebody is listening...

Redsland
09-07-2007, 01:33 PM
A 10 page thread about it shows that somebody is listening...
Really? Because the initial post is about a newspaper article.

Matt700wlw
09-07-2007, 01:34 PM
Really? Because the initial post is about a newspaper article.

There wouldn't be a newspaper article if nobody cared...

KronoRed
09-07-2007, 01:35 PM
A 10 page thread about it shows that somebody is listening...

..one person, and a bunch reading :D

Roy Tucker
09-07-2007, 01:37 PM
Reading this thread hasn't caused me to go listen to Willie. As a matter of fact, it has had the opposite effect.

pedro
09-07-2007, 01:39 PM
You guys do realize that a 10 paged thread about what Willie said only helps us, right?

I don't see how. It's mostly 10 pages of people talking about what a joke WLW has become and how they don't like to listen to it.

Strikes Out Looking
09-07-2007, 01:40 PM
For some unknown reason, I've read through this thread and now I have some questions and observations.

Dunn as a player: I don't think anyone is blaming Adam Dunn personally for the Reds lousy season. He's been pretty much Adam Dunn all year, meaning alot of homers, rbis, runs scored and walks. Also alot of K's and strange outfield play. The Reds have got what they paid for. The bigger question I have is what do other GM's and scouts say about Adam Dunn (while he is sober, of course). Are the Reds not using him correctly? Is his natural position (in the NL) really
1b, even though he balked at it in the Spring of '06? Or should he really just go to the AL and be a DH. What is his real market value? I know we all have opinions, but I really wish we could hear from an insider, outside of the Reds, who has an opinion on this.

Dunn and the media: He may not have liked the comments of Cunningham, who is nothing more than a circus act anyway. But the Cincy media comments are very mild compared to what he'd get in the East Coast--except for Washington--which I'll get to in a second. I think the media that has covered the Reds for a while is just tired, like the fans, of following a loser. Dunn has played on the loser, thus he gets his share of criticism--however, I think others have received more in the past. For example, see Milton, Eric.

Dunn and D.C. -- I have this gut feeling that JimBo wants Dunn more than anyother GM. He could put together an OF of Dunn, Pena and Kearns. He could finish in or near last place in the NL East like the Reds often did when he was in Cincy. For me, living here in the D.C. area, it would be great fun. And the media basically ignores the Nats, so Dunn wouldn't be called a drunk by anyone. Heck, unless he plays QB for the 'Skins he won't even be mentioned!

Redsland
09-07-2007, 01:45 PM
There wouldn't be a newspaper article if nobody cared...
That's my point. Nobody that's contributed to these 10 pages of discussion did care. Or, perhaps more accurately, nobody here was listening and heard it. If somebody had been, then there would have been a thread about it four days prior to the published account.

Look at the article. It says Cunningham made his statements on Friday, August 31. The article itself didn't come out until Tuesday, Sept. 4. In the intervening days, nobody here mentioned it, which you can be sure would have happened if any of us had heard Cunningham's remarks. We didn't. Heck, it was 7:30 in the evening before that article was posted, and it's from the morning paper.

The article has been good for 10 pages of discussion, but don't think it's doing anything to drive ratings or revenues toward your station.

Matt700wlw
09-07-2007, 01:46 PM
That's my point. Nobody here did care. Or, perhaps more accurately, nobody here was listening and heard it. If somebody had been, then there would have been a thread about it four days prior to the published account.

Look at the article. It says Cunningham made his statements on Friday, August 31. The article itself didn't come out until Tuesday, Sept. 4. In the intervening days, nobody here mentioned it, which you can be sure would have happened if any of us had heard Cunningham's remarks. We didn't. Heck, it was 7:30 in the evening before that article was posted, and it's from the morning paper.

The article has been good for 10 pages of discussion, but don't think it's doing anything to drive ratings or revenues toward your station.


All I can do is look at the ratings......


Somebody's listening.


And yes, Willie was wrong.

RFS62
09-07-2007, 02:01 PM
You guys do realize that a 10 paged thread about what Willie said only helps us, right?


All I can do is look at the ratings......


Somebody's listening.


And yes, Willie was wrong.



You realize that you thinking that is a much bigger part of the problem, right?

If WLW thinks that this is somehow good for them, that really explains a lot.

Matt700wlw
09-07-2007, 02:04 PM
If it hurts ratings, it's bad.

It won't.

He was wrong...we'll all move on. So will Dunn.

TeamBoone
09-07-2007, 02:42 PM
But the Cincy media comments are very mild compared to what he'd get in the East Coast--

Who cares about what's done on the east coast. We're talking about a baseball player in Cincinnati. I don't care how they are treated in NY, Boston, Baltimore, or Washington.

It was a lousey thing to say, and I don't blame AD for being upset. He does, after all, ignore so much... this was a personal, unfounded statement made across the airwaves (and supplemented by the press) which is much more detrimental to his public image.

Hyperbole... my :mooner: !!!!

Strikes Out Looking
09-07-2007, 02:49 PM
Who cares about what's done on the east coast. We're talking about a baseball player in Cincinnati. I don't care how they are treated in NY, Boston, Baltimore, or Washington.

It was a lousey thing to say, and I don't blame AD for being upset. He does, after all, ignore so much... this was a personal, unfounded statement made across the airwaves (and supplemented by the press) which is much more detrimental to his public image.

Hyperbole... my :mooner: !!!!

I don't disagree it was a lousy thing to say. My point is, if he ends up somewhere else, he'll hear lousy things on a daily basis at a much higher decibel level.

M2
09-07-2007, 02:58 PM
You realize that you thinking that is a much bigger part of the problem, right?

If WLW thinks that this is somehow good for them, that really explains a lot.

What? How can it be wrong if you make a buck?

bucksfan2
09-07-2007, 03:13 PM
Willie was absolutly wrong and out of line. People tend to forget that athletes are human beings as well. Willie portrays this holier than thou attitude that I can't stand and do not listen to him. If somebody insults Willie on the radio what does he do? He uses the airways to counter the insulter. Willie says that Adam Dunn is drunk on the field which doens't sit well with him so he complains so what does Willie do. He gives a tongue and cheek apoligy that brings even more attention to him. Willie is the classic case of if a tree falls and no one is around does it make a sound. Dont listen to him and he will go away. Unfortuantly there are way too many people who buy into him.

KittyDuran
09-07-2007, 03:53 PM
That's my point. Nobody that's contributed to these 10 pages of discussion did care. Or, perhaps more accurately, nobody here was listening and heard it. If somebody had been, then there would have been a thread about it four days prior to the published account.

Look at the article. It says Cunningham made his statements on Friday, August 31. The article itself didn't come out until Tuesday, Sept. 4. In the intervening days, nobody here mentioned it, which you can be sure would have happened if any of us had heard Cunningham's remarks. We didn't. Heck, it was 7:30 in the evening before that article was posted, and it's from the morning paper.

The article has been good for 10 pages of discussion, but don't think it's doing anything to drive ratings or revenues toward your station.Maybe no one on RZ was listening but Dunn's Mom or someone close to the family was monitoring the airwaves after the incident (missing the bag) and picked up on it. Supposedly Junior's family and friends do the same.

KittyDuran
09-07-2007, 03:56 PM
For some unknown reason, I've read through this thread and now I have some questions and observations.

Dunn as a player: I don't think anyone is blaming Adam Dunn personally for the Reds lousy season. He's been pretty much Adam Dunn all year, meaning alot of homers, rbis, runs scored and walks. Also alot of K's and strange outfield play. The Reds have got what they paid for. The bigger question I have is what do other GM's and scouts say about Adam Dunn (while he is sober, of course). Are the Reds not using him correctly? Is his natural position (in the NL) really
1b, even though he balked at it in the Spring of '06? Or should he really just go to the AL and be a DH. What is his real market value? I know we all have opinions, but I really wish we could hear from an insider, outside of the Reds, who has an opinion on this.

Dunn and the media: He may not have liked the comments of Cunningham, who is nothing more than a circus act anyway. But the Cincy media comments are very mild compared to what he'd get in the East Coast--except for Washington--which I'll get to in a second. I think the media that has covered the Reds for a while is just tired, like the fans, of following a loser. Dunn has played on the loser, thus he gets his share of criticism--however, I think others have received more in the past. For example, see Milton, Eric.

Dunn and D.C. -- I have this gut feeling that JimBo wants Dunn more than anyother GM. He could put together an OF of Dunn, Pena and Kearns. He could finish in or near last place in the NL East like the Reds often did when he was in Cincy. For me, living here in the D.C. area, it would be great fun. And the media basically ignores the Nats, so Dunn wouldn't be called a drunk by anyone. Heck, unless he plays QB for the 'Skins he won't even be mentioned!What Dunn is here in Cincinnati is the Big Fish in a small pond... put him on the East Coast with the large market teams where he's paid less and would not be so high profile and he would probably be ignored by the press. Well, until he does something that causes a game to be lost.

KittyDuran
09-07-2007, 03:59 PM
What? How can it be wrong if you make a buck?Nothing at all when your sole purpose is Abritron ratings. Someone once said, and I'll paraphase... Any publicity, even bad publicity, is good - no publicity is BAD.

Redsland
09-07-2007, 04:31 PM
Maybe no one on RZ was listening but Dunn's Mom or someone close to the family was monitoring the airwaves after the incident (missing the bag) and picked up on it.
Yes, Dunn said that a friend of the family heard the broadcast and then called Dunn's mom to tell her about it (presumably because Dunn's mom no longer listens to WLW). Once she'd been alerted to the broadcast, Mom then called Adam in tears. According to Adam.

"Say I stink, I suck, whatever," Dunn said. "But when my mom's friend hears it and calls her, then (my mom) calls me crying her eyes out ... That's over the line. People believe that stuff."

KittyDuran
09-07-2007, 05:44 PM
Yes, Dunn said that a friend of the family heard the broadcast and then called Dunn's mom to tell her about it (presumably because Dunn's mom no longer listens to WLW). Once she'd been alerted to the broadcast, Mom then called Adam in tears. According to Adam.So his Mom's friend listens to Willie...:eek:

BoydsOfSummer
09-07-2007, 05:52 PM
McConnell is still a pretty good listen.

Matt700wlw
09-07-2007, 05:53 PM
He's always right, too...

:)

BoydsOfSummer
09-07-2007, 05:56 PM
Just not toooooo far right.;)

Ron Madden
09-08-2007, 04:47 AM
I doubt that Adam even cares what Silly Willy says about him.

Hell, I'd be pissed at anybody that ever made my Mom cry too.

The only reason anyone that I know ever listens to WLW is for the live broadcast of Reds, Bengals, Bearcats or Muskies games.

TeamCasey
09-08-2007, 10:01 AM
You guys do realize that a 10 paged thread about what Willie said only helps us, right?

I was thinking the same thing.

KronoRed
09-08-2007, 11:25 AM
So his Mom's friend listens to Willie...:eek:

He should buy everyone he knows satellite radio:thumbup:

KittyDuran
09-08-2007, 12:19 PM
He should buy everyone he knows satellite radio:thumbup:Err... WLW IS on satellite radio.

redsrule2500
09-08-2007, 01:18 PM
I think every radio station criticizes their teams, especially when they struggle. To be honest, it's better than having a team-run network where any critical viewpoints aren't allowed. Also, let's be honest, Bill has a point.

KronoRed
09-08-2007, 01:47 PM
Err... WLW IS on satellite radio.

Yes but it's separate ..you can get just the game and skip the rest of the garbage

KittyDuran
09-08-2007, 03:24 PM
Yes but it's separate ..you can get just the game and skip the rest of the garbageTrue... but someone was listening to the garbage for it to get back to Dunn's Mom - just sayin'!;)

KronoRed
09-08-2007, 03:46 PM
Also, get them satellite radio so they can hear the other teams PBP guys :thumbup:

True... but someone was listening to the garbage for it to get back to Dunn's Mom - just sayin'!;)

Hopefully they won't make the same mistake again:cool:

Yachtzee
09-09-2007, 11:44 AM
If it hurts ratings, it's bad.

It won't.

He was wrong...we'll all move on. So will Dunn.

Eventually, WLW is going to wear on people enough to where those ratings will go away. It's ironic how, for many years, I would get a staticky WLW in and would fight to hear through all the static to get my Reds and Bengals fix. Then I got XM radio and could not only get Reds games, but also WLW, crystal clear. Do you know what has happened after 2 years of listening to WLW and the Marty Brenneman show? I've stopped listening to Reds games almost completely and I don't tune in to WLW any more. I can't take it. It's not the Reds losing that's getting to me. If it was just the losing, I could still listen just to find out how the young guys were doing. It's the "pot stirring" that I can't stand. Making mountains out of mole hills and directing fan anger at the wrong people. It's controversy for controversy's sake. I have enough aggravation in my everyday life. I don't need it from a radio station. So now I just check in here for my Reds news and listen to the Reds road games on occassion, but I can't listen to WLW or Brenneman anymore because I'm tired of getting angry at the radio.

I would think a good radio station would want to attract all sorts of fans and the thought that they were driving people away would be enough to send chills down any radio person's spine. But based on WLW's attitude, and your own, Matt700WLW, I guess all they care about is counting their ad dollars now without any care about what they're doing to their listeners in the long run. When the listeners go, the ad dollars will go away too.

TeamBoone
09-09-2007, 12:07 PM
I think every radio station criticizes their teams, especially when they struggle. To be honest, it's better than having a team-run network where any critical viewpoints aren't allowed. Also, let's be honest, Bill has a point.


A point about what? That AD was playing drunk? Or something else that I'm missing.

Ltlabner
09-09-2007, 03:56 PM
I would think a good radio station would want to attract all sorts of fans and the thought that they were driving people away would be enough to send chills down any radio person's spine. But based on WLW's attitude, and your own, Matt700WLW, I guess all they care about is counting their ad dollars now without any care about what they're doing to their listeners in the long run. When the listeners go, the ad dollars will go away too.

You are assuming that the dislike of WLW, Marty B, et al found on RZ is representative of the general public, or general Reds fan.

Because they agrivate a smattering of people on an internet forum it doesn't follow that they've alinated their audience at large, or that the general Cincy native's views are reflected here.

I would think any radio person with a brain is going to cater to the significantly larger group. If you get 1,000,000 listeners but in the process tick off 200 people on a website, I don't think the radio guy is going to lose a single wink of sleep about it.

Team Clark
09-09-2007, 03:59 PM
You are assuming that the dislike of WLW, Marty B, et al found on RZ is representative of the general public, or general Reds fan.

Because they agrivate a smattering of people on an internet forum it doesn't follow that they've alinated their audience at large, or that the general Cincy native's views are reflected here.

I would think any radio person with a brain is going to cater to the significantly larger group. If you get 1,000,000 listeners but in the process tick off 200 people on a website, I don't think the radio guy is going to lose a single wink of sleep.

Reminds me of Howard Stern. People who DISLIKE Howard Stern listen to him longer on average than those who say they LIKE him.

LoganBuck
09-09-2007, 04:59 PM
A point about what? That AD was playing drunk? Or something else that I'm missing.

Dunn played like he was a beer league softball player in that game. That was and is the point. I berated Marty and sent an email to the Reds about his treatment of Adam Dunn on the air, after the trade deadline. Cunningham was in the wrong, but lets get one thing straight, Marty is a Broadcaster, Bill Cunningham is a commentator. One is expected to give you the facts, the other brings you the fluff. I believe I said something to the effect of "Adam Dunn must have been smoking crack" to my brother when the play occurred that Cunningham was referring to. I wasn't broadcasting at that point, but that is truely how I felt.

Adam and his parents seem to have rabbit ears, and they seem to be looking for excuses to get out of Cincinnati.

Yachtzee
09-09-2007, 05:22 PM
You are assuming that the dislike of WLW, Marty B, et al found on RZ is representative of the general public, or general Reds fan.

Because they agrivate a smattering of people on an internet forum it doesn't follow that they've alinated their audience at large, or that the general Cincy native's views are reflected here.

I would think any radio person with a brain is going to cater to the significantly larger group. If you get 1,000,000 listeners but in the process tick off 200 people on a website, I don't think the radio guy is going to lose a single wink of sleep about it.

And you assume I'm just one guy on the internet. I assure you I am not. I suspect the people who listen to the folks on WLW aren't really there for the Reds and the folks who want to listen to the Reds are more likely just tolerating WLW's antics to get their Reds fix. Why do you assume it's just a bunch of internet cranks here? I think Redszone has enough people around to represent a cross section of the Reds fan base and the fact that a significant number of people around here don't like WLW should be a cause for concern. If their goal is to be the voice of the Reds, the fact that they are alienating Reds fans should in fact be a cause for concern.

The saying goes, if you don't like what you hear on the radio, change the channel. Well that's what I've done. I bet you I'm not the only one. Imagine how many younger fans are turning the channel. Guess what, they've got other options out there. Kids in Columbus can get the Indians on the radio just as well as the Reds. If you want to keep people listening to the Reds while they're not doing well, I would think you'd best not want to stir the pot needlessly.

Ltlabner
09-09-2007, 06:28 PM
I think Redszone has enough people around to represent a cross section of the Reds fan base and the fact that a significant number of people around here don't like WLW should be a cause for concern.

Talk about the definition of small sample size.

Acording to the members list there are 1600 members of RZ. Let's be very generous and say 50% are regularly active and offering their opinions. Of those 800 people, let's say 50% think WLW is the scum of the earth. Of those 400, it's safe to say another percentage here are from out of town and don't listen to WLW on a regular basis anyway. Let's say that's 10% so the 400 becomes 360people. And I think saying 360people here at RZ don't like WLW and crew is a strech.

If you think 360people out of a metro area of several million people, and lord knows how many at night, represent anything you are fooling yourself.

I'm not dogging on RZ or people's opinion that WLW is beneath contempt. But to say that WLW should be concerned because some folks on RZ don't like the station is laughable. If they've lost market share because of the antics, or lose advertising dollars, or lose stock value, then and only then, should they be concerned.

TeamBoone
09-09-2007, 09:19 PM
Dunn played like he was a beer league softball player in that game. That was and is the point. I berated Marty and sent an email to the Reds about his treatment of Adam Dunn on the air, after the trade deadline. Cunningham was in the wrong, but lets get one thing straight, Marty is a Broadcaster, Bill Cunningham is a commentator. One is expected to give you the facts, the other brings you the fluff. I believe I said something to the effect of "Adam Dunn must have been smoking crack" to my brother when the play occurred that Cunningham was referring to. I wasn't broadcasting at that point, but that is truely how I felt.

Adam and his parents seem to have rabbit ears, and they seem to be looking for excuses to get out of Cincinnati.


I disagree with you so much. Saying "Adam Dunn must have been smoking crack" to your brother is totally different than "Adam Dunn was playing drunk" to a thousand or more radio listeners.

Your private remark to your brother would not in the least suggest that he really was; Cunningham's remark was a statement that he really was.

Yachtzee
09-09-2007, 09:32 PM
I'm not dogging on RZ or people's opinion that WLW is beneath contempt. But to say that WLW should be concerned because some folks on RZ don't like the station is laughable. If they've lost market share because of the antics, or lose advertising dollars, or lose stock value, then and only then, should they be concerned.

Well it seems to me that you enjoy the pot stirring and don't think it has any real effect on the fanbase. I disagree. I think WLW should be concerned because if I were the Reds I would be thinking about moving the team to another broadcast outlet from which I get a greater share of the revenues, regardless of what the yahoos on WLW were saying. WLW (and FSN Ohio) has benefited from the fact that Reds ownership has been about 5-10 years behind the times when it comes to marketing the team. Eventually, they will look to a media outlet in which they have an ownership interest. If the Reds, and the Bengals for that matter, were to leave WLW, I'd think they'd take a significant hit in their ratings. However, I think it might actually be a good thing for them because then they can do their thing whole hog and target the audience they want and the rest of us can listen to sports on the radio without the aggravation.

Ltlabner
09-09-2007, 09:52 PM
Well it seems to me that you enjoy the pot stirring and don't think it has any real effect on the fanbase.

No, I don't enjoy the pot stiring. I just listen, pick out the bits I find enjoyable and move on. I guess I don't feal the need for the hystronics everytime someone says something I don't agree with. If Willie says something totally wild I discard it. It's pretty simple really. I could care less if the next guy isn't smart enough to either figure out that it's Willie being Willie or just ignore it. Nor am I nieve enough to think that if 700 and Marty B would just be nice guys people would love the Reds.

I think people mistakenly think that the fans that frequent RZ represent the majority of casual fans. Fact is, we represent the 1% of "uber baseball fans" for lack of a better term. The overwhelming majority of baseball fans (and any sports fans really) just don't have the interest level we do. They follow the standings, go to a number of games, can can converse about the sport on a cursery level. But face it, that's where it ends for the vast majority of fans. (none of which means that we have the market on some secret wisdom, or someone who is a casual fan is a dolt...it's just a different interest level, really).

Casual fans don't pour over stats, scour the net for every last baseball article we can find, don't spend hours thinking and discussing baseball, and generally wrap themselves up in the sport. If they did, they wouldn't be causal fans would they?

WLW is aimed at the casual fans. That doesn't excuse idioic comments (such as the Dunn was drunk comments). But it should supprise no one that their programming is aimed at casual fans and will often leave much to be desired if you thirst for some solid, indepth baseball discussion. Expecting it to be something more is pointless.

Yachtzee
09-09-2007, 09:57 PM
No, I don't enjoy the pot stiring. I just listen, pick out the bits I find enjoyable and move on. I guess I don't feal the need for the hystronics everytime someone says something I don't agree with. If Willie says something totally wild I discard it. It's pretty simple really. I could care less if the next guy isn't smart enough to either figure out that it's Willie being Willie or just ignore it.

I think people mistakenly think that the fans that frequent RZ represent the ideals of the casual fan. Fact is, we represent the 1% of "uber baseball fans" for lack of a better term. The overwhelming majority of baseball fans (and any sports fans really) just don't have the interest level we do. They follow the standings, go to a number of games, can can converse about the sport on a cursery level. But face it, that's where it ends for the vast majority of fans. (none of which means that we have the market on some secret wisdom, or someone who is a casual fan is a dolt...it's just a different interest level, really).

Casual fans don't pour over stats, scour the net for every last baseball article we can find, don't spend hours thinking and discussing baseball, and generally wrap themselves up in the sport. If they did, they wouldn't be causal fans would they?

WLW is aimed at the casual fans. That doesn't excuse idioic comments (such as the Dunn was drunk comments). But it should supprise no one that their programming is aimed at casual fans and will often leave much to be desired if you thirst for some solid, indepth baseball discussion. Expecting it to be something more is pointless.

I don't think it's aimed at casual fans. Casual fans hear "the Reds stink" and turn off the radio. They've got other entertainment options. WLW's shows are target for guys 18-30. They're trying to do the edgy thing like Stern and Jim Rome do, but they're doing it with lesser talents.