I answered your question Jim, how about answering my question about reporters making sure they get the facts.

 

Sorry, I thought I was clear that in hindsight it was an error, but that I understand why he made the mistake. When you apply the "reasonable man" standard to it, it's a mistake anyone could make.

Sorry, I thought I was clear that in hindsight it was an error, but that I understand why he made the mistake. When you apply the "reasonable man" standard to it, it's a mistake anyone could make.

 

Making a reasonable assumption and PRINTING a reasonable assumption are completely different. You know that.

This article and the others by the same writer, are objective and factual.

 

Some UK fans dont llke any truth and objectivity in reporting about the Wildcats.

 

The fake press had passes to the fake game. The real games I surely hope UK will clean that up when the season begins.

 

Stop wasting time on these threads and finds some real news.

 

Looks like some of the fake press will be reporting live at the fake exhibition tomorrow night, as well :ylsuper:

 

By the way, Tipton has now admitted to two pieces of misinformation in the last three days.

WHen I read this I didn't sense the negativity. But, when reading anything it is easy to assume a certain tone with a writer, especially when their is a certain bias. I think there are a lot of people, for whatever reason, doesn't like Tiptons's writing and when he writes a new column, people draw a tone from his writing. I am not saying the negativity is never/always there, but when it is a shade of gray, the haters will pick it apart. JMO

WHen I read this I didn't sense the negativity. But, when reading anything it is easy to assume a certain tone with a writer, especially when their is a certain bias. I think there are a lot of people, for whatever reason, doesn't like Tiptons's writing and when he writes a new column, people draw a tone from his writing. I am not saying the negativity is never/always there, but when it is a shade of gray, the haters will pick it apart. JMO

 

I admitted that I may have been a little over the top in sensing the negativity, but, when the lies started coming out - that changed everything.

This UK fan doesn't care what UCLA may or may not have done during that dominating run...there are way more than 12-15 good players on any given year...for UCLA to accomplish what they did...I don't remember the exact numbers, but I'm thinking 9 consecutive and 10 of 11 years, and perhaps 11 of 13 or something...also, 88 consecutive wins. Incredible run. I think that would be hard to match if you could handpick the guys you wanted for two decades. JMO

 

That run will never be duplicated.

 

Actually UCLA won 7 straight titles (1967-73) and 10 out of 12 years. (1964-1975)

 

The 88 game win streak was from '71 to '74. That, along with the consecutive titles will likely never be matched again. Ever.

 

In those days there were 15 scholarships per team, no Freshmen played, and everyone stayed all 4 years. Teams (not just UCLA) could stockpile talent. In '73 the NBA drafted Swen Nater who never started a game at UCLA but was Walton's backup. He had an unspectacular but contributing career.

I admitted that I may have been a little over the top in sensing the negativity, but, when the lies started coming out - that changed everything.

Fair enough. I don't know the man at all. In your opinion, is he planting seeds here and there on purpose to cause a ruckous?

Fair enough. I don't know the man at all. In your opinion, is he planting seeds here and there on purpose to cause a ruckous?

 

My opinion is that he works overtime to slip negative angles into his articles that will stir the pot a little.

Tipton is a hasbeen. The Lex Herald Leader is a hasbeen. Its great to watch them both sink together. The ownership and editor(s) decided that taking a position against 2 very important issues (UK Basketball & Coal) for all Kentuckians, would sell papers but it has done just the opposite. I bet the next editor (and it wont be long) may try a novel approach and actually support 2 very important issues near and dear to Kentuckians and subsequently sell more papers and online advertising.

Tipton is a joke...

OK then, riddle me this: If you were talking to some 21-year-old kid, any random kid, and he or she said they got a new car, wouldn't you assume they'd be driving it home that night? I think you and any other reasonable person would, and you're lying if you say you wouldn't.

 

Well, I honestly don't think I would care, which is precisely the point.

 

What gets me about this is that you pretend to be so objective, when in reality, you're so biased it's silly. I commended Tipton for writing the piece on John Wall, because it was a huge story. To not report on that would make him appear to be a UK homer.

 

But this is an instance where Tipton has been exposed, yet you keep defending him. And it's not just this instance in which Mrs. Patterson called him out. She accused him of misquoting her in the past.

 

The truth of the matter is that many of the accusations leveled at Tipton now have substantial credibility.

Well, I honestly don't think I would care, which is precisely the point.

 

What gets me about this is that you pretend to be so objective, when in reality, you're so biased it's silly. I commended Tipton for writing the piece on John Wall, because it was a huge story. To not report on that would make him appear to be a UK homer.

 

But this is an instance where Tipton has been exposed, yet you keep defending him. And it's not just this instance in which Mrs. Patterson called him out. She accused him of misquoting her in the past.

 

The truth of the matter is that many of the accusations leveled at Tipton now have substantial credibility.

 

Pretty weak dodge, IMO.

 

And I'm not defending him per se, now that it is much clearer what has happened with this issue. I've just said I can see how it might have happened non-maliciously, which is incomprehensible to you guys, apparently.

Pretty weak dodge, IMO.

 

Funny. I'd summarize your entire argument in the same way.

Funny. I'd summarize your entire argument in the same way.

 

That's because you're only willing to see it from the fan's point of view.

That's because you're only willing to see it from the fan's point of view.

 

And you only see it from the journalist homer point of view.