The Washington Post may have been scooped on the revelation of one of its most important sources ever, but the Post still can own the Deep Throat story that has dominated journalism circles for a few days. (Aside: This story is getting a bit overplayed mainly, I think, because the journalists making decisions think this is a bigger story than it really is, especially to the younger folks.)
The Post has a fantastic writer in Hank Stuever, whose pieces in the Style section often have me rolling. Stuever wrote a piece about the unmasking of Deep Throat, and it's worth a look. If you read the blog of one of my good pals, Uniongrrl's Cyphering, and her recent post about Deep Throat and his mystique and allure, you'll like the Stuever piece.
The Poynter Institute's Chip Scanlan, for his regular column, wrote about Stuever's DT piece and interviewed Stuever.
By the way, check out a bit more from Stuever, in his collected work, "Off Ramp: Adventures of Heartache in the American Elsewhere," which is available in paperback from Picador this summer.
-- Wenatchee, Wash.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
Sorry Loganite, this comment has nothing to do with your blog, but I decided to post it anyway because it is the only way I know to reach Drpezz.
Drpezz, I recently read your letter in the Apple Leaf regarding the cheerleaders. Your comparison of the cheer squad to the sports teams of WHS demean the school's athletes. You say the squad placed second in state, and were the highest-placing WHS team. However, you failed to mention several key facts regarding the "state tournament."
1. There was no qualification required for state; the team was allowed to participate simply by signing up. (WHS sports teams must qualify to participate in state through district and sometimes regional competitions).
2. There were only five other squads at the tournament. (There are 11 teams in the Big Nine alone, 25 in the region, and many more at state).
Second out of six is good, but to place it on the same level as a second place finish for a sports team is ridiculous. In the Big Nine Conference alone, there are ten other teams. Regional competitions, which require qualification through the district tournament, incorporate the 14-team Greater Spokane League. Only when a team has finished among the top few out of the 25 teams in the region do they even have the opportunity to compete at state.
I don't know the exact number of teams from the west side of the mountains, but the state tournament significantly increases the total number of teams. More teams means more competition for a strong finish, such as second.
Suppose there are sixty total 4a schools in the state. Proportionally, a team which finishes 20th out of 60 in the state has placed as well as your beloved cheer squad.
You mention their eleven-month practice schedule as if it were above and beyond the schedule of a typical athlete. Dedicated atheletes in other sports have to train for their sports year-round in order to be competitive. Regulations prevent them from practicing formally as teams during this time, but practice certainly does take place.
By elevating the cheer squad above the other sports teams based on a second place finish in a tournament of six total teams, you "...seem to be quite insulting to a dedicated group of young women [and men]." You criticized the Apple Leaf because, "...the whole story is not available, therefore not entirely accurate." You, Drpezz, didn't make the whole story of the "state tournament" available. Therefore, the story of their second place finish at state and status as the highest-placing WHS team were not entirely accurate either.
Don't want to show your name after a post like that eh?
I'd love to, but it wasn't worth making an account for one post (two now).
I realize its not the cheer squad's fault that there isn't much competition. They did well to place second. However, the fact that such a lack of competition exists makes the comparison to other teams totally irrational.
Firstly, Anonymous, I did not have to hide in anonymity when I composed my message. Not the Guy Above Me has the right idea for you, too. I feel strongly enough to sign my name to my words.
Secondly, the intent of the letter is not to place the Cheer Squad "above the other sports teams" except to state that they outperformed their competition in the only venue available to them. Many teams do not even compete in the state tournament because they will not fair well. In all of the divisions at the tournament, I believe only a few scored higher than WHS in total. You neglected to mention the differing ways the divisions exist as well. Shame on you. Their divisions are more restricted and defined than most other sports.
Thirdly, my letter was to highlight the lack of reporting on the hard work and excellence of the program, Anonymous. Despite the dedication and perserverance of the squad and because the cheerleaders remain easy targets, the article only reinforces stereotypes. No preconceived perception is challenged or dismissed regarding Cheer in the Apple Leaf this year. The Apple Leaf is an award winning paper, but the staff needs to do a better job of recognizing the less visible athletes and sports in a positive light. As I said before, cheerleaders are easy targets and few have the courage to become one.
Fourthly, you seem to have an issue with how the cheer tournament is constructed. That is out of their control. They can only practice, perform, and await the result. All sports and activities (because cheer is not considered a sport in Washington, though its participants often are better conditioned than those on sports teams) when they first begin must begin at a level of lower participation until they grow. This is true of cheer in that its participation is growing each year.
Is the WHS football championship in the early 1970s worth less than those won by other schools today? Schools today compete against more squads, but I would not denegrate the memory of those teams simply because of the number of competitors. They were the best of those teams at that time--end of story.
Lastly, you obviously know me. Why would you contact me through someone else's site? Confront me in person or at least sign your name to your opinion; otherwise, you appear cowardly or too afraid of reprisal to own up to your words. Besides, I have my own blog. I simply have not spread the address about. Substitute drpezz for loganite in the address and you'll find it.
By the way, I love your Republican-esque voter counting proportionality style argument. Bridges threw that one back at the Reps too. I won't get into that one any more than that.
Also, which teams practice together for 11 months out of the year, formally or informally? I know this doesn't happen as a team because I remember the gym and weight rooms being opened one summer for all teams to work out and train together. Four showed up, athletes not teams. While this may be improving for some teams, your argument here falls flat. Individuals can be preparing for their sports year round, but very few do it in a disciplined and rigorous fashion (individual competitors seem to do this more effectively).
Again, you have not refuted the crux of my displeasure with the Apple Leaf. You only attack the tournament style and imply that cheerleaders are not athletic, or as athletic as those on other sports teams. You would find yourself sorely mistaken here. I actually thought this way until I got to know the program and the athletes; then my views completely changed. But then again, most people don't take the time, preferring to relax in the glow of preconceived misconception.
Not the Guy Above Me,
You're my hero. If only I knew who you were...
"Secondly, the intent of the letter is not to place the Cheer Squad "above the other sports teams" except to state that they outperformed their competition in the only venue available to them."
Notice my 10:57 post: "I realize its not the cheer squad's fault that there isn't much competition. They did well to place second." I understand that they did well given the venue. My point is that the venue is tiny compared to that of other sports. Therefore, a comparison is inaccurate.
"You neglected to mention the differing ways the divisions exist as well. Shame on you. Their divisions are more restricted and defined than most other sports."
It doesn't matter how their divisions are structured. The fact is that they competed against only five other squads for the title. Fewer teams=less competition=much better chance of winning.
"The intent of the letter is not to place the Cheer Squad "above the other sports teams" except to state that they outperformed their competition in the only venue available to them."
You placed them on a level above the other teams when you stated that they were the highest-placing WHS team so far.
"Again, you have not refuted the crux of my displeasure with the Apple Leaf."
My intention was not to defend the Apple Leaf. My sole intention was to refute your assumption that the cheer program is one of the school's elite programs simply because they finished second in a state tournament. Good for them. They did the best they could with what they had. I'm sure they worked hard for it. But don't compare it to other sports; it simply isn't fair to compare where the teams placed in state when there are so many more teams in sports.
"You only attack the tournament style and imply that cheerleaders are not athletic, or as athletic as those on other sports teams."
Nowhere in my comment did I imply that cheerleaders are not athletic. I have nothing against cheerleading or the participants, and I understand that they devote a significant amount of time to practice. Once again, the whole point of my argument was to refute the notion that the second place finish in state can be compared to the finishes of other sports teams in state competition. The structure is so drastically different.
Let's take boys swimming, for example. The team placed 15th at state. The cheer squad placed second. You're saying that the lower number automatically indicates a stronger program. I'm saying that the comparison cannot be made simply because the boys swim team competes with so many more teams.
The cheer squad could have performed horribly, finished dead last, and they would have placed sixth. With a sixth place finish, they still would have been the second highest-placing team at the time you wrote your letter. Using the place earned by the squad as the sole reference when making a comparison to other sports is misleading. End of story.
You make it sound as if a second place finish out of six is just as impressive as a second place finish out of 1000.
Perhaps proportion wasn't the right word for my first entry, since it gave you the chance to make a political reference instead of actually countering the point (I am a democrat, by the way). How about percentile, such as on a standardized test? The cheerleaders finished in the 80th percentile--an admirable performance. However, the swimmers and bowlers finished at least that high in comparison to all the other teams in the state, yet I never saw you calling for an article describing the strength of those programs.
When one is personally connected to a particular program, he or she naturally becomes more appreciative of the time, effort, and skills required for success. I understand that cheer takes lots of time, skill, and effort. However, you don't seem to understand the dedication of many other athletes to their sports, and their year-round preparations. Perhaps you, Drpezz, should get to know the tennis player who plays everyday during the summer, travels to tournaments around the state, and plays several times a week during the school year. Or the swimmer who wakes up at 4:00 a.m. during the week for early morning workouts for a team outside the school. Or the football player who goes to the gym (note: there are facilities other than the high school weight room used regularly by high school athletes) several times a week, year round. Or the baseball player who plays legion ball daily during the summer, then receives private hitting or pitching instruction during the winter. The point is that cheerleaders are no more dedicated to their sport than many other athletes are to theirs.
And about this whole name thing...I could pick a completely random name, and you still wouldn't know who I really am. Would it truly help if, instead of "anonymous," it said, "Johnson," or "Bob," or "Mr. Pibb?"
Anonymous (the still too lazy to get an online name or sign your real name),
The WHS Cheer team could be the second best on the entire west coast, but we'll never know because they don't have competitions set up to allow them to show this. They, like dance teams and other activities, have to perform in the venue available.
To say they only competed against six teams is true to an extent. They performed in the most difficult forum at the tournament because they have a high enough number of males to do so. Other schools either choose not to enter and be embarrassed or simply cannot field a team in their highly specialized division. You are stuck on the six teams who ENTERED the tournament. You follow that up with the squad not having competition. How ignorant! That does not mean that more squads don't exist in the division or have attended other competitions. One team WHS came in second to at another tournament is a nationally recognized program, touted as the best in the west. WHS Cheer was, at the time of the article, the highest placed team at WHS.
I am not putting down other athletes whatsoever. We have a few very dedicated athletes; however, most of your examples again prove my point: they are individuals (swimmers, tennis players, and baseball primarily are individual efforts combined towards a team score).
For you to say that cheer "is not one of the school's elite programs" is obviously biased and shortsighted. They are recognized around the state as a team of the highest calibur. Just because you don't does not make it untrue. Other teams and coaches at camps want to work with WHS because of their reputation for and performances of excellence. These athletes know their sport and teach others.
As a former coach and athlete myself, I have a very intimate idea of how dedicated (or not) athletes are when it comes to their sports. For you to assume otherwise is ignorance. If you knew me, then you would know this. I at no point said cheerleaders were more dedicated than other athletes, but I did point out that they work as a team for almost an entire year. Note: team is the key word. This dedication is unrewarded and unrecognized. The gym opening reference was for the athletes of teams to work as a team; the athletes chose not to do so. I also stated that this is improving but nowhere where it needs to be.
I will not respond any more to your obviously biased opinion (I recognize mine) about the cheer program. You are stuck on the tournament format that they have no control over. You put them down without being a part of it or having full knoweldge; you add to the idea of the squad being easy targets. Come talk to me in person, sign your name, or continue to hide.
"For you to say that cheer "is not one of the school's elite programs" is obviously biased and shortsighted."
I never said that they weren't one of the school's elite programs. I said that you can't assume that they are based on their finish in such a small tournament, and you can't make the comparison to sports. Clearly, you didn't actually read what I wrote. My exact words were, " My sole intention was to refute your assumption that the cheer program is one of the school's elite programs simply because they finished second in a state tournament." Once again, you have misled anyone else reading these arguments by misrepresenting my argument and putting words in my mouth. Every time I quoted you, I copied and pasted to avoid skewing your words. I'd appreciate it if you'd do the same.
"I will not respond any more to your obviously biased opinion (I recognize mine) about the cheer program."
I have no connection to the cheer programs or to any WHS sports, nor do I have any family members or close friends strongly involved in either. If my opinion is "obviously biased," then there is no such thing as an unbiased opinion. This is the way I see it as an outsider.
"You put them down without being a part of it or having full knoweldge."
For the last time, I didn't put the cheerleaders down. Once again, you misrepresent my opinion for your benefit. To quote myself:
"I realize its not the cheer squad's fault that there isn't much competition. They did well to place second."
"I understand that they did well given the venue."
"They did the best they could with what they had. I'm sure they worked hard for it."
"The cheerleaders finished in the 80th percentile--an admirable performance."
"I understand that cheer takes lots of time, skill, and effort."
My comments were never meant to be attacks on the cheerleaders, the program, or even the tournament itself. My sole intention was to refute the notion that the cheer program is a stronger program than other sports simply because they finished second. I understand that the squad works hard, that they are dedicated, and that they have performed admirably. But don't try to compare their second place finish at state with other sports, because it simply isn't fair or accurate.
By the way, you'll notice I used a name. Are you satisfied? Does it honestly make any difference?
You did not read Pezz's post carefully Pibb. I can see your bias in the words you use.
I don't exactly see cheerleeders being equal with sports but they did get 2nd at state. You dont seem to care. Your putting that down the way you talk.
"there isn't much competition" shows bias. Pezz showed you what's up but you didnt hear him. I know Pezz and he knows this stuff real good. He knows about how sports and cheerleeder teams work. Those cheerleeders are good. I saw them and they kicked butt. They were the best in the all the big 9 and if they went to state thats cool.
Nicely done, Anonymous (argh).
There is a bias in the language. He won't change his mind, and I stand by my original letter. Though he is at an advantage; I signed mine.
Oops. This got left off.
Anonymous, get a screen name.
"You did not read Pezz's post carefully Pibb."
Apparently, you didn't read mine too carefully either. Try reading the last three paragraphs of the 12:44 to see exactly what I said about cheerleaders. How was that putting them down?
I assure you I read drpezz's posts very carefully. If you took the time to look, I quoted him (accurately, I might add) several times in my own entries before countering his points. How could I have countered without reading first?
"I...they did get 2nd at state. You dont seem to care."
Do you care that boys swimming got 15th, or that bowling got 4th, or wrestling 16th? If cheerleading deserves extra attention for their second place finish, then these programs do as well. Funny, drpezz doesn't seem too upset about those...
""there isn't much competition" shows bias."
In what way? It's a fact. There were only six teams; relative to the number of teams involved in the state tournament for other sports, that's not much competition. Where's the bias?
Drpezz, just because my opinion differs from yours shouldn't mean its automatically dismissed as biased and, therefore, worthless. I already told you I have no connections and absolutely nothing against cheerleaders or the activity itself, so the bias argument holds no water.
"He won't change his mind..."
You make that sound like a bad thing. You won't change your mind either. If I'm close-minded on this issue, then so are you.
Drpezz, do you recall the article in the Wenatchee World from December about the cheer program? It described the squad in a positive fashion, and made members of the community aware of their dedication and athleticism. What other team (besides football, with the coaching change) has received coverage like that this year? I don't recall any. Even if they aren't in the Apple Leaf enough, the cheerleaders (and their coach)have attracted positive attention this year for their hard work and dedication.
Help me to understand the point of this argument? It seems to serve no purpose. As DrPezz's letter was already published, there seems to be no reason for this argument. Unless you like arguing that is.
Post a Comment