by Stop Mike Lupica on September 25 at 2:34PM
Two comments from readers related to the on-going sexual harassment lawsuit got me thinking. One is from Aone:
"Am I the only one that thinks this whole case is nothing more than a smear campaign again Isiah and the Knicks???"
Nope. I mean, to be fair, if you mean is the lawsuit a smear campaign... yes and no. Obviously it's a campaign by Anucha Sanders to get compensation for what she is claiming is inappropriate and illegal treatment. That second aspect is very important. Anyway, the best way for her to get that money is to smear the Knicks. That's fine, and that's part of the game. That's how the lawsuit will be won or loss. As I've said before, Dolan should have settled with her to prevent all of this from coming out. The fact that he didn't really speaks to the volume of how much he either hated Anucha, or wants to win this case.
It's been suggested elsewhere, by writers who actually know Dolan a bit, that he feels like winning this case would be vindicative. It would "vindicate" the Knicks organization. That line of thinking is... foolish. The newspapers won't ever cut you slack, James. You know that. Neither will the fans, unless the team is winning. Team wins, no one cares, and they'll root and support the team, and the newspaper smear campaign will either shut up or become irrelevant. Winning the trial... not so much. Fans aren't "rooting" for the Knicks on this one. It's not a game.
Now, back to Aone's question... if the question is "Is this a smear campaign by the newspapers", all I have to do is point to not one, but two articles today.
First, let's start with this NY Post article by Andrea Peyser. Let's start with the various examples lack of journalistic integrity:
She opens up with this jem:
"Intern-On-Wheels Kathleen Decker slunk up to the witness stand in a black pantsuit so tight, I hoped and feared her ample bottom might burst her trousers."
This article serves as nothing more than straight up mean cattiness, ripping a young woman for what crime, exactly? For being "easy" around a celebrity? Please, like this "writer" for the Post wouldn't spread her legs if Brad Pitt came around honking, or even a C-list celebrity like Paul Giamatti.
See that there? That was rebuttal to that Ms. Peyser's piece, using the same high-standards of integrity Ms. Peyser employs in her writing.
Now, The Daily News has ugly mean girls, too! Let's read Jane Ridley, whom the Greek Professor wrote me about this way: "i read your blog commentary on the daily news coverage of marbury's butterpecanchocalatedeluxe limo antics, but the gremlin-esque andrea peyser in the post has been far worse".
True, but the Post is a joke to begin with. The Daily News is just slippery-slide there slower. Jane is much nicer to the intern that the "gremlin-esque" Post writer was... she calls her "bubbly". Of course, she also writes "
Leave a comment
"Am I the only one that thinks this whole case is nothing more than a smear campaign again Isiah and the Knicks???"
Nope. I mean, to be fair, if you mean is the lawsuit a smear campaign... yes and no. Obviously it's a campaign by Anucha Sanders to get compensation for what she is claiming is inappropriate and illegal treatment. That second aspect is very important. Anyway, the best way for her to get that money is to smear the Knicks. That's fine, and that's part of the game. That's how the lawsuit will be won or loss. As I've said before, Dolan should have settled with her to prevent all of this from coming out. The fact that he didn't really speaks to the volume of how much he either hated Anucha, or wants to win this case.
It's been suggested elsewhere, by writers who actually know Dolan a bit, that he feels like winning this case would be vindicative. It would "vindicate" the Knicks organization. That line of thinking is... foolish. The newspapers won't ever cut you slack, James. You know that. Neither will the fans, unless the team is winning. Team wins, no one cares, and they'll root and support the team, and the newspaper smear campaign will either shut up or become irrelevant. Winning the trial... not so much. Fans aren't "rooting" for the Knicks on this one. It's not a game.
Now, back to Aone's question... if the question is "Is this a smear campaign by the newspapers", all I have to do is point to not one, but two articles today.
First, let's start with this NY Post article by Andrea Peyser. Let's start with the various examples lack of journalistic integrity:
She opens up with this jem:
"Intern-On-Wheels Kathleen Decker slunk up to the witness stand in a black pantsuit so tight, I hoped and feared her ample bottom might burst her trousers."
The young lady who made her indelible mark on her back - or her knees - in basketball star Stephon Marbury's truck testified in a loud voice, sorely lacking in diction and grammar, that she currently works making "dreams come true" for poor kids.
But it was clear that the dreams Kathleen is qualified to fulfill involve grown men and stationary cars.
Smear campaign? I have yet to read anything resembling an unbias opinion yet. She's shown within the first three paragraph where she stands... she's apparently jealous that someone is getting ass. It's certainly not her... one look at Andrea's photo shows that she's fugly.This article serves as nothing more than straight up mean cattiness, ripping a young woman for what crime, exactly? For being "easy" around a celebrity? Please, like this "writer" for the Post wouldn't spread her legs if Brad Pitt came around honking, or even a C-list celebrity like Paul Giamatti.
See that there? That was rebuttal to that Ms. Peyser's piece, using the same high-standards of integrity Ms. Peyser employs in her writing.
Now, The Daily News has ugly mean girls, too! Let's read Jane Ridley, whom the Greek Professor wrote me about this way: "i read your blog commentary on the daily news coverage of marbury's butterpecanchocalatedeluxe limo antics, but the gremlin-esque andrea peyser in the post has been far worse".
True, but the Post is a joke to begin with. The Daily News is just slippery-slide there slower. Jane is much nicer to the intern that the "gremlin-esque" Post writer was... she calls her "bubbly". Of course, she also writes "
Not that we ever believed she was the sharpest knife in
the drawer". But that's coming from someone who can accurately be described, again just from her photo, as "not the best looking troll lurking under the bridge". Still, she at least directs most of her anger towards Marbury ("the married Neanderthal with a relatively clear head.") and his cousin Hassan Gonsalves ("deadbeat cousin").
Never the less, as bad as the smear campaign is, it's even funnier when these fugly gals try to push a fact into their rip jobs, and do so very poorly. Like this one, from the end of Ridley's piece:
Seriously, if I was a woman with an interest in writing about sports for the MSM, I would be straight up angered by these two. They're not only embarrassing to women (portraying them as stereotypes unable to view women and men interacting with any kind of objectivity), but a hindrance to women writing about sports.
******
The second comment I wanted to share with ya'll is from "Tom":
Just wanted to give you some insider insight I was given this morning, which isn't really all that interesting, but whatever... My cousin works at MSG for one of the other teams that plays there (for anonymity's sake, I wont specify whether it's the Liberty or the Rangers), and he's said he's had to deal with Anucha in the past, and she was one of those people who always made things difficult for the other person. Like, even the simplest of interactions would be met with confrontation. I'm sure you know the type. You probably work with someone like that. I know I do... He also said Isiah has a tendency to rub people the wrong way. Everyone except Dolan, apparently, who can't get enough of Isiah.
That's about par for the course from what I've read. Marc Berman touched on his feelings towards Anucha, and that she was both "unprofessional" and "ambitious". Others who have written about her, or testified during the case (even on her behalf) have hinted that she was tough to deal with, someone who wanted to get her way.
That is also true for Isiah - people have written about how hard he can be to deal with, and how he has to get his way, from as far back as his CBA ownership days.
In other words, this battle, this trial, should be no surprise to Dolan. He had to know this work relationship would end badly. He should have cover his ass more, especially with regards to the firing. The sexual harassment charge is a joke at this point... the judge has even comment on it, calling the plaintiff's case "weak". There seems to be no pattern of discrimination against her, even from her testimony. Isiah Thomas is chilling.
But the firing is the key point of the trial now. And, to no one's surprise, it's Dolan who is in hot water for making a poor decision.
That sums up the Knicks in a nutshell - Isiah gets hammered by the media for stuff that isn't even his fault (he'll get vindicated in the end, as he kinda has in the Larry Brown fiasco, and possibly in the Eddy Curry trade fiasco). Marbury gets portrayed as everything from a moron down, but he's role in the result of the trial is going to be pretty minor. Same with the Knicks at this point - his job is minor now, just get the ball to the big men. And Dolan - he just always seems to strike people badly, and always seems to make or do the wrong decision.
Never the less, as bad as the smear campaign is, it's even funnier when these fugly gals try to push a fact into their rip jobs, and do so very poorly. Like this one, from the end of Ridley's piece:
"Whether it was fair of them to put her in this position in the first place didn't seem to cross their minds."
She's referring to the Garden putting the Intern into the trial. Yeah, except it wasn't the Garden that brought her into this... it was your hero, Anucha Sanders, who first mentioned her, first brought her into the trial, so to get some salacious coverage of the trial in media.Seriously, if I was a woman with an interest in writing about sports for the MSM, I would be straight up angered by these two. They're not only embarrassing to women (portraying them as stereotypes unable to view women and men interacting with any kind of objectivity), but a hindrance to women writing about sports.
******
The second comment I wanted to share with ya'll is from "Tom":
Just wanted to give you some insider insight I was given this morning, which isn't really all that interesting, but whatever... My cousin works at MSG for one of the other teams that plays there (for anonymity's sake, I wont specify whether it's the Liberty or the Rangers), and he's said he's had to deal with Anucha in the past, and she was one of those people who always made things difficult for the other person. Like, even the simplest of interactions would be met with confrontation. I'm sure you know the type. You probably work with someone like that. I know I do... He also said Isiah has a tendency to rub people the wrong way. Everyone except Dolan, apparently, who can't get enough of Isiah.
That's about par for the course from what I've read. Marc Berman touched on his feelings towards Anucha, and that she was both "unprofessional" and "ambitious". Others who have written about her, or testified during the case (even on her behalf) have hinted that she was tough to deal with, someone who wanted to get her way.
That is also true for Isiah - people have written about how hard he can be to deal with, and how he has to get his way, from as far back as his CBA ownership days.
In other words, this battle, this trial, should be no surprise to Dolan. He had to know this work relationship would end badly. He should have cover his ass more, especially with regards to the firing. The sexual harassment charge is a joke at this point... the judge has even comment on it, calling the plaintiff's case "weak". There seems to be no pattern of discrimination against her, even from her testimony. Isiah Thomas is chilling.
But the firing is the key point of the trial now. And, to no one's surprise, it's Dolan who is in hot water for making a poor decision.
That sums up the Knicks in a nutshell - Isiah gets hammered by the media for stuff that isn't even his fault (he'll get vindicated in the end, as he kinda has in the Larry Brown fiasco, and possibly in the Eddy Curry trade fiasco). Marbury gets portrayed as everything from a moron down, but he's role in the result of the trial is going to be pretty minor. Same with the Knicks at this point - his job is minor now, just get the ball to the big men. And Dolan - he just always seems to strike people badly, and always seems to make or do the wrong decision.
Leave a comment
|
It sounds like Anucha is basically the "Super Head" of this organization.
Thrown to the side, so she has to tell all.