12/21/24
October 18, 2003
It's a blitz!: Gregg Easterbrook, writer of the Tuesday Morning Quarterback columns on ESPN's Page 2, has apparently been fired, apparently for some odd comments he wrote that imply some odd views on Jews in a non-ESPN column recently. This has been going around the left-side of the Blogosphere over the last few days, with speculation now being that since ESPN and Miramax are both Disney-owned companies, Easterbrook was actually criticizing his bosses.
Here's the column in question, and Easterbrook's apology/explanation. At first I hated Easterbrook's columns, but lately I've enjoyed his style and looked forward to reading his column every week. Nobody else gave such in-depth analysis and exposed the bad logic of some coaching decisions like he did. You're absolutely right, Mike McD - he shared a deep understanding of the game with his readers. I wanted to use some examples, but good luck trying to find archives of his column on ESPN's site. Try searching for "easterbrook" using the ESPN.com search function. I tried several other words and got search results, but "easterbrook" is apparently now a taboo word. What, is he blacklisted now? This kind of political crap exposes the bad side of the ESPN/ABC/Disney company's near-monopoly on sports info. Thank God for independent, noncommercial sources of information (like SportsFilter). Hey Easterbrook - write a column for this site once in a while. The pay sucks, but we won't pretend you don't exist if you say something pollitically incorrect.
posted by dusted at 05:35 PM on October 18, 2003
No problema, dusted. There's always Google cache and that should have a big chunk, if not all, of the articles. Click the "Cached" link in each result for the articles.
posted by worldcup2002 at 05:51 PM on October 18, 2003
Well, you could probably craft a better search (I used "TMQ ESPN Easterbrook") than I did and get better results. Good luck!
posted by worldcup2002 at 05:56 PM on October 18, 2003
I've been a big fan of Easterbrook's NFL writing, but I'm having trouble finding sympathy for him after that indefensible rant calling Michael Eisner a Jew who worships money "above all else, by promoting for profit the adulation of violence" and then adding this insult in his alleged apology: "I'm ready to defend all the thoughts in that paragraph." Michael Eisner is his boss. Even if the sentiment wasn't ugly as hell, can anyone imagine saying something like that about their boss and remaining employed?
posted by rcade at 06:21 PM on October 18, 2003
Even if the sentiment wasn't ugly as hell, can anyone imagine saying something like that about their boss and remaining employed? Normally no, but journalism has a different set of rules.
posted by mick at 10:22 PM on October 18, 2003
At first I hated Easterbrook's columns, but lately I've enjoyed his style and looked forward to reading his column every week. Nobody else gave such in-depth analysis and exposed the bad logic of some coaching decisions like he did. You're absolutely right, Mike McD - he shared a deep understanding of the game with his readers. I thought that too at first, until I realized that he's full of lame, self-serving logic, which is amusing the first time you see it, but it is his only gag.
posted by chmurray at 10:32 PM on October 18, 2003
At first I hated Easterbrook's columns, but lately I've enjoyed his style and looked forward to reading his column every week. I feel/felt the same, though I still prefer Peter King's MMQB at SI.com for behind-the-scenes NFL insight (I do skip over his Montclair HS reports). Sometimes Easterbrook's stuff seemed too look-at-how-smart-I-am, but it *was* smarter than others, so maybe he couldn't help it. I can understand how ESPN has no archived link to any Easterbrook stuff, but I think it's weird and chicken-shite to not even have an explanation. Anyone see one anywhere from ESPN/Disney?
posted by msacheson at 12:09 AM on October 19, 2003
Normally no, but journalism has a different set of rules. Not really, thought it's nice to think so. First of all, it's not exactly as if ESPN's writers are unionized. So he's basically an at-will employee. Secondly, I could see someone getting away with saying that you disagree with a move or two made by your superiors -- immediate or further up the chain -- but even that isn't safe harbor in a lot of places. It's another issue to state that your bosses are slime, which is what Easterbrook basically did, while also throwing their religion and culture into the mix. Nice job, TMQ. (It's why it's nice to have a good editor or producer. Two good heads to save one ass. There are ways to make the same point and not have to look for another writing gig.) Finally, I thought that his apology was pretty weak. Perhaps what struck me most was the implication that Weinstein had nothing to do with "Kill Bill". Maybe things have changed, but my impression is that outside of Ben and Matt, there's no one Weinstein dotes on more than Kill Bill director Quentin Tarantino. Easterbrook probably knew this when he made his blog entry, and he also knew that Eisner probably had more than a passing interest in that movie's development as well.
posted by jackhererra at 10:03 AM on October 19, 2003
FWIW, my best friend, a huge movie and Tarantino fan, saw Kill Bill yesterday and said it isn't worth the price of admission unless you make it part of an 'informal' double feature.
posted by billsaysthis at 02:09 PM on October 19, 2003
Easterbrook doesn't like Pulp Fiction??
posted by cg1001a at 05:04 PM on October 19, 2003
I thought that too at first, until I realized that he's full of lame, self-serving logic, which is amusing the first time you see it, but it is his only gag. Um, what columnist doesn't employ self-serving logic time after time? This is just an inflated way of saying you don't like his columns. I've heard it said that if you have a microphone put in front of you for your opinions, if you talk long enough you're going to eventually get into trouble. This may be the first notable time that a blog had the same result.
posted by GoDizzGo at 08:17 PM on October 19, 2003
Easterbrook was a fantastic member of the ESPN writing team - TMQ was damn funny and insightful - but damn if that wasn't a piss poor article with some shoddy and questionable inferences. I've never heard him sound so ill-informed and poorly mannered (This is the guy who refuses to call the 'Skins anything but the Potmac Drainage Basin Indiginous Persons). The 'money worshipping Jew' angle is nothing short of a slanderous assault. But he'll find other work. He's too good not too. And he's dead wrong about Tarantino, but that's another story.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 08:34 AM on October 20, 2003
I've heard it said that if you have a microphone put in front of you for your opinions, if you talk long enough you're going to eventually get into trouble. That's not really fair to columnists and commentators who manage to be brilliant without making asses of themselves in print or on air.
posted by jackhererra at 10:34 AM on October 20, 2003
Kill Bill kicks ass. Period. Bill, no disrespect to your best friend, but he obviously isn't much of a kung-fu movie fan.
posted by garfield at 11:30 AM on October 20, 2003
Notice this happens before he was able to update whether or not the NY Times finally went 1000 straight games without picking a correct final score. interesting...
posted by lilnemo at 11:52 AM on October 20, 2003
hopefully he can continue the column on his own somewhere... I was thinking he could go back to slate where he was, but ESPN is on MSN and isn't slate MSN too? So that's out. Damn it, TMQ is the whole reason I come to work on tuesdays! (Not really, but it is why I stay at my desk for lunch)
posted by Bernreuther at 02:32 PM on October 20, 2003
Dear Mr. Easterbrook, Until you get a paying gig, write a Tuesday column for us. No, really! Sincerely, Spofi
posted by dusted at 04:36 PM on October 20, 2003
Gregg has long been in love with his own words, and this is the consequence of that self-love. He lost the ability to edit his own writing. Regardless of whether or not he deserved what happened to him, he's smart enough and has enough experience in the journalism/entertainment biz that he should have known better. This is the biggest problem with blogs: no editors. A good editor would never have allowed that last paragraph to be published. I stand by Gregg's right to say what he said, but I don't have any sympathy for him. To quote a comment from this blog: "Calling your boss Jewy Jew Man is probably not the best way to keep your job."
posted by Scott Carefoot at 09:09 AM on October 21, 2003
This is the biggest problem with blogs: no editors. A good editor would never have allowed that last paragraph to be published. Absolutely well put. And agreed to by Jack Shafer on Slate here. But I detect the heavy hammer of Eisner falling. This whole shebang doesn't say as much about Easterbrook and his momentary lapse of judgement, as it does about 'decision-making' by the holy trinity of ESPN-Disney-Eisner.
posted by chriskalexander at 03:58 PM on October 21, 2003
Not this kind of momentary lapse, chriskalexander?
posted by billsaysthis at 07:26 PM on October 21, 2003
That's a shame. Easterbrook wasn't always correct but he occasionally made points that deepened my understanding of the NFL game. That's better than any almost every other columnist out there. I will miss him.