Hey, there! Log in / Register
Globe no longer wants to fight to see the Kraft sex tape
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Dan Kennedy thinks it's ok for opinion writers
to coordinate campaigns against others advertisers if they say things you disagree with.
He often puts politics before Journalism and I hope it doesnt rub off on his students.
If there is no sex trafficking and Krafts lawyers contend the videos were obtained illegally, why shouldn't they drop out.?
Didn't he work for a newspaper which made money on prostitution ads?
Videos
Just because Kraft's lawyers say the video was recorded illegally doesn't mean that it was. It's a question for the courts, not journalists or personal attorneys.
Kennedy needs to focus on the bigger issues
Like the looming debt at the MBTA / MassDOT
Um ...
Kennedy is a journalism professor, and before that, he was a media critic. There are plenty of people out there to get upset about the T on a professional basis.
Dan Kennedy writes about the T from time to time
Combining his T and Globe concerns is a good avenue to explore. The Globe went from hard hitting reviews of T practice to writing Pollack Pablum. The difference in T reporting between the local rags (Day, Reporter, Banner) and the Globe is startling. Meanwhile, with the exception of WCVB, I don't think any of the main print and TV outlets in Boston have dared to bring up Ken Snow, Pollack's husband, for various reasons. MassDOT coverage is showing shades of concern.
Once again, the almighty
Once again, the almighty dollar rules. In everything.
Globe
Smart by the Globe. The Patriots could easily reduce their access to the Globe reporters/columnists as reprisal for wanting the tape released. Also Dan Kennedy blocked me on Twitter, because I said I liked the comic strip Fred Bassett!!
If Tom Brady was on the film
This conversation would likely be much different...
Would TB12 ...
be the client or Mister K's masseur?
Lovely scandal!
I vote masseur!
No. Would be different if there was a sex-trafficking component
All the evidence has pointed to no. Some reporters can't accept it
THE QUESTION OF THE DAY
The question of the day is simple:
What purpose would it serve for the public and Society gain from looking at this video.
Showing that video absolutely serves no public interest.
No public interest socially criminally or any other reasons to show this video.
I absolutely cringe and get physically sick just thinking about what that might look like.
Only perverts would want to see that video.
It was reported very early on
It was reported very early on that there was no sex trafficking happening at that location. Not sure why the Globe was so persistent, maybe they're a bunch of closet perverts