MarvinisaLunatic 0 Report post Posted October 22, 2003 Full Article Gregg Easterbrook is a senior editor at The New Republic, whose online edition sponsors his new blog, too-cutely named Easterblogg. ("Gregg" with two g's at the end, ya get it — huh? huh?) Easterbrook has a quick mind and broad tastes that include professional football in all its gory glory, so until now he's also contributed a weekly column to ESPN's website, writing as the "Tuesday Morning Quarterback." I'd link you to one of his TMQ columns, except — it seems that Michael Eisner and his minions have zapped them all. Yeah, it appears that they've fired Easterbrook — and not just fired him, they've disappeared him — or at least his name from the masthead and all traces of his columns from the ESPN website! Nacht und nebel! Easterbrook expressed a pretty pointed opinion that that "Kill Bill" stinks, that its director Quentin Tarantino stinks, and that Miramax stinks for sponsoring Tarantino's mindless über-violence, and that Harvey Weinstein and Michael Eisner — respectively the CEOs of Miramax and its corporate parent, The Walt Disney Company — stink for letting Miramax sponsor Tarantino's über-violence. Easterbrook didn't just pan the movie, its director, its studio, the studio's corporate parent, and their respective CEOs, though — he managed at the same time to point out that (gasp) Weinstein and Eisner are both Jewish: Yes, there are plenty of Christian and other Hollywood executives who worship money above all else, promoting for profit the adulation of violence. Does that make it right for Jewish executives to worship money above all else, by promoting for profit the adulation of violence? Recent European history alone ought to cause Jewish executives to experience second thoughts about glorifying the killing of the helpless as a fun lifestyle choice. Ouch. No more TMQ sucks. No more R*dsk*n bashing!..No more cheerleader pics! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted October 22, 2003 I have no idea who this guy is, but this seems ridiculous. Getting fired over THAT?... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mik 0 Report post Posted October 22, 2003 TMQ is the longest weekly article I have ever seen in my life. I never managed to read it, because it was just so damn long. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MrRant 0 Report post Posted October 22, 2003 Eh... didn't really like his stuff. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest El Satanico Report post Posted October 22, 2003 Another example of why religion is evil and should never be mentioned in public. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Redhawk Report post Posted October 23, 2003 ...unless it's the President telling us all to sing "God Bless America." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Smell the ratings!!! Report post Posted October 23, 2003 that column ruled. and frankly this is crap. I read he was fired for saying "Jewish executives worship money over all else", which he clearly didn't. oh well. I shall always remember the Flaming Thumbtacks and the Potomac Drainage Basin Indigenous Persons. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
starvenger 0 Report post Posted October 23, 2003 I have no idea who this guy is, but this seems ridiculous. Getting fired over THAT?... Funny, that's what Tony Kornheiser said in an internet chat, dismissing him as "just another guy on the internet". Fact is that this guy has written articles for the Washington Monthly, the Atlantic Monthly and Time. He's published books on religion, politics and football, and is well respected by his peers. Which of course makes him the exact type of person Kornheiser wouldn't know anything about. Anyways, when I read the blog article I was rather surprised by the content, and yes it is offensive to Jews, but looking deeper it really is a condemnation of Eisner and Winstein for the gratutious violence within Kill Bill vol 1. Of course, Eisner is the CEO of Disney, which owns ESPN and ESPN.com's Page 2. Even though the ESPN.com suits deny any connection, something sure seems rather dodgy there, especially since all traces of TMQ were gone faster than you can say "Rush Limbaugh". TMQ was a fine column, complete with haiku, token babes in skimpy outfits, football analyses and strange tangents, and the main reason why I visited Page 2. And since the Sports Guy is half-assing it (and they're not doing a NFL stadium review ala the MLB ballparks) I guess I have no more reason to visit. My favourite team names, btw, was the Arizona (Caution: May contain football-like substance) Cardinals and the aforementioned Indigenous Persons... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dr. Tom 0 Report post Posted October 23, 2003 TMQ was the best football column on the internet, period. It's a shame to see Easterbrook fired over such a remark, when it's obvious he wasn't trying to be an anti-Semite. Eisner is an oversensitive prick, though, who has expressly forbidden his employees from talking bad about him. Slate Magazine (slate.msn.com), where TMQ was published before moving to ESPN, has a lot more information on this story. I'm sure the column will land somewhere, sooner instead of later. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MarvinisaLunatic 0 Report post Posted October 23, 2003 If anything, I liked the fact that he seemed to be serious and not serious at the same time in his columns. Yeah, they were long, but really only too long for a person with a short attention span and no more than 5-10 minutes to read it. Im sure some site will pick him up for a column although I doubt it will be in time for any more football this season. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Choken One Report post Posted October 23, 2003 I'm betting he'll have job with CBSPORTSLINE or CNNSI shortly. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MarvinisaLunatic 0 Report post Posted October 23, 2003 Id almost be willing to say Fox Sports would give him a job on their site or even something for their pregame show.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Choken One Report post Posted October 23, 2003 FOX and Intelligent people doesn't fit yo... Jillian Long Bradshaw Kimmel Kimmel's replacement and let's not get started on the god damn baseball announcers... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted October 23, 2003 Eisner is an oversensitive prick, though, who has expressly forbidden his employees from talking bad about him. Yeah, the same Eisner that said about Jeffrey Katzenberg, "I hate the little midget..." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skywarp! 0 Report post Posted October 23, 2003 Do we not have free speech in this country? What business is it of Eisner's if Easterbrook has a web blog as a personal interest outside of his job? They actually fired him for his personal life. Wow. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ripper 0 Report post Posted October 23, 2003 A personal web blog in which he publically insulted the man that SIGNS HIS FUCKING CHECKS. What kind of world is it that people are SHOCKED to see someone fired when they openly insult their boss. Go in you bosses office and insult him now. Go do it. Where did that get ya. He will have another job soon, and he had every right to say what he wanted but they had every right to fire him. Rule number 1 of the real world: Don't make personal insults about your BOSS in public where your BOSS can see them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skywarp! 0 Report post Posted October 23, 2003 A personal web blog in which he publically insulted the man that SIGNS HIS FUCKING CHECKS. What kind of world is it that people are SHOCKED to see someone fired when they openly insult their boss. Go in you bosses office and insult him now. Go do it. Where did that get ya. He will have another job soon, and he had every right to say what he wanted but they had every right to fire him. Rule number 1 of the real world: Don't make personal insults about your BOSS in public where your BOSS can see them. I understand and agree, but it's just that yelling about your boss publically is one thing. It's another to have a blog with a user handle (anyone could arguably be named "Easterblogg") which means someone either hunted it down or knew about it and ratted him out. However, if he alluded to his blog in one of his ESPN articles, then he can be held accountable at his job for anything on that blog (not that he can't already). In the end it's definitely his fault, he maybe should have had a more annonymous name. It's not that I don't think he deserved it, I'm just amazed that with the size and anonymity of the internet, somehow something as small and insignificant as a web blog got found out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
starvenger 0 Report post Posted October 23, 2003 A personal web blog in which he publically insulted the man that SIGNS HIS FUCKING CHECKS. What kind of world is it that people are SHOCKED to see someone fired when they openly insult their boss. Go in you bosses office and insult him now. Go do it. Where did that get ya. He will have another job soon, and he had every right to say what he wanted but they had every right to fire him. Rule number 1 of the real world: Don't make personal insults about your BOSS in public where your BOSS can see them. Some rules of the real world don't apply to media, but others do. It would have been perfectly fine for Easterbrook to state that "I cannot believe that Michael Eisner would allow such a gratuitously violent movie to be released. This is an obvious cash grab by Eisner and Weinstein who are trying to milk every red cent from a Tarantino move". This attacks Eisner, but not in an offensive way. But in trying to come up with an analogy, he implied that it was "very Jewish" of them to be grabbing for that money, which is in bad taste, but is also in an online journal attached to The New Republic, which so far as I know has only one connection to the Disney Empire - Easterbrook's TMQ column on ESPN.com. OK, there's your grounds to be fired - but the official reason is because he made an anti-Semetic remark. Never mind that he has never made one before, or than in his ESPN column he refuses to use Washington's team nickname because it is offensive to Native Americans, or that several of his colleagues are Jewish etc. He makes one statement - which by his admission later was very poorly worded - and BAM, he's gone, as if he never existed. Remember, ESPN took about THREE DAYS to can Rush Limbaugh for something that he had PLANNED to say on air, and quite frankly was something you were expecting to say at some point. Since Easterbrook's statement was of a similar slanderous nature (although not premeditated and definitely out of character), shouldn't he get the same leeway, at least? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skywarp! 0 Report post Posted October 23, 2003 He should. Unfortunately, the slanderous comment was directed at the president of a monilith who can do what he wants with the snap of a finger. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dr. Tom 0 Report post Posted October 23, 2003 He will have another job soon, and he had every right to say what he wanted but they had every right to fire him. Sure. He made his own bed and now he has to lie in it. As a fan of the column and Easterbrook's journalism (he's also written some dashed good articles for The New Republic, which is where his blog is hosted), I just think it sucks that he got shitcanned. And I think it's ridiculous that Eisner can't deal with criticism to the point that he has expressly forbidden anyone who works for him to say one bad thing about him. Kane, free speech isn't an issue here, since the president of a privately-owned media conglamerate can basically dictate what his employees can and cannot say. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skywarp! 0 Report post Posted October 23, 2003 Kane, free speech isn't an issue here, since the president of a privately-owned media conglamerate can basically dictate what his employees can and cannot say. I know. Sometimes I just can't hide my disgust for people who weild so much power and have so much when so many have so little, but that's off-topic to this discussion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
starvenger 0 Report post Posted November 5, 2003 For those few TMQ fans on this board, Gregg Easterbrook wrote this statement at Football Outsiders.com yesterday: Dear Friends of TMQ, The current situation is that Tuesday Morning Quarterback is mulling several possibilities. And it looks like the football gods want me back. Latest sign from the football gods: not one, not two but almost 20 readers, including Jeannie Bennett and Noah Caplan, have sent me this Vince Lombardi quotation: "It's not how often you fall, it's how often you get back up." Somehow, somewhere, Tuesday Morning Quarterback will return to the Web on November 11th. Keep checking Football Outsiders for more details. In the meantime, I offer this haiku triptych: TMQ awaits his rehabilitation. Tuesdays must be saved. Football gods frowned on me; soon, smile? They smiled on Bucs -- so all possible. Ghost of Lombardi watching me; don't want Vince mad! I better get up. Thanks to all for the many continued expressions of good will and support. Best, Gregg Easterbrook P.S.: Dwight Freeney was single-handedly killing the Marine Mammals -- three sacks, two forced fumbles, numerous hurries and, just when Miami seemed poised to prevail, the game-icing play. So why didn't Dolphins' couches give Wade Smith some help? As Freeney practically beat the snap to Brian Griese over and over again, hapless rookie tackle Wade Smith was left on his own against one of the league's budding stars: no double-team help, not even a back chipping off. Smith had a cover-your-eyes game, but don't blame him for Miami's defeat. Blame the coaches who failed to notice the problem and get him help. P.P.S.: In the offseason, Dobby the Elf (Steve Spurrier) waived power back Stephen Davis because Dobby wanted to pass more. On Sunday, Davis alone gained 153 yards rushing; all players in the Potomac Drainage Basin Indigenous Persons' passing attack combined to gain 124 yards. So far this season, Davis personally has outrushed the entire Persons team: Davis 992 yards, Persons 793 yards. Davis's spectacular 5.1-yards-per-attempt running average is only fractionally lower than Dobby's awful 5.2-yards-per-attempt passing average. Imagine how much better the Persons aerial game would be if they had a runner to take the pressure off -- especially a runner who's just shy of a thousand-yard season after only eight games. Maybe, this offseason, Dobby and his evil master Lord Voldemort (Dan Synder) will go out in free agency and try to get somebody like Stephen Davis. P.P.P.S.: Hey, this stuff is fun to write. Ye gods, I'd better get TMQ back into existence. Good news, indeed... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Smell the ratings!!! Report post Posted November 6, 2003 damn, that site was excellent. I've never even heard of it before. in exchange, I offer you the marginally funnier but far less informative profootballtalk.com. Sometimes right, sometimes wrong, always entertaining. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
C Dubya 04 0 Report post Posted November 6, 2003 Wow, I was really wondering what happened to the column. It was always a fun little distraction from work during the day (and I use the word little loosely). Couple of other points.... 1). There's still MMQB by Peter King on CNNSI.com, which is always an excellant read. 2). The freedom of speech arguement doesn't apply here. He was free to express himself anyway he wanted to and faces no governmental punishment for his views, but his employers have the right to fire him. 3). I still really enjoy the Sports Guy (in regards to the person who said he was half-assing it). His NBA preview was another fun read. Hmmmm, that's all I got. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Smell the ratings!!! Report post Posted November 6, 2003 personally, Peter King fills me with violent rage. maybe it's his monthly Brett Farve column. Now Dr. Z, that there's some quality writin'. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
starvenger 0 Report post Posted November 6, 2003 3). I still really enjoy the Sports Guy (in regards to the person who said he was half-assing it). His NBA preview was another fun read. That would be me. I think that maybe his passion shows through with hoops, but the crux of the matter is that between Jimmy Kimmel, the magazine column, Page 2 and the Cold Pizza segment (which you'd think would be interesting, but isn't) he's stretched it to the point where imo the only real entertaining columns from him is the mailbag. damn, that site was excellent. I've never even heard of it before. Neither had I until TMQ plugged it. I'm still not sure about the whole "efficiency rating" thing though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MD2020 Report post Posted November 6, 2003 personally, Peter King fills me with violent rage. maybe it's his monthly Brett Farve column. Now Dr. Z, that there's some quality writin'. Yes--twenty years ago. Dr. Z is still good at times, but other times it seems like the game passed him by. And is it wrong for me to hope that Mary Beth King blows out her knee somepoint soon, so I don't have to read about her exploits in field hockey or softball? It just really gets on my nerves. Or maybe she'll get pregnant. That'll stop her from playing sports. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Smell the ratings!!! Report post Posted November 7, 2003 teen pregnancy really could spice up the column. and frankly part of what I like about Z is what a crusty old bastard he is. I love his stories about going on rants at HoF selection meetings and everyone rolling thier eyes at him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
C Dubya 04 0 Report post Posted November 7, 2003 Yeah, well the key to reading Peter King is to skip the bj's he gives Farve and anything non-football related, but I like reading the rest. He seems to get a lot of good insider information. Dr. Z's power rankings never fail to amuse me either. Especially when he gets towards the bottom and admittedly phones it in. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
