Are the bans of certain writers and publications becoming counterproductive on this site?
I logged on to comment on the content posted by another user regarding Coach Harbaugh's podcast interview and suddenly the thread was gone. The OP posted a disclaimer about the content coming from some forbidden writer or publication.
However, it was good content. Now if it happens to be a hit piece, then I understand deleting it. But, shouldn't we welcome good content that can be discussed... on a message board. Maybe we should relax, and loosen up our sometimes vengeful posture.
February 18th, 2022 at 10:56 AM ^
Most publications aren’t universally wrong on facts or wrong on analysis. But some are much better than others in getting scoops and rumors right. Some are much better than others interpreting the facts (hello stretchgate).
If moderators don’t want to play whack-a-mole with certain publications, I don’t blame them.
February 18th, 2022 at 10:58 AM ^
The bans are warranted. A shitty writer with questionable sources and a penchant for making shit up has the ability to sink the credibility of any outlet that gives him/her a voice. The moms are correct in banning them from this site, as this site is their livelihood. If you owned a small business and were associated with an assclown that made you look bad in the eyes of your customers, you'd disassociate yourself from that person.
February 18th, 2022 at 10:59 AM ^
I completely disagree. These individuals have proven that they are not worthy of discussion on this board. If you want to follow their content, follow them yourself. Next thing you'll see is Pete Finebaum videos posted.
February 18th, 2022 at 11:00 AM ^
The macro aspect of this is that in some (probably small) way these outlets pay a price for making things up.
If everyone had the same standards and consistently held these outlets accountable for non-factual reporting, the world would be a better place.
"Make stuff up, increase traffic" would instead be "make stuff up, lose traffic."
February 18th, 2022 at 11:04 AM ^
Could we institute a new news posting format for titles. People could choose for themselves if someone is full of poo poo. #mgocancel everyone
Something like the following:
"Author", "format" , "title"
Ex.-Balas, Twitter, "Canadian bacon is better than dog turds"
February 18th, 2022 at 3:13 PM ^
No, and the simple reason is this:
"Hey, did you see that 'article' on MGoBlog? That guy said that Harbaugh is leaving to join UFC."
"Yeah, MGoBlog is so full of shit, lately. I wonder what happened?"
Suddenly, the source changed from Barstool to MGoBlog and Brian takes the blame.
February 18th, 2022 at 9:17 PM ^
I dont understand that. Posters idealy provide a title describing what the post is about. Why would indicating the source (author) of the information at the beginning of the title make it more likely to be attributed to mgoblog/Brian. Maybe I'm missing something obvious.we could drop the specific website from the title if that helps, but the author should be included.
February 18th, 2022 at 11:05 AM ^
Bad or not, there's a larger issue. Newspapers are less relevant because there are more ways to get information now. When Mitch Albom or Joe Falls were opining on sports, we listened because they were the only means of getting a daily sports fix. Once talk radio, blogs and twitter arrived, I began to realize that newspaper columnists and ringers didn't know anymore about sports than anyone else. They just had more access.
I don't subscribe or click the Free Press because their information interests me less than other sources (reddit, MGOBLOG, other blogs etc). I can triangulate information from various sources and think for myself. I actually subscribe to the Detroit News and the NYT for news about the real world but I rarely venture over to the sports sections.
Otherwise the Freep will continue to be dead to me not only for their irresponsible hack job over a decade ago, but also because they aren't as useful.
February 18th, 2022 at 11:06 AM ^
My humble opinion is that content should be the overriding factor in determining if an article or thread is deleted. This isn't some sort of deal breaker for me. I'm just throwing it out here for discussion.
February 18th, 2022 at 1:07 PM ^
I'd humbly suggest broadening your perspective. For example, if Rainer writes one informative article for every nine glorified shitposts (links to which contained in the informative one), is it reasonable to send attention his way?
Play the long game. I'm assuming your intentions are pure. They may not be.
February 18th, 2022 at 11:09 AM ^
I have to be honest: sometimes I wonder whether or not political opinion is motivating the banning of certain sports writers on this site.
And I get that that is the prerogative of the mods, but it doesn’t speak well to free and honest and common sense discourse.
February 18th, 2022 at 11:18 AM ^
I don't have an opinion either way on ideological and political censorship happening or not happening on this site, but I would argue for individuals not mods determining if an article is right or wrong. if someone thinks an author is full of it they can try and convince others with a lively debate in the comments. What else is the internet for if not the free exchange of ideas and porn.
Of course obvious racist content should be immediately removed.
February 18th, 2022 at 12:23 PM ^
'JDean' and 'gsquared': Simply stated, we as mods (LSA, myself, and numerous other volunteer moderators we've had come and go over the years) are essentially traffic cops enforcing the clearly-stated guidelines/rules as written by Brian (owner) and Seth (managing editor). There's no political agenda that I'm aware of in their rules nor is there a political agenda in how LSA and I enforce their rules.
What's more, without voluntary mods, would Brian and his staff of writers have time to provide free content and maintain order on the MGoBoard? Just my guess, but if it came down a choice of one or the other, I think an unmoderated board would quite possibly be eliminated.
February 18th, 2022 at 2:38 PM ^
Rob, you and the other mods are doing a fantastic job, period. Thank you for your service. I felt that I was defending the moderators by saying that I don't see a political or ideological leaning in the moderation. I will re-evaluate my wording.
My argument is only that I don't believe posts with information from "insiders" like Balas should be banned. Let people ignore their information and the problem goes away. At least I would hope people would ignore threads that aren't important to them. Maybe I should make a wider generalization about how easy is it to gin up a reaction of outrage in society at large. We should be slow to anger and outrage.
February 18th, 2022 at 3:44 PM ^
The only ban we have in place to prevent you from posting stuff from Balas is that most of his work is paywalled and we should respect that information is for his paying customers.
February 18th, 2022 at 12:17 PM ^
I don't think it's politics, it's just following our current societal proclivity to only hear what you want, and toss out or discredit what you don't. Many OSU fans are absolutely convinced ESPN has it out for OSU because of an SEC bias... which may be true, or not true. I'm inclined to believe they talk about OSU (and UM) because that's going to generate clicks and subsequent revenue.
The issue with "banning" certain media outlets and writers is that someone other than you is choosing to select certain information as truth, and other information as non-truth. If the "truth" is favorable to your viewpoint, you accept it and discuss. A "non-truth" is deemed garbage, untrustworthy, and discredited... Right along with the individual and outlet that published it. EVERY writer and outlet is competing for clicks in this day and age, censoring doesn't get us anywhere other than building comfortable little echo chambers. Some writers and outlets are hacks, but that doesn't mean they can't or haven't dispersed true information. As with everything now days, it's up to the reader to educate themselves from multiple sources, and then try to find the real truth in the middle.
February 18th, 2022 at 12:46 PM ^
Why am I not surprised this common-sense take on censorship was downvoted.
Thank you for reminding everyone that censorship is a problem, and a band-aid for the ego of the one deciding the truth at best, never a solution.
February 18th, 2022 at 1:05 PM ^
I'm an OSU fan, downvotes kind of come with the territory I'm posting in, common sense or not.
February 18th, 2022 at 1:12 PM ^
Curious, why are you here?
I would never go to an OSU board unless I was trying to find out when the septic pump truck was arriving to pump my poop.
Side note, I live in ohio and got my septic pumped recent and I kid you not, the pump truck looked like a cooler.
February 18th, 2022 at 5:37 PM ^
You must have missed the post above, I try to get news and viewpoints from multiple angles and sources, hence cruising a UM blog even though I'm an OSU fan. I would have never known what a septic pump truck looked like if I hadn't been on this site, so now I know! See how that works?!?
February 18th, 2022 at 6:16 PM ^
Relax I was just fucking with you
February 18th, 2022 at 2:48 PM ^
OfficerRabbit is right on.
Read ALL of the sources and make up your own mind. That's the only way to get to some level of truth these days.
Anybody who accepts a single 'news' story on its face is just not that smart or doesn't care to know the full story.
Seems a fair amount of people just don't want to know the truth. It boggles my mind.
February 18th, 2022 at 12:27 PM ^
Yes, because "free and honest and common sense discourse" is only possible if you're allowed to use the N word as many times as possible.
In case it isn't clear, this is a reductio ad absurdum, not a personal accusation.
February 18th, 2022 at 11:11 AM ^
IMO, there’s some inconsistency to the band. The blog bans the lead writer for the biggest newspaper in the state, the Freep, just because the blog doesn’t like him, and deems him a clickbaiter, even though most of his coverage is inoffensive. Chris Balas is notoriously unreliable, and I suspect he flat out makes shit up, but he’s been getting a pass here for a long time. This never made sense to me.
February 18th, 2022 at 11:51 AM ^
To be fair, the blog doesn't ban the lead writer for the Freep - the Freep in it's entirety is banned. If I recall correctly it was because of the hit piece on stretching (among other things)
February 18th, 2022 at 4:04 PM ^
No it's just Rainer Sabin because he's a hack and a troll. The rest of what he produces you can find any other place. The post in question was just saying what Harbaugh said on his podcast--there's an MLive article, a free 247 article, an On3 article and a Detroit News article that all have the same information or better.
The people whining about this are just trying to perpetuate anti-informational tropes so they can pretend victimhood; I doubt any of them are seriously going to try make a case that anyone here needs Rainer Sabin content on the message board.
February 18th, 2022 at 11:13 AM ^
First and foremost this blog is privately owned and they can do what they want and I fully support and respect their right to ban whatever they want, for whatever reason, whenever they want.
I disagree with the owners of this site on almost every possible issue unrelated to Michigan sports and at times that has caused me to leave...and other times come back for the content. My choice to come or go, and again, fully support and respect the owners of MGB doing what they want, whenever they want, however they want.
However...that's not your question. You are not really asking if they are allowed to but more so does it curtail productive discussion. I think the answer is maybe, but who knows. I would prefer we allow basically "anything goes" and as posts get engagement they rise to the top and if not they just drop off and supply and demand for topics will prevail. I find it odd on a message board to not allow some of the things not allowed. I like a little more free flowing information when I visit blogs but I also mostly visit bodybuilding or powerlifting type blogs where it is literally anything goes so that is also what I'm used to.
February 18th, 2022 at 11:17 AM ^
T Nation!
February 18th, 2022 at 1:26 PM ^
t nation, promuscle, outlaw muscle, etc. wild discussions over the years lol!
February 18th, 2022 at 11:22 AM ^
I definitely don't advocate for an "anything goes" approach, just that the deletions are content based. And, of course, the site owners are free to determine the quality of the content that they permit.
February 18th, 2022 at 1:15 PM ^
There was an OT season a few years back where there was like ... one active mom.
It was a shit show and anything goes is a terrible idea because the BS begins to overtake anything worthwhile
February 18th, 2022 at 1:33 PM ^
Potentially, but with a couple strong mods and SOP's setup properly it self regulates rather well. For example, this board encourages double posting because topics don't "bump" to the top when someone posts in them. By having posts "bump" with new posts you radically cut down on redundant topics and get people to use the search function. You can't engage in an old topic so it encourages starting new threads, unnecessarily.
Sorry, I'm off topic, By "anything goes" I mean more anything goes in the realm of not banning certain media members or sources. It's just an odd thing to do on a message board.
February 18th, 2022 at 1:40 PM ^
Ahh I gotcha. Some media members should be banned though IMO. They are UM trolls or hate UM and would love to get their BS lies on this blog just to screw with the fans. Eff those people and everything they write.
February 18th, 2022 at 3:27 PM ^
there is a standard operating procedure that's outlined on the moderation sticky. you might not agree with the some of the choices, but they're probably clearer, and the intent better described, than just about any message board you're going to find.
February 18th, 2022 at 11:14 AM ^
You almost need to take an MgoBlog 101 course to know all the rules. There's the normies and then there's those highly educated in MgoBlogging that sometimes like to make condescending and abrasive comments to those that don't magically know the unwritten rules and norms. The snarkier the retort, the more entrenched in it they are. It provides a little dose of pleasure. You learn to love them though. It's like a weird quirky cult.
February 18th, 2022 at 11:23 AM ^
LOL that's really an apt description of this place.
February 18th, 2022 at 12:14 PM ^
I am under the impression that the snarky criticism is mostly tongue-in-cheek sarcasm which unfortunately doesn't translate to print.
February 18th, 2022 at 2:52 PM ^
This is so accurate. The Guardians of Content who aren't mods but get mad at almost any new post and make the first 20 comments a debate about its validity.
Any time someone starts nit-picking grammar I about die laughing because they clearly have been here a long time, but not so long that they remember the wild west of the original blog format. Just a giant text thread of nonsense. I miss that.
February 18th, 2022 at 4:05 PM ^
Most of the rules that people get dinged for violating are in fact written down, on the board FAQ or moderator action sticky landing page.
Now, I think you have a point that the retorts can be pretty snarky and most new users haven't necessarily found their way to the places where the rules are written. I actually think that there could be a banner or something with a link to all the rules that a user sees before they hit the save button a new post. That would make it harder for people to unknowingly break a rule and incur the wrath of the pile on gang.
I agree that it's kind of fun to have the unwritten norms (e.g., "moms").
February 18th, 2022 at 11:14 AM ^
Double post
February 18th, 2022 at 11:23 AM ^
I was only sorry it got removed before I could rescue the text; wanted to re-post with the podcast it had been drawn from but am too busy to re-create from scratch. (Since I have some residual anger about Stretchgate and the Freep myself, I have mixed feelings about your larger point.) Thanks for the note of solidarity, though--it was posted in good faith, and I too thought that some of the content was valuable--we've all been arguing for years about what really goes on with play-calling on game day, and here's Harbaugh matter-of-factly describing how it works/will work.
Here's the podcast link anyway:
February 18th, 2022 at 11:27 AM ^
I also found that interesting. Harbaugh's interview is worth a listen, as he speaks pretty openly on a number of topics we've been discussing lately.
February 18th, 2022 at 11:32 AM ^
Thank you for posting the content! I hadn't been aware of it. Even though I usually stay briefed on University, and football and basketball content, life sometimes intervenes and demands more time. I appreciate when someone takes time out of their day to spread some good information.
February 18th, 2022 at 11:25 AM ^
I could be wrong, but I think the issue here was that this site transcribed a podcast interview and therefore undercut the podcast itself. I liked the interview and think Harbaugh's comments are worthy of discussion, but that still leaves the question as to how we are getting those comments.
There is quite a bit of gatekeeping on this site, but it's worth distinguishing what comes from the designated mods (and is therefore fine, and we can leave if we don't like it) and what comes from individual posters, many of whom should lighten up.
February 18th, 2022 at 11:35 AM ^
If there is a good, well written article by a writer or publication that is currently "banned" I have no issue with it being posted on the board as long as the OP posts a disclaimer and explains why it's worth a read. Yes there are exceptions but it's HIGHLY unlikely the likes of R* Saben or J* Yoder/Chat sports are ever going to post something worth our time.
One thing I appreciate about this site and board is that I don't have to wade my way through that garbage to find something worth reading.
February 18th, 2022 at 11:40 AM ^
The main issue to me is giving those sites traffic and clicks.
February 18th, 2022 at 11:46 AM ^
I'll preface by saying that I'm unaware of the (redacted) article referenced in the OP and don't really care enough to retrace it, but assuming from context that it's from a Ranier Sabin type.
Let's assume that this article is itself fine. Even if so, there's a whole body of work from him that is unreliable and inflammatory and you are what your record says you are, so that's why Sabin doesn't get the benefit of the doubt.
Not to speak for the mom's but I am reminded of the axiom that it takes 10x more effort to debunk bullshit than it does to poop it out, and we have no idea how much time they've spent in the past wading thru Sabin/Yoder types. I'm guessing that going forwards, they would rather expend that mental bandwidth elsewhere, so it is what it is. There's probably instance where you or I may not agree with individual decisions but we're not doing the mental and emotional labor of running this place .
A completely open forum for unfettered and enlightened free speech is about as realistic a notion as Scarlett Johansson thinking that I'm a sweet and funny guy. Failing that, there will always be some boundaries in any space* to mark the bounds of acceptable speech. That line can and will move, but because of his track record, Sabin is outside it and doesn't get the benefit of the doubt, so c'est la vie.
(Yes, even in the context of the First Amendment - go to Times Square with a I <3 ISIS sign and see how long it takes for the FBI to pay you a visit).
February 18th, 2022 at 11:48 AM ^
The bans on this site have always been ridiculous, even back to stretchgate. Simply adding a disclaimer that "this link comes from a questionable source and the validity should be extremely scrutinized" should be sufficient. Full blown deletion of topics is too much.
Just my opinion.
February 18th, 2022 at 12:15 PM ^
But those "questionable links" gain traffic off of this website. There is almost never a time where you cannot provide that same information from an approved site. If you want to read them, give them all the clicks you desire but if you want to share it here follow the boards rules.
February 18th, 2022 at 11:48 AM ^
I don't particularly care if people link to a good resource even if it's produced by a bad writer/troll, but I am always a bit cautious of giving some of these scorpions a free ride because they promised to finally not sting UM. Like, Yoder, Gggggreeeggggg Henson, Sabin, etc. are all inherently antagonistic and obnoxious and so even if they get something right I feel like it's more chance than actual effort.