Commentary: College Hockey (Still) Has a COVID Problem

[Swampy]

Subheading: But It's Not (Only) What You Think

Great article by Adam:

https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2021/12/28_Commentary-College-Hockey.php#.Yc0jPIaLbGQ.link

Good opinion piece. Unfortunately, judging from the comments, some people think that it's an investigative article, based upon facts, and is true.

Well it might be true, but what is written is opinion.

I'm not saying it shouldn't have been written. Sometimes stating your opinion in an article shakes the trees and gets the facts exposed.

Let's hope that happens this time, but for now what we have is opinion.

Jim,

Read Manufacturing Consent by Herman and Chomsky. All Adam needed to do for a "Just the facts, ma'am" article would be to find people who share his perspective, which wouldn't have been difficult, and quote them on the points he makes instead of voicing them himself.

Facts never speak for themselves.

Adam is clear that only Michigan knows its true motives but Michigan is silent on the subject. As we've seen elsewhere, stonewalling can hide nefarious motives, and it's up to regulatory bodies to cut through the the BS, which they often don't do.

In this sense, Adam's article discusses a larger truth.

[Jim Hyla]

Subheading: But It's Not (Only) What You Think

Great article by Adam:

https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2021/12/28_Commentary-College-Hockey.php#.Yc0jPIaLbGQ.link

Good opinion piece. Unfortunately, judging from the comments, some people think that it's an investigative article, based upon facts, and is true.

Well it might be true, but what is written is opinion.

I'm not saying it shouldn't have been written. Sometimes stating your opinion in an article shakes the trees and gets the facts exposed.

Let's hope that happens this time, but for now what we have is opinion.

Jim,

Read Manufacturing Consent by Herman and Chomsky. All Adam needed to do for a "Just the facts, ma'am" article would be to find people who share his perspective, which wouldn't have been difficult, and quote them on the points he makes instead of voicing them himself.

Facts never speak for themselves.

Adam is clear that only Michigan knows its true motives but Michigan is silent on the subject. As we've seen elsewhere, stonewalling can hide nefarious motives, and it's up to regulatory bodies to cut through the the BS, which they often don't do.

In this sense, Adam's article discusses a larger truth.

No you can't just quote random people. Otherwise it would be true that Trump won the election. If you can't get the people who made the decision, then you try to find people who know about the decision making. If they won't talk "on the record", then you have to put the disclaimer "from someone who knows of the discussion, but can't speak on the record". The more people that can affirm what you find, the more you can believe it.

This type of reporting is done all the time. Someone in government leaks something, but can't be quoted. Finding others who substantiate that "fact" makes it more likely. That's how you have to read investigative journalism. Your skepticism gets diminished as the number of your sources goes up. But it's never 100% true.

But if your sources are people who have no knowledge of the decision process, they are meaningless, just like I am.

[Swampy]

Subheading: But It's Not (Only) What You Think

Great article by Adam:

https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2021/12/28_Commentary-College-Hockey.php#.Yc0jPIaLbGQ.link

Good opinion piece. Unfortunately, judging from the comments, some people think that it's an investigative article, based upon facts, and is true.

Well it might be true, but what is written is opinion.

I'm not saying it shouldn't have been written. Sometimes stating your opinion in an article shakes the trees and gets the facts exposed.

Let's hope that happens this time, but for now what we have is opinion.

Jim,

Read Manufacturing Consent by Herman and Chomsky. All Adam needed to do for a "Just the facts, ma'am" article would be to find people who share his perspective, which wouldn't have been difficult, and quote them on the points he makes instead of voicing them himself.

Facts never speak for themselves.

Adam is clear that only Michigan knows its true motives but Michigan is silent on the subject. As we've seen elsewhere, stonewalling can hide nefarious motives, and it's up to regulatory bodies to cut through the the BS, which they often don't do.

In this sense, Adam's article discusses a larger truth.

No you can't just quote random people. Otherwise it would be true that Trump won the election. If you can't get the people who made the decision, then you try to find people who know about the decision making. If they won't talk "on the record", then you have to put the disclaimer "from someone who knows of the discussion, but can't speak on the record". The more people that can affirm what you find, the more you can believe it.

This type of reporting is done all the time. Someone in government leaks something, but can't be quoted. Finding others who substantiate that "fact" makes it more likely. That's how you have to read investigative journalism. Your skepticism gets diminished as the number of your sources goes up. But it's never 100% true.

But if your sources zare people who have no knowledge of the decision process, they are meaningless, just like I am.

I didn't mean quoting randoms. I meant quoting knowledgeable people who hold similar views. Herman & Chomsky's exemplars are MSM journalists quoting Pentagon spokespeople with no counter views from opposing spokespeople or other investigative journalism. This way the journalist's "impartial" reporting becomes a megaphone for the Pentagon. In Adam's case, he could have hid his opinion by reporting on the "controversy" by quoting coaches, respected sports journalists, comparable issues in other sports, etc.

[jtwcornell91]

world juniors getting cancelled helps mich solve one problem.

I couldn't find a WJC thread, so I'll put this here:

https://www.dw.com/en/junior-hockey-teams-from-russia-and-czech-republic-ejected-from-plane/a-60310238

[adamw]

have no idea what Jim's point is - I think he's just trying to find a way to criticize me ... ymmv  

[adamw]

perhaps everyone would like to read the follow up article - with a beloved Cornell coach quoted:

https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2022/01/03_Conversations-Continue-in.php

[Trotsky]

a beloved Cornell coach quoted

You got Dick Bertrand?!

[Jim Hyla]

have no idea what Jim's point is - I think he's just trying to find a way to criticize me ... ymmv  

First, tell me where I criticized you.

Second, how can you not know what my point was. I said it more than once. What you were writing was opinion, not fact. I wrote it because the comments were implying that it was true that UM called off the game because of PWR.

Not that there was anything wrong with writing it, I said that as well.

A little too sensitive are we?

[Trotsky]

Be nice to each other, we are all Red here.

[adamw]

have no idea what Jim's point is - I think he's just trying to find a way to criticize me ... ymmv  

First, tell me where I criticized you.

Second, how can you not know what my point was. I said it more than once. What you were writing was opinion, not fact. I wrote it because the comments were implying that it was true that UM called off the game because of PWR.

Not that there was anything wrong with writing it, I said that as well.

A little too sensitive are we?

was all tongue in cheek anyway Jim.