incognito_man Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 (edited) 8 minutes ago, ChaRisMa said: You originally responded today to me asking about the questionable timing of Silverstein releasing his info when he knows Rodgers can’t respond. You don’t find that at all suspicious that Silverstein and McGinn wait until Rodgers can’t respond before they release their clickbait? nope. not suspicious at all. if I'm a reporter, I'd encourage more dialogue around my story. I'm confident they would, too. *edit - moreover, like me, I'm sure they (and everyone else) also would not anticipate any sort of response from Rodgers about an article that doesn't need any sort of response from him. What would Rodgers even say? What is there for him to say about a conversation between Gute and his colleague? Edited February 19, 2023 by incognito_man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaRisMa Posted February 20, 2023 Share Posted February 20, 2023 47 minutes ago, incognito_man said: nope. not suspicious at all. if I'm a reporter, I'd encourage more dialogue around my story. I'm confident they would, too. *edit - moreover, like me, I'm sure they (and everyone else) also would not anticipate any sort of response from Rodgers about an article that doesn't need any sort of response from him. What would Rodgers even say? What is there for him to say about a conversation between Gute and his colleague? “Gute and I have a good relationship working in the same building toward the same goal for years now, I trust him to be honest with me and the last time we spoke he didn’t mention that I’m fired despite reports that his mind is made up or whatever people want to make up about me for profit.” You don’t find it suspicious that two journalists write Aaron Rodgers articles, both saying he’s not a Packer in 2023 per sources, and release them day 1 of up to 4 of him being unavailable for response. They wait until after the Super Bowl despite Packer season ending 6 weeks ago and half the staff has gone home to announce they have a source, and you aren’t a smidgeon suspicious of that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted February 20, 2023 Share Posted February 20, 2023 5 minutes ago, ChaRisMa said: “Gute and I have a good relationship working in the same building toward the same goal for years now, I trust him to be honest with me and the last time we spoke he didn’t mention that I’m fired despite reports that his mind is made up or whatever people want to make up about me for profit.” You don’t find it suspicious that two journalists write Aaron Rodgers articles, both saying he’s not a Packer in 2023 per sources, and release them day 1 of up to 4 of him being unavailable for response. They wait until after the Super Bowl despite Packer season ending 6 weeks ago and half the staff has gone home to announce they have a source, and you aren’t a smidgeon suspicious of that? Um...no? What is suspicious about it? Why don't you just lay out the conspiracy in detail rather than trying to skirt around it with questions. Tell us what the conspiracy is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaRisMa Posted February 20, 2023 Share Posted February 20, 2023 5 minutes ago, incognito_man said: Um...no? What is suspicious about it? Why don't you just lay out the conspiracy in detail rather than trying to skirt around it with questions. Tell us what the conspiracy is. Using reporters privilege for profit through the harm of Aaron Rodgers and/or the Green Bay Packers. Clickbait is most effective when it’s the only thing happening. It’s even more effective if people are talking about your subject starting an unusual therapy approach publicly on Tuesday and how it’s starting Friday. Then you have all week to figure out the exact wording on how to make your lie as big as possible (Gute said it) while making your own accountability for reporting it zero (can’t give up my source but it’s the person you’d most suspect Gute would say this to). Best part is—if Rodgers returns, doesn’t that make this source a liar? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted February 20, 2023 Share Posted February 20, 2023 (edited) 14 minutes ago, ChaRisMa said: Using reporters privilege for profit through the harm of Aaron Rodgers and/or the Green Bay Packers Who was harmed, how were they harmed and describe how it's the fault of the reporter rather than the fault of the people involved in the story. Edited February 20, 2023 by incognito_man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted February 20, 2023 Share Posted February 20, 2023 I don't get any of this discussion rn lol 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaRisMa Posted February 20, 2023 Share Posted February 20, 2023 Just now, incognito_man said: Who was harmed, how were they harmed and describe how it's the fault of the reporter. Aaron Rodgers career is harmed by twisting the public view on him. Future and current career. It’s the fault of the reporter if he is willfully making up sources to generate a profit for himself. That’s libel. Unfortunately—we can’t prove he was never told that by anyone because even if legal action was taken against him, he has privileges granted to him by the first amendment than allow him to not have to answer the question. It’s the oldest and easiest abuse of power. Licensed to lie for profit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted February 20, 2023 Share Posted February 20, 2023 Just now, ChaRisMa said: Aaron Rodgers career is harmed by twisting the public view on him. Future and current career How? We need details. Did he lose money? How much? And why was it a result of only this article? How do you know it is "twisted"? How do you know it's not the truth that's being reported? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted February 20, 2023 Share Posted February 20, 2023 1 minute ago, Norm said: I don't get any of this discussion rn lol You are not involved in it, thus no need to comment on it or be offended by it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted February 20, 2023 Share Posted February 20, 2023 8 minutes ago, Norm said: I don't get any of this discussion rn lol I don't either, tbh I'm so confused, all I have are questions 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaRisMa Posted February 20, 2023 Share Posted February 20, 2023 5 minutes ago, incognito_man said: How? We need details. Did he lose money? How much? And why was it a result of only this article? How do you know it is "twisted"? How do you know it's not the truth that's being reported? How does loss of future compensation work if you are in the entertainment industry? Easy. Public gets a certain image of you, you become less desirable. Aaron Rodgers the gigantic Covid toe having immunizer is seen as a bad guy and not worth a 200 million dollar broadcasting job (for example). Aaron Rodgers the love not war guy that everyone loves is. Did he lose money directly-No, just public opinion of him despite him saying and doing nothing wrong. Believe it or not Rodgers has endorsements that make him money that are swayed by public opionin. It’s a reporter taking a small bite at a big apple and by the time all the reporters take their bites we are all Rodgers fatigued to the point we accept losing games over offseason stories. Saying it’s a result of only this article is your wording not mine. Any adult would know others opinions of you change the way you are treated as a person. I don’t know they are twisting the truth. I’m saying it’s suspicious that they wait until he’s not around to talk about him. You see that as coincidence. I’m happy we get to find out either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted February 20, 2023 Share Posted February 20, 2023 3 minutes ago, ChaRisMa said: don’t know they are twisting the truth. I’m saying it’s suspicious that they wait until he’s not around to talk about him. You see that as coincidence. I’m happy we get to find out either way. How do we find out? And what do we find out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaRisMa Posted February 20, 2023 Share Posted February 20, 2023 20 minutes ago, incognito_man said: I don't either, tbh I'm so confused, all I have are questions Who else is damaged? Packer fans get turned off by Rodgers. They decide not to watch the game. Packers and NFL lose money. Brian Gutekunst now has a report that he as GM of the Packers—opened his mouth to someone he shouldn’t have trusted with vital information. Now his future employability is damaged. None of this gets an exact dollar amount on it. None of it is prosecutable because of reporters privilege. But these are real problems for those real people. It comes out financially as a small win for the reporter whom doesn’t feel guilty at all because they are either legitimately simply reporting sources or they are convince themselves it’s okay because their subject has money and they don’t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted February 20, 2023 Share Posted February 20, 2023 3 minutes ago, ChaRisMa said: Who else is damaged Nobody. The answer is that nobody is damaged by that article. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaRisMa Posted February 20, 2023 Share Posted February 20, 2023 19 minutes ago, incognito_man said: How do we find out? And what do we find out? We find out if Gute planned to get rid of Rodgers like McGinn’s gut and Silverstein’s sources say based off whether or not Rodgers is a Packer this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.