A thread about uga

justafan said:
Thank you, Alan Judd, for sacrificing your job to do the right thing and report an important story. It isn't worth working for people who would fire you for that.
Click to expand...

Well he got fired for inaccuracies and fabricating stuff in his story. I'd love to see nothing more than Ugag get hit hard and to be dragged through the fire, but when a 24 year tenured, who's also your lead investigative journalist flat out lies and fabricates things in his story, especially a serious topic like rape and rape support.......Thats not good and heads will roll. Judd also got fired from his position in Louisville for doing the same thing apparently so he has a history of this type of thing.

The fact the AJC issued corrections & fired him, while mildly & meticulously responding in writing the way they did, tells me they know there was more inaccuracte/fabricated things in his article and they don't want to be sued by the UGAA, so they corrected the bare minimum in good faith. Judd response after being fired also shoes he knew he went off the rails a bit. This was a pre-emptive "let's end this now" on the AJCs part because they know their guy screwed up as did his editors and management.

It's also makes UGA now look like they won and that the AJC was on a smear campaign which sucms because there is a lot of stupid stuff happening at that cesspool.
 
If AJC thought there was a bunch of inaccuracies, they would have retracted article. The fact that they only corrected two minor points indicates that they believe in the facts of most of the article. I am fairly certain that there was a decent amount of editorial review on this before publishing the article since it is a pretty hard hitting piece on an institution beloved by many in the state. I would also surmise that Judd was canned due to his resume omission, not for two minor items in the article. Not so different than OLeary - bogus stuff added/omitted from resume years ago that could/should have been easily corrected after finding success.
 
nfGoldmember said:
I think that the precise number of sexual offenders and other basic facts are something that they should get right or not publish.
Click to expand...

You can never be 100% sure of anything, better to just not ever report anything at all then if you have to get every detail right down to the plank length. This is all a bunch of bullshit, much more likely that this isn't the real issue, which is being obscured by this excuse that is being given. Ultimately I'd place my bet on its the same kind of $$$ / power dynamic that exists across many realms.

Alternative:

"my sources say there were 11 instances".

"reveal your sources"

"no"

How hard is that.
 
juraitwaluzka said:
You can never be 100% sure of anything, better to just not ever report anything at all then if you have to get every detail right down to the plank length. This is all a bunch of bullshit, much more likely that this isn't the real issue, which is being obscured by this excuse that is being given. Ultimately I'd place my bet on its the same kind of $$$ / power dynamic that exists across many realms.

Alternative:

"my sources say there were 11 instances".

"reveal your sources"

"no"

How hard is that.
Click to expand...

The implication from the AJC retraction is that he didn't have validated sources indicating 11 instances, but rather he MADE THAT UP and was fired because of it. If you are okay with the AJC just making stuff up, even details, then fine but I am not. I am sure that an equally damming but maybe less inflammatory article could of been published with verified sources and UGA's lawyers would have no grounds to push for a full or partial retraction.
 
nfGoldmember said:
The implication from the AJC retraction is that he didn't have validated sources indicating 11 instances, but rather he MADE THAT UP and was fired because of it. If you are okay with the AJC just making stuff up, even details, then fine but I am not. I am sure that an equally damming but maybe less inflammatory article could of been published with verified sources and UGA's lawyers would have no grounds to push for a full or partial retraction.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I get that but it's just disappointing to me that this is the issue and not the actual infinitely more egregious violations that so many place on the importance hierarchy below football wins. If the travesty of justice is some mal-reporting that takes down the uga bullshit (fantasy as that possibility may be), I could live with it vs people being ok living with their fetish of watching criminal young men on the gridiron held to no standard and whose lives will be öööö other than those that make it to the NFL. It's repugnant.
 
nfGoldmember said:
The implication from the AJC retraction is that he didn't have validated sources indicating 11 instances, but rather he MADE THAT UP and was fired because of it. If you are okay with the AJC just making stuff up, even details, then fine but I am not. I am sure that an equally damming but maybe less inflammatory article could of been published with verified sources and UGA's lawyers would have no grounds to push for a full or partial retraction.
Click to expand...
That’s “the implication” because U(sic)GA wants that to be implied. Congrats on being a dwag putz. :dunno:
 
gtleviathan said:
That’s “the implication” because U(sic)GA wants that to be implied. Congrats on being a dwag putz. :dunno:
Click to expand...
Yes, the whole world is conspiring to prop up UGA football and keep us down that is the AJC's actual mission. Instead of just publishing a bunch of fluff pieces about UGA's football run they decide to publish a bunch of investigative pieces directly attacking Kirby's leadership, consuming resources, etc.. only to retract a minor detail because that's what UGA wants.

You got me for being so naive, thanks
 
nfGoldmember said:
Yes, the whole world is conspiring to prop up UGA football and keep us down that is the AJC's actual mission. Instead of just publishing a bunch of fluff pieces about UGA's football run they decide to publish a bunch of investigative pieces directly attacking Kirby's leadership, consuming resources, etc.. only to retract a minor detail because that's what UGA wants.

You got me for being so naive, thanks
Click to expand...
It’s the U(sic)GA lawyers who made the implication. The AJC just doesn’t have the intestinal fortitude to push back forcibly. (And why should they, they’re a dying enterprise in a dying industry with a majority of customers who are actively invested in the dwag myth of righteousness.)

All that being the case, there’s really no good reason any Tech man should fall for the BS coverup. No, there’s no reason to believe the reporter “made up” anything. It’s perfectly reasonable to believe he heard plausible evidence of 11 incidents. Seeing as how that wasn’t the main thrust of the story and the main story seemed competently and thoroughly researched (and the additional fact he didn’t even attempt to report in depth on all 11), it’s easy enough to recognize that line as a part of a broad illustration of the legal (and moral) issues the reporter observed around Athens. There is no blatant lack of journalistic integrity in making that observation. We can easily see the attempted whitewashing for what it is.
 
Part of me is curious where all the people who riot and protest about rape and violence against women (It is wrong and always will be) are in this part of me just has a bit of curiosity.
 
I’m going to cancel my subscription to the AJC. Biggest cuck move ever…but probably a smart business decision. UGA has decades of lawyers lined up ready to take on this case pro boner.
 
nfGoldmember said:
Yes, the whole world is conspiring to prop up UGA football and keep us down that is the AJC's actual mission. Instead of just publishing a bunch of fluff pieces about UGA's football run they decide to publish a bunch of investigative pieces directly attacking Kirby's leadership, consuming resources, etc.. only to retract a minor detail because that's what UGA wants.

You got me for being so naive, thanks
Click to expand...

1689891311920.png
1689891311920.png
 
nfGoldmember said:
The implication from the AJC retraction is that he didn't have validated sources indicating 11 instances, but rather he MADE THAT UP and was fired because of it. If you are okay with the AJC just making stuff up, even details, then fine but I am not. I am sure that an equally damming but maybe less inflammatory article could of been published with verified sources and UGA's lawyers would have no grounds to push for a full or partial retraction.
Click to expand...

Pretty much my thoughts as well. A culture of speeding and reckless driving, lax rules for recruiting staffers is one thing. Ample info/facts to run with that all day long which should be exposed. Once you get into "rape" and "rape support" especially a HC, you need to have your facts straight and not just post innuendo in a fiery article and call it factual. It clearly wasn't in that regard. The AJC overstepped and got called on it. They should have just stuck with the speeding angle.

I'd feel the exact same way if they came after our institution for X, but then went off on a tangent of Y with faulty and or unverifiable information. The latter is a smear campaign.

Kirby is a d-bag with a horrible haircut and pompous attitude, but I don't believe he "supports" anything to do with rape. They also said they could not verify that Kirby gave his blessing to players to go to the Anderson trial hearing, yet Judd put that in his article as fact....

They shot themselves in the foot and got called on it. I'd expect the exact same if they ever come after our coach and program.
 
YellowJacket4Life said:
Pretty much my thoughts as well. A culture of speeding and reckless driving, lax rules for recruiting staffers is one thing. Ample info/facts to run with that all day long which should be exposed. Once you get into "rape" and "rape support" especially a HC, you need to have your facts straight and not just post innuendo in a fiery article and call it factual. It clearly wasn't in that regard. The AJC overstepped and got called on it. They should have just stuck with the speeding angle.

I'd feel the exact same way if they came after our institution for X, but then went off on a tangent of Y with faulty and or unverifiable information. The latter is a smear campaign.

Kirby is a d-bag with a horrible haircut and pompous attitude, but I don't believe he "supports" anything to do with rape. They also said they could not verify that Kirby gave his blessing to players to go to the Anderson trial hearing, yet Judd put that in his article as fact....

They shot themselves in the foot and got called on it. I'd expect the exact same if they ever come after our coach and program.
Click to expand...

In the words of @jts1207, Lol.
 
YellowJacket4Life said:
Pretty much my thoughts as well. A culture of speeding and reckless driving, lax rules for recruiting staffers is one thing. Ample info/facts to run with that all day long which should be exposed. Once you get into "rape" and "rape support" especially a HC, you need to have your facts straight and not just post innuendo in a fiery article and call it factual. It clearly wasn't in that regard. The AJC overstepped and got called on it. They should have just stuck with the speeding angle.

I'd feel the exact same way if they came after our institution for X, but then went off on a tangent of Y with faulty and or unverifiable information. The latter is a smear campaign.

Kirby is a d-bag with a horrible haircut and pompous attitude, but I don't believe he "supports" anything to do with rape. They also said they could not verify that Kirby gave his blessing to players to go to the Anderson trial hearing, yet Judd put that in his article as fact....

They shot themselves in the foot and got called on it. I'd expect the exact same if they ever come after our coach and program.
Click to expand...
You obviously don’t know many powerful people and how the state is run by lawyers.

Agreeing with the legal team from uga and calling yourself “YellowJacket4Life” should be a bannable offense.

F this guy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top