- Okay, so 610 am sports talk radio host Josh Innes said condescending, dismissive, misleading things about me and my blog on his radio show. This is not surprising because as he says, he doesn't know me, doesn't read my little blog and seemingly, his entire schtick is being smug, pot-stirring and dismissive about just about everything.
Probably the highest complement for me and my blog is that Josh doesn't like us. As far as I can tell from hearing him on the radio, we couldn't be any more opposite human beings. I'm guessing we're both okay with that.
But I figure it is worth using this um "beef" as a discussion on sexism and sports talk. Because why not? As Josh says, you can't talk about Matt Schaub for the entire off-season.
I usually don't like bringing attention to trolling, pot-stirring, negative attention behaviors, but 1. Sexism and sports talk radio is an under-discussed topic 2. I feel bad that he suggested that I trashed the Mad Radio show which is unequivocally not true but he used as a strawman to bring me up in a discussion because he got his feewings hurteds. (I very much enjoy Seth Payne and Mike Meltzer's relatively newish show. It's another great option for that time of day. Seth is radio gold on just about everything, and Meltzer on Texans/NFL topics often references advanced statistics topics in support of his point of view which is always better than emoting drunk guy at the end of the bar feelings about games).
- After hearing Innes' beef with me, I think this is where it started.
- A few thoughts. I would much rather bring attention to people who I think do good things than dog people who do things I don't like. I enjoy talking sports, don't like talking about my female point of view stuff because painful and uggh, but I've realized over the years that if I don't comment on this stuff from time to time, which female in the Houston sports world will? Casual sexism is everywhere. I'm not going to combat it all because it would be pointless and not enough hours in the day. It's more common on sports talk than casual racism, because if hosts go there, they are more likely to have someone call BS on it. (Though not always).
The guy talk radio format exists because often there's not enough sports talk to fill air. I get that. But I think Jen made a good point. There's some bits on sports talk radio that are totally repulsive for females to listen to. I also think there's a ton of male hosts in Houston that do guy talk radio format in a funny, clever, self-deprecating, inclusive, non-creepy way.
Right now, I think the best are Lance Zierlein, Sean Pendergast, Seth Payne. There's plenty of others I think who do it well, but I think these guys do it the best. In full disclosure, I know all those guys, and have done radio with two of them, so maybe because I know them I'm more likely to not see what they are saying as creepers. But I think in sum, they do usually their radio in a way that wouldn't repulsive to wives or girlfriends or their female listeners.
- OK, the following Tweet was used as an excuse to start the beef. Interestingly, even though Innes pretends like he is defending the Mad Radio guys, in his tweets and in his radio bit, he suggests that he declined doing the Upton radio bit because he thought it would be bad radio. So I'm not sure what he's defending, other than I think he got his wittle feewings hurt that some lady with a cute little blog might think what he does is creeper radio.
- This was not meant as a slam to Mike. It's just the obvious twitter joke about what is the point of a model on the radio, and what question would you think to ask her. Oh, the tweet happens to publicize the interview to my followers, so for those interested in hearing Upton on the radio they could check it out.
- As a Texans blogger, I TOTALLY get this. More than most. Matt Schaub talk is boring, usually stupid, and is certain to get me to change stations.
- Steve wins Twitter.
- This is where Josh butts into the conversation. He doesn't follow me. My tweet wasn't addressed to him. I have no idea why he decided to do a hit and run on the Upton thing, where he comes out of nowhere, and slags a single blog post. I get that my blog isn't for everyone. But that blog post actually has been shared a lot, received a number of comments, has a lot of page hits.
My blog fills a niche. It's for Texans fans who want informed, reasoned discussion of the Texans. Lots of sports media types read it because sports have become more specialized, and it often talks about details not discussed elsewhere. It's also a resource for people outside of Houston that would like to know more about the team for fantasy football reasons or because they are draftniks or whatever.
I have opinions. I share how I got to those opinions. Then the comments end up being like a second blog post, where I moderate a discussion, answer questions. There's not that many places where fans can get calm, in-depth, evidence-based info about the Texans, and my blog was one of the first. But yeah, not everyone's cup of tea.
- Note, I didn't say that Mike and Seth would be creepy. I suggested that a radio interview with Kate Upton might be more interesting than a blog post about the Texans #2 wide receiver position, but has the potential to be more creeper. Who can disagree with that point of view?