Star should fire Jason Whitlock thread

[King_of_the_Cassel]

Hey hey hey, It's about time to start a signed petition to see if we can send Twitlock to Cincy with LJ. I for one am sick of all his racist driven cracks at Pioli and Haley and his immature behavior in an attempt to be a "shock jock" on the paper. I know I could just not read his articles and so could everyone else, but he is supposed to be a Chiefs reporter and because he isnt given a free pass to all information like he was in the past, he throws a big fit almost weekly and its getting very old. Whomever started a petition for the chiefs to cut LJ should start one about JW being canned and driven out of KC.

[kilobytes]

I've never quite understood all the hate for him. I enjoy his articles. I don't always agree with him though but its entertaining

[SAPHOJUNKIE]

agree that Whitlock is fat obnoxious mf but he's got a little piece of paper on his sideLII: Constitution ....if you don't like it, ignore

You don't understand the constitution.

A free press can't be shut down for criticizing the government. That doesn't mean that newspapers, which are privately owned, can't fire one of their journalists for performance-based inadequacies.

Freedom of speech means that you can't silence me, simply because you disagree with me. I have a right to my opinion. Whitlock has a right to his opinion. No one can stop him from spouting off ever-more-ridiculous nicknames for the men of power who ignore him. He has a constitutional right to never do research, never be honest and reasonable with his opinions, and make transparent attacks on those who recognize him as the hack he is. that doesn't mean he has a right to be PAID for these "opinions" when the people who PAY to read the newspaper throw his pages away, unread.

[OPLookn]

I guess I could agree with Whitlock but then we'd both be wrong...

[lucky_lefty]

You don't understand the constitution.

A free press can't be shut down for criticizing the government. That doesn't mean that newspapers, which are privately owned, can't fire one of their journalists for performance-based inadequacies.

Freedom of speech means that you can't silence me, simply because you disagree with me. I have a right to my opinion. Whitlock has a right to his opinion. No one can stop him from spouting off ever-more-ridiculous nicknames for the men of power who ignore him. He has a constitutional right to never do research, never be honest and reasonable with his opinions, and make transparent attacks on those who recognize him as the hack he is. that doesn't mean he has a right to be PAID for these "opinions" when the people who PAY to read the newspaper throw his pages away, unread.

then just ignore his columns then...this is the thing I don't get...I like chatting on here but people will crucify anyone who disagrees w/ their views on the team but let a player (or former player at that) speak out on the coach/team, then he needs to go or he's a problem...you have posters on here who say worse or you have your ones who wonder why/when is someone going to speak on it...w/ Sh tlock, its either hit or miss...some of his columns are spot on, some are just blabbering heaps of BS...

[matthewschiefs]

I am no fan of Whitlock for the most part but the guy hasnt done anything but his job. His job is to tell you what he thinks. Right or wrong thats what he does. Hes done nothing to deserve being fired for.

[SAPHOJUNKIE]

I am no fan of Whitlock for the most part but the guy hasnt done anything but his job. His job is to tell you what he thinks. Right or wrong thats what he does. Hes done nothing to deserve being fired for.

Maybe, maybe not. It depends on how the Star wishes to be viewed. He has done absolutely nothing to show that his opinion is an informed, thought-out one. It is pure sensationalism. Say shocking things to ignite readership. My best guess is that, having been forced out of radio, he know is employing the same tactics that have made Rush Limbaugh, Colin Cowherd, and many other on-air personalities successful - throw out a one-sided, strong opinion that many will disagree with. the more, the merrier. Literally. the more people who wholly disagree with his opinions, and the more intensely they do so, the more "successful" he feels his column was.

That's his only purpose in journalism.

I think he's fireable, because Kansas City sports fans often times read the newspaper for Chiefs news, and having Whitlock as your flagship column is both unfair and insulting to your readership. the problem is, the only way to show your displeasure is to not read, but I suppose that means not buy the newspaper. the way things are going, about a week of that and the Star would shut down.

[Chiefster]

You don't understand the constitution.

A free press can't be shut down for criticizing the government. That doesn't mean that newspapers, which are privately owned, can't fire one of their journalists for performance-based inadequacies.

Freedom of speech means that you can't silence me, simply because you disagree with me. I have a right to my opinion. Whitlock has a right to his opinion. No one can stop him from spouting off ever-more-ridiculous nicknames for the men of power who ignore him. He has a constitutional right to never do research, never be honest and reasonable with his opinions, and make transparent attacks on those who recognize him as the hack he is. that doesn't mean he has a right to be PAID for these "opinions" when the people who PAY to read the newspaper throw his pages away, unread.

Agreed with absolutely every single part of that. We all have the right to free speech, meaning we may say whatever is on our mind (within the confines of the law) no where in the constitution is there a right to be heard.

[chief31]

I don't rally have a big problem with Whitlock.

I rarely read what he writes, and when I do, it's generally because someone hated what he had to say.

Does he exaggerate? Yep.

Does he resort to childish name-calling? Yep.

Is he on the money? Yep. Not all the time. But certainly alot of the time.

I think the reason so many people hate him, is based on the fact that most of what I have read from him has been negative, in ragards to The Chiefs.

Emotions can get stirred if you are seeing/hearing/reading someone(thing) that you love getting beat up.

BUt that does not mean that they don't deserve to get beat up.

There has been alot of things hat this team, and the people who run it, have done to deserve getting a verbal beatdown for.

It just hurts to watch, and makes it even harder, when he pours salt in the wounds, with the name-calling and what-not.

But if you don't like him, then how do you know what he is writing?

I usually don't.

[figcrostic]

Hey hey hey, It's about time to start a signed petition to see if we can send Twitlock to Cincy with LJ. I for one am sick of all his racist driven cracks at Pioli and Haley and his immature behavior in an attempt to be a "shock jock" on the paper. I know I could just not read his articles and so could everyone else, but he is supposed to be a Chiefs reporter and because he isnt given a free pass to all information like he was in the past, he throws a big fit almost weekly and its getting very old. Whomever started a petition for the chiefs to cut LJ should start one about JW being canned and driven out of KC.

It's never going to happen. Why? You ask, name he's the only well known columnist on the whole staff. He is a doucher but people know and recognize him. But I agree I would like to see him S-canned.