Grossi's remarks were intended to be private but they weren't shielded, to his later dismay. If he had used the same language describing Mitt Romney, give or take several million, he would have been spared his demotion. But pro football is very big business and despite the paper's denial that the Browns front office had called for the writer's put-down, surely Lerner had a lot to say about it through one channel or another.
It the Browns were at least competitive over the past decade or so, the editors might have been excused for telling Grossi to go to his room. Does anybody want to defend the owner's relevancy?
Oh, Fladung did concede that Grossi was indeed a "very good beat writer" but that his next assignment at the paper still hasn't been determined.
Fair warning to Grossi's successor.
Posts
3 comments:
Private and Twitter can't be used together in the same sentence.
It's the same as saying the New York Times ran a "private headline".
Not being a tweeter (twitterer?) I don't have a clue to the formal language of the system. I guess I followed the published report that said Grossi thought he was sending a DM - "a private tweet".... You could have fooled me.
That may be true, but relying on a mass posting technology to send a private message is naive.
I'd be much more inclined to believe Grossi is using the Direct Message excuse as cover. tony gets the first Anthony Weiner Award for 2012.
Post a Comment