Jon Miller Talks Criticism And The Internet

Dan Steinberg, now of the Sporting Blog, sat down with Jon Miller recently and specifically asked him about the criticism that both he and Joe Morgan receive(d). Not only did Miller discuss blogs and the internet as a whole, but he specifically addressed the whole Fire Joe Morgan issue as well....

Hey, speaking of Joe, do you get irritated with some of the criticism?

Well, I figure for any of us in this business, the fact that there are critics, radio/TV sports critics, it’s all a positive for us. Because if you go back years ago, really before my time, Walter Winchell had the big column. In San Francisco, it was Herb Caen. I know here in Washington, in the Style section they’ve always had columnists. PR people are trying to get showbiz people and clients in those columns, so that they’re around town, getting their name in the paper. And now the sportscasters have these critics, and we get talked about.

What about the Internet stuff, do you read blogs?

Oh no, I don’t even understand what the point of it is. I mean, I know people are communicating, but it’s not interesting to me. I like the blogs that the beat writers have now. Henry Schulman with the Chronicle, in addition to whatever he’s writing for the paper, he’s got other stuff on his blog. And Bruce Jenkins is a great columnist for the Chronicle, he’s got other columns on the blog.

But for the rest of it, I don’t really care about it. I mean, for me, if there’s criticism, and it’s about something that I could do something about, or at least something that I could say that’s a good point, or no I disagree with that for this reason, well, that’s good. I mean, we all need feedback, and maybe somebody makes a good point. You know, I was a terrible English student in high school. I couldn’t probably diagram a sentence today. I mean, if somebody uses the phrase dangling participle, I’m going 'Huh?' I don’t have a clue what that is.

But over the years, people would send me letters, saying you said such and such, and that’s really improper usage, the proper way to say that would be this way. I'd say Eddie Murray awaits on deck, and the guy wrote me and said it would be awaits his turn on deck. You couldn’t say "'awaits' without 'his turn;' you have to say what he’s awaiting. So that was good, so I learned from that. A lot of stuff, that’s how I learned it. I thought that was very instructive.

But if somebody just says, this guy sucks, or he stinks? Well, that’s not interesting to me. You know, there’s nothing I can do with it. With Joe, you know, Joe knows a LOT about the game. Whether occasionally he mangles the language or says something that maybe comes out different from what he meant to say, like a million other ballplayers, that all could be. But they told me that there’s a Web site called FireJoeMorgan.com or something. Well, what’s the point of that? That’s just mean, mean-spirited. I mean, what is the actual point?

I guess Miller has a point. If someone doesn't "get" blogs, then there's really no point in trying to convince them over their validity or entertainment value. It's taken me awhile myself to understand the difference between an opinion, and something that is just "mean spirited" as Jon says, but I can understand how maddening it can get listening to certain people. Especially Dr. Joe Morgan.

Jon Miller on 300 Wins, Spanish Accents and FJM (The Sporting Blog)