Danny Snyder Forces The Washington Post to Rename “Redskins Insider” to “Football Insider”

[MTK]

And the perpection will always be that Snyder is evil. I get it, not a big fan of him myself but a lot of these things are blown out of proportion.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

And the perpection will always be that Snyder is evil. I get it, not a big fan of him myself but a lot of these things are blown out of proportion.

I think we are in essential agreement. I don't view Snyder as "evil," which is a word better reserved for the bin Ladens of the world. I just think that he can be very petty. And in this case, poorly timed.

As said, this is not a big deal. I'm done here.

[over the mountain]

In Internet age, sports teams are increasingly in the news business - The Washington Post

I read the article in the OP and the links. The link above talks about a high school athletic conf in Wisc. that doesnt want other internet companies to stream whole games online b/c they contracted with a co. to have exclusive rights to do that.

Streaming whole games is different from having the name "redskins" used in a section of a newspaper imo. A company streaming whole games online goes much more to the earning revenue side in which a company may make a claim that the online co. is making unauth revenue from use of the company. Just putting the name "redskins" as the title of a newspaper section seems much more public domain/freedom of press since the argument that the wash po is deriving unauth. revenue just from including the name "redskins" is much more of a stretch imo.

What NFL, NHL, MLB or NBA team besides the skins have forced their local major newspaper to not use their name the way the wash po had?

Given the legal battle that the DS brought to the citypaper and claims they want to subpoena wash po writers emails/communications and the overal history of the DS and wash po makes the term "forces" more than appropriate imo.

not a big deal in contrast to the other things the DS has done imo, just another example of the DS further alienating himself from the major newspaper in the city and the fans.

[SmootSmack]

I think the bigger issue was probably the video webcasts the Post was streaming

[over the mountain]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I think the bigger issue was probably the video webcasts the Post was streaming

Thats what I thought as well, the video streaming of parts of skins games etc, but the wash po (maybe probably self servingly to slant the action as petty) only mentioned changing the name and didnt mention the videos.

I dont go to the wash po for videos, i go to the nfl site who have a great database of categorized videos.

If its about videos, it makes the decision more understandable to me as i could see fans going to the wash po for videos of their team instead of the redskins official site which also has videos or other sites that have contracted with the team for authorization to use videos.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

Thats what I thought as well, the video streaming of parts of skins games etc, but the wash po (maybe probably self servingly to slant the action as petty) only mentioned changing the name and didnt mention the videos.

I dont go to the wash po for videos, i go to the nfl site who have a great database of categorized videos.

If its about videos, it makes the decision more understandable to me as i could see fans going to the wash po for videos of their team instead of the redskins official site which also has videos or other sites that have contracted with the team for authorization to use videos.

From the article:

The Redskins recently asked The Washington Post to rename the newspaper’s video webcast and blog about the team, which was called “Redskins Insider,” according to people who have knowledge of the circumstances. The team had used the name “Redskins Insider” first, and The Post agreed to switch to “Football Insider.”

[ArtMonkDrillz]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

From the article:

The Redskins recently asked The Washington Post to rename the newspaper’s video webcast and blog about the team, which was called “Redskins Insider,” according to people who have knowledge of the circumstances. The team had used the name “Redskins Insider” first, and The Post agreed to switch to “Football Insider.”

This is the part that I don't really get.

Maybe I'm wrong, but if the main issue really is that the Skins' website used the name "Redskins Insider" before The Post then couldn't the Post have simply changed the name of their blog/webcasts to something that's still Redskins-related? "The Redskins Post Source" or "'Skins News" or whatever, I just don't see why they felt the need to go so generic with the name unless they're just trying to prove a point.

And again, I'm probably missing a bigger issue.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by ArtMonkDrillz

This is the part that I don't really get.

Maybe I'm wrong, but if the main issue really is that the Skins' website used the name "Redskins Insider" before The Post then couldn't the Post have simply changed the name of their blog/webcasts to something that's still Redskins-related? "The Redskins Post Source" or "'Skins News" or whatever, I just don't see why they felt the need to go so generic with the name unless they're just trying to prove a point.

And again, I'm probably missing a bigger issue.

The main issue is the use of 'Redskins'

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I think the bigger issue was probably the video webcasts the Post was streaming

Not sure about this so don't shoot me but didn't George Michaels have a problem like this with his Sports Machine show when it first started?

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Not sure about this so don't shoot me but didn't George Michaels have a problem like this with his Sports Machine show when it first started?

Um...I won't comment on who had a problem with what...

Why are we boycotting?

[MonkFan4Life]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Um...I won't comment on who had a problem with what...

Why are we boycotting?

Because for whatever damn reason they feel that is what they should do. I told Chad Dukes yesterday that stuff like this really doesn't concern me. All I care about are Sundays. That they can still report on the redskins, still bash them if they want, and still cover them without changing anything but a name. I was told that IF i cared about Sundays then i should be pissed ? Why ? I don't know, however, my little youtube shoe that 6 people watch will have my reson for why this is so F'n retarded as well as the dumbing down of the Washington Redskins fan !

If you are so wuick to say If they do this then I'm done, ****ing roll. Accept that you don't give two F's about things outside of football or stop rooting. This hating yourself for being a redskins fan is idiotic people, it's not like you're legally tied to this team or something.

Smoot I don't get it, but hey. If the fan tells us to boycott, damnit, then we should boycott !

[KLHJ2]

Penis Insider.


Think about it.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by Angry

Penis Insider.


Think about it.

That's the publication on Pen Island.

[NC_Skins]

SS, I understand that other teams do this and it's their right to protect their labels and product. I get that, I really do.

However, I also read that the Giants, Cowboys, and Eagles all have media outlets that have similar blogs or sections in their coverage.


Let's be honest. This boils down to Dan Snyder being a punk ass bitch. He's hated the WaPO since he's taken over because he can't stand criticism. Don't believe me? Read this reporters experience with Dan Snyder first hand. Appalling.

Feinstein On The Brink


You don't think this isn't about Danny boy's beef with the WaPO because they've killed him in the papers? You are fooling yourself if you think otherwise.

I'm sorry, I certainly don't agree with the assessment that Dan Snyder's actions are overblown. Why is it you don't hear a single issue with other owners and the media? I can tell you why. Because most of the other owners are smart enough not to fight with the very people who are covering you.



It's funny though. Dan sure as hell didn't have a problem stealing somebody else name for profit.

Dan Snyder vs. the Kennedys: It Has Hooters and Cigar-Bar Access, But Should it Have RFK's Initials? - Washington City Paper



Let's not forget this gem. Threatening to fire a cheerleader if her husband talked to a competing media outlet. Overblown? ...lol No, his actions speak to his character.
Redskins owner apologizes over TV dispute involving cheerleader


No. **** Dan Snyder. He'll never atone for the shit he's done to the team. The only way he has a chance if he stays the **** out of the public eye and not speak at all unless it's a charity events. I don't want to hear a single word from this man unless it's "I'm selling the team".

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

SS, I understand that other teams do this and it's their right to protect their labels and product. I get that, I really do.

However, I also read that the Giants, Cowboys, and Eagles all have media outlets that have similar blogs or sections in their coverage.

Maybe they don't have other contractual obligations with other media. And they're not talking about shutting down the blog, just changing the name. Do all these other outlets use the team name in their title or do they use generic names such as Birds' Eye View in the Philadelphia Inquirer, or

Let's be honest. This boils down to Dan Snyder being a punk ass bitch. He's hated the WaPO since he's taken over because he can't stand criticism. Don't believe me? Read this reporters experience with Dan Snyder first hand. Appalling.

What about when I was working at a tv station helping launch a new Sunday night show and we got a letter from John Kent Cooke after the first episode saying we had to remove the word Redskins from the title? Can I call Cooke a punk ass bitch?

Feinstein On The Brink

The guy who called Shanahan a racist for benching McNabb? Yeah, who's the bitch now?

You don't think this isn't about Danny boy's beef with the WaPO because they've killed him in the papers? You are fooling yourself if you think otherwise.

I'm sorry, I certainly don't agree with the assessment that Dan Snyder's actions are overblown. Why is it you don't hear a single issue with other owners and the media? I can tell you why. Because most of the other owners are smart enough not to fight with the very people who are covering you.

Actually because the media usually doesn't talk about it. We've had to make several adjustments but we don't go around saying "Bud Selig made us do this"

It's funny though. Dan sure as hell didn't have a problem stealing somebody else name for profit.

Dan Snyder vs. the Kennedys: It Has Hooters and Cigar-Bar Access, But Should it Have RFK's Initials? - Washington City Paper

I think that's the first I've heard this story

Let's not forget this gem. Threatening to fire a cheerleader if her husband talked to a competing media outlet. Overblown? ...lol No, his actions speak to his character.
Redskins owner apologizes over TV dispute involving cheerleader

I don't think we read the same article there, looked like a misunderstanding to me. But whatever, Snyder caused the mess in Iraq...

No. **** Dan Snyder. He'll never atone for the shit he's done to the team. The only way he has a chance if he stays the **** out of the public eye and not speak at all unless it's a charity events. I don't want to hear a single word from this man unless it's "I'm selling the team".

Fine, whatever