Yesterday we posted a story about a column written by Andy Brown of the Louisburg-Herald, a town south of Kansas City. Brown had suggested that the Chiefs looked cheap and I responded to it, basically calling him out.
We pride ourselves on transparency around here so I wanted to offer up my reasoning behind doing that yesterday.
I always want to help start conversation on the site and I had this idea in my head that to do that we needed to be edgier to do that. I felt we needed to stir the pot and that came at the expense of Andy Brown. I called him "small town" and basically tried to act like a tough guy, which is even worse when you consider he's someone I won't even see in the press box. I don't even know him. It was an out-of-character move on my part.
While I think everything I wrote was accurate and there were several good points that did get across, there was a better way to go about things. I should have ignored it, or I should have contacted Andy Brown, or I should have written it in a way that wasn't demeaning. If you've been reading this site for a while, you know attacking others like that isn't my style at all (which some of you noted in the comments section and subsequent emails). I was trying to be someone who I wasn't. In short, it was a cheap shot, and I've learned a lesson in all this.
My point was this: I was tired of this narrative being presented that the Chiefs are cheap without any supporting evidence and I wanted to get people to think smarter about that narrative.
The lesson in all this? Be yourself. I think we're successful because we're fair and honest when it comes to blogging about the media and the team. Unfortunately, this likely won't be the last time we do something we wished we wouldn't have but, if that happens (and we'll do all we can to ensure it won't), we'll be as transparent about it as possible.
Andy Brown responded to our story via email and I posted his response below. We're on good terms now -- I think -- but I felt his initial response needed to be shared.
Hope you are having a good day. This is the small town writer who called the Chiefs cheap and I just wanted to respond to your blog post and clarify a few things about my column.
First off, it was an opinion column that describes how I feel about the Chiefs. It was not meant to be a financial breakdown. I have only about 15 inches to write a column every week so therefore I have to keep it short. I hardly ever write about professional sports. However, since it was a slow week in Louisburg with practices just now starting up for the high school, I decided to give my short opinion on the Chiefs. It wasn't meant to be anymore than that.
Second, I am not exactly sure why you chose my column to bag on when I don't even cover the Chiefs. I have heard several radio and television reporters in Kansas City say they don't know why the Chiefs aren't spending more money, but you are not going after them. If you wanted to prove your point that the Chiefs aren't cheap, maybe you should attack someone who actually covers the team. Instead I have several people on your site attacking me, my integrity and calling me a nothing journalist. If you had a problem with my column, you are more than welcome to email or call me, but instead you decide attack me and my writing because you can? You have that right just like I have a right to my opinion, but there is a thing called tact.
You have no idea who I am or what kind of journalist I am. Is it because I work in a small town newspaper that I am just some schmuck?
Listen, you run what appears to be a successful site and you have a lot of followers and it is obviously because you are doing something right and that you put a lot of thought into what you put on there and what you write. This however, you didn't put a lot of thought in to. You said on your site that you did this because you were in a mood. Well, I hope you are in a better mood today. You have people on your site saying you shouldn't have given me my 15 minutes of fame. Trust me, this was not fame.