As I read (UC)LA Times reporter Paul Pringle's article in the California Section (not the Sports Section) this morning, I wondered why was the article ever written?
Mr. Pringle reported NO new "News" about Pete Carroll and USC. All he did was to "SENSATIONALIZE" rehashed information.
His source, an internal Pac-10 report, never even stated Pete Carroll's name. How is Mr. Pringle privy to an "INTERNAL" report in the first place? Mr. Pringle, himself, made the assumption that the coach named in the report was Pete Carroll. For all I know, the coach that was UN-named could be UCLA's "Slick" Rick!
Of course, the (UC)LA Times would never print a similar article about UCLA!
Will the UCLA BIAS over USC ever end?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment