Heather Cox last night

[Entropic]

What in the world is going on in this thread. that was a completely innocuous interview. Yikes. I as a viewer absolutely wanted to see what he would say to those questions and she asked them in easy manner.

I wholeheartedly agree with you. She did her job and asked relevant questions and they have to be expected to be asked such questions. You were under a very serious investigation and incommunicado the entire time. This seemed to make sense, your team just did a great thing, how did the past month of a crap storm impact the team for good or bad, what did you learn. Very reasonable.

Its like when the president is asked a question he doesn't like and boots the reporter of the media bus for the rest of the tour. Its like how dare you ask me those questions? Get over it you're in the spot light.

 

[tbonezone]

i'm sorry but i keep hearing the word REPORTER in the above posts. seriously?

this is the same girl with the beach volleyball pedigree and pulitzer prize nominations for "sounds like a hamstring" and "his dad loves the bears but mom is a cougar" and who could forget the detailed expose of "tailgate chili…beans or no beans" or the harrowing "manziel bobble heads". that's some exceptional journalism barbie.you're ready for nancy grace ...

 

[PeteCalvin]

Heaven forbid we hold our football gods accountable for what they may be involved with. More than that -- heaven forbid we hold anyone in the public spotlight accountable. Heaven forbid we ask questions that may be uncomfortable when we have access to their rarified air.

I don't know what's worse -- FSU banning her from the presentation or fans being in an uproar for perfectly appropriate questions given his last month in the limelight. What's the problem with asking a public figure uncomfortable questions from time to time? Fans feel like everything is wrong with it. Journalists are awful people for asking important questions because they're trying to "tear down" the anointed ones.

We've become a society of star *ckers. It's cool when the media builds them up to dizzying heights, but if they try to ask real questions about an actual important topic they're vultures, and awful, horrible people. Frankly those questions were softballs. He was accused of RAPING someone. How are any of those questions not important?

I'm sure the usual suspects here will say "IT'S NOT THE RIGHT FORUM!" When else has any reporter in the last month had a chance to talk to him about this? Now that the investigation is over he should have no problem answering those questions. He won't answer them in any other forum, so you ask them to him when you have the access.

He was obviously instructed to not talk about the matter. If he was instructed not to talk, then he isn't going to talk. If she wants to look like an ass and ask 10 questions about it that he won't answer, then fine. It's not about giving the kid a pass. He should address it. But if he didn't after the first couple of questions, drop it and spare the rest of us an awkward interview.

 

[strumpfasaurus]

I think the interview was mild, but at the same time I don't see why Winston has to answer any questions. He was not charged with any crimes, and that should be it. I know the case seemed inconspicuous but at the end of the day he had no charged brought against him and should never have to discuss it again if he does not want to.

 

[DoctorBombay]

I think when a witness is unimpaired and gives different statements and descriptions, it raises a red flag. I have not seen any pictures of him with dreads, which at one point she says her attacker had.

No no no no...don't you get it yet? It's guilty until proven innocent, that's the standard for these kinds of allegations. Appropriate skepticism is not acceptable against these unimpeachable accusers- I mean, " victims". Just sayin'.