It is getting curiouser and curiouser............

…for example, in Tom Murphy’s article:

“The quartet of Kentucky, Florida, South Carolina and the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville have the strongest chances to make the field, …”

Four SEC schools. Three referred to by their “normal” name and one “wordy to the max” naming. Could this weird policy stand out more? I don’t think so, except it hasn’t made it into a headline yet. Probably just a matter of time. It looks like the copy editor got chewed out bigtime for letting Nate Allen’s article, yesterday, get out without the mandatory “University of Arkansas at Fayetteville” inclusion and now he is desperate to not let it happen ever again.

All you can ask for is consistency. This is anything but, and an obvious/blatant slap in the face of The University of Arkansas.

It’s clear to me that the writers are being forced into doing this.

I sent emails to both Murphy and Bob Holt yesterday, letting them know that I knew it was not them, but a change in policy, and then outlining my grievance with this change. Both of them responded last evening, thanking me for articulating my concerns and letting me know that they were forwarding my email to ‘those that handle these things’. They didn’t say it outright, but the vibe was that they were not happy about it either and were glad to see someone from outside validating their position.

By the way, on one of the points I made in my note was that IF they stayed with this unfortunate position, then they MUST also note that the Longhorns play for the University of Texas at Austin, and that the Crimson Tide is associated with the University of Alabama at Tuscaloosa.

Emails and letters DO make an impact. If you are upset with this, I implore you to do the same thing I did. Remember to be courteous to the writers - they are the middle men in all of this. Just tell them why you don’t like the new policy and ask them to forward to “the appropriate party”. They will.

Another example of Media printing what they want to print based on a political agenda not supported by their subscribers. Are they willing to go bankrupt while supporting their inconsistent political agenda? No wonder the public doesn’t the media.

What is your position on this and do you know why they are doing this?

I am sure that Clay and the gang can’t divulge what’s happening so I sent an email to the Arkansas Times to see if they would like to stick it to the DemGaz and explain what’s behind all of this. The only problem is the Arkansas Times may like the fact that the UofA doesn’t like having the “at Fayetteville” tag on their name. They may want to support the DemGaz in this new policy.

My position is that Hawgs Illustrated writes it the same way it’s always written it.

Kudoes for that, Clay! But, as I understand what Richard stated in a post this morning, any of his DemGaz articles will reflect the new policy of the revisionists (he seems to have no choice if he desires to remain in their employ, so no argument here about that). HI’s problem with that is that a lot of its articles originate from the DG writers. Thus, despite your personal philosophy, the board is going to be increasingly infected with this “AF virus”, degrading the site’s content and leading to increasing resentment.

I am not suggesting you do anything about it, or that you can. Just meant as a sympathetic note because I can see a lot of people turning away because of the DG direct and intentional campaign.

It is ridiculous. This is what you get without adequate competition in the print media business.

As long as the paper is the only one that does this it really doesn’t matter
The UA could really stick it to them by limiting the paper’s access which would marginalize them. Something they cannot afford.
I assume the school will take the high ground.
It is a shame that Whole Hog sold out to these people so we could all fight back by dropping all subscritions and tell them why.
Now who is benefitting from this? Follow the money.

I suspect it is UALR advocates in Little Rock who resent that “The University”, UofA, University of Arkansas, etc. all communicate very well that it is the original flagship campus of that system being talked about, not one of the lesser, satellite, campuses. In almost every state (California being one exception) there is a flagship campus that is THE University of that state and the other campuses of that system who came along later get the “at so-and-so” label, not the flagship. Artificially trying to create the appearance of equality between the UofA and UALR by trying to take away the flagship distinction will not work and will generate great ill will towards the perpetrators. JMVVVHO.

Campus politics should not spill over to the sports pages.

Oh, Cal-Berkeley is very much the flagship campus there too. The fact that other UC campuses, including UCLA, are very well regarded academically doesn’t change that. In fact, they tend to refer to that campus as “Berkeley”, not as Cal-Berkeley or Cal. The school website is, for instance.

There is no school commonly referred to as The University of California. They have numerous major institutions in the University of California systems at San Diego, Davis, Los Angeles, Berkeley, etc. They use the Cal or Berkeley nickname for THEIR flagship just like we use “The University”, Fudville, The YouOfA, The University of Arkansas, etc.

It is absurd. The logical way to write that story is the University of Kentucky at Lexington, the University of Florida at Gainesville, the University of South Carolina at Columbia, and the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. Everyone of those schools has a campus in another city. Every. One.

But they only single out Arkansas for this special treatment. Why?

The newspaper’s style rule only applies to schools from within the state.

The rule is even more stupid. If everyone in the country recognizes who the Razorbacks are and who the University of Arkansas is, everyone in the state knows it even better. People know there’s a UALR, a UAM, a UAPB, and now a UAFS. Except in those stories that mention the whole system & need to distinguish the schools, it’s ridiculous to add “Fayettville”. That’s especially true in sports stories when the “Arkansas Razorbacks” or even just Razorbacks or UA Razorbacks are mentioned.

Sounds more & more like the reason for the rule is to bring the UA down to the level of a directional school. Tell the folks in charge the UA was founded in 1871 and has always been at Fayetteville. The addition of other schools to fit under a UA umbrella doesn’t change that.

To whom do we write? I missed the email addresses of those involved. It’s too bad that HI made this move to join up, I never kept up the Demazette bc of HI magazine and board and another paid board I frequent. I would cancel today if I knew a way to continue to read the HI crew. There are other media outlets in this state and while I am sure we are the message board minority, eventually they will lose subscribers over this.

ASU has campuses in Beebe, Mountain Home, and Paragould, yet you never see “@ Jonesboro” stuck onto their flagship institution’s name in the DemGaz. This is a UALR vs UofA issue artificially created by a Little Rock owned newspaper. I live in Little Rock so don’t assume this is an anti-Little Rock slant. If “@ you-name-the-town” is not needed to understand which University of Florida, Georgia, Texas, Alabama, etc. is the subject of the sentence, then it is not needed in articles about The Trojans or The Razorbacks. When the dateline says “Fayetteville” at the top of the article where is the need to be redundant? This is not a journalism issue, it is a newspaper with a political agenda abusing its power. JMVVVVVHO

Email Jason Yates -