[Kelly Blake Moran]

Jeff,

I think we've done a pretty good job of working through some of the issues, and I think for the most part we have been complimentary of the persons involved.  Are you saying that there is a list of people that are beyond any question, and then there is another list of people that we can go after.  Can you provide both lists?

[Jeff_Lewis]

That's kinda nasty isnt it Kelly?

Lorne said he hadnt directly seen the work.  He quoted people who have.  There was no misrepresentation by Lorne, which was certainly what a number of posters were implying.

[Kelly Blake Moran]

That's kinda nasty isnt it Kelly?

Lorne said he hadnt directly seen the work.  He quoted people who have.  There was no misrepresenation by Lorne, which was certainly what a number of posters were implying.

It was Jeff, but it felt good at the time.  At least on my part I think I was less concerned about any misrepresentation, at least until it was brought up, and more astounded by the acknowledgement he had never seen the work yet was devoting valuable space to it.  It still doesn't seem quite right, something is just not quite right about it, but if we are to accept it because they are good guys then so be it, I am beginning to beat a dead horse.

[ForkaB]

I'm available to write an article about Sand Hills.

Haven't been there, haven't done it, haven't got the t-shirt, but I know a lot of people who have.

All offers should be directed to my agent.

[George Pazin]

It's brutally cold and snowy in the Burgh. I can only imagine it's worse in the great white north. Next to nothing's happening on the golf scene worldwide, so maybe Lorne jsut wanted to provide a little filler for the downtime.

I don't think Rod's courses are in Lorne's neighborhood, and I hope I can be one of the first to experience Cabot Links.

Maybe slightly questionable judgement in offering others' opinions, but I'd cut Lorne some slack in this case.

[Robert Thompson]

Yeah, but Rich, if you only offered your buddies' quotes on their experience at Sand Hills, how are you misrepresenting anything. Now if you wrote something suggesting you had been there, when you had not, that would be something entirely different.
Would it benefit Rubenstein to see Whitman's work? Sure. Did it hurt the article because he has not seen it? Maybe. Was the article more worthwhile than another story on Mike Weir? Absolutely.

I'm one of Lorne's main competitors in the Canadian market and wrote about Cabot Links two months ago. But Ben's project is worthwhile and if Rubenstein's story helps it get off the ground, so much the better.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Robert:

I don't comment on courses / architects unless I have sampled them personally. I also make it a point not to extrapolate a "fixed" position on any architect until I have played a good cross section of courses within that person'a portfolio. Others may do it a different way but I don't feel the reader benefits from such situations -- ever.

Simply listing information is one thing -- saying with total clarity that "x" course(s) or "x" architect is to be saluted without a direct connection is nothing more than totally disconnected journalism.

Matt,
You raise my ire here. You can't extrapolate on any fixed position of architect or course that you don't know, yet you can post your opinion on Bayonnne, having not played it. Give me a break!

To even compare yourself to a class of individual and/or of a journalistic talent such as Lorne Rubestein is more self-serving hubris on your part. Matt, simply put--your no Lorne Rubenstein!

While I'll take my lumps from an earlier day and time frame in my life when I questioned the integrity of Ron Whitten, because even when I originally posted that thread knowing I wasn't even in his league, I was questioning more the motives and the agenda.

So tell me where do you get your nerve to even question Lorne's integrity as if you and the New Jersey Golfer were the highest of authorities? Try using some humility first by looking at your circulation.

As for Rod Whitman, I can only say that the article was pretty spot on what I've heard about Rod. I haven't had the great fortune to met him but I have seen and played his work with Coore & Crnshaw at Friar's Head, and frankly speaking, he hits a grand slam of mass proportions there. It only adds to the excitement of someday getting to visit Nova Scotia and the Cabot Links which will no doubt take its place amongst the more interesting and worthwhile projects of the future.

Kelly,
If Lorne's article was hilighting one of your courses, would you have been so sensitive? I can only hope not! Now for your penance, you must go out and search a true links project of your own so Lorne can write about it! (Put the Moran School of thought in the sand!)

[Kelly Blake Moran]

Tom,

When I get that sand site you'll be the first to know, Lorne will be the second, how's that!

If Lorne wrote an article about me I wouldn't have posted it here and we wouldn't be talking about it!  Would I ahve been sensitive, tom deep down I would be a little disappointed and disallusioned that someone wrote about me without doing some research, but no I wouldn't have complained about it on here.  I mean Whitten wrote a nice article in GD online about Hawk Pointe but he didn't play the course I am told and that disappointed me but I did not complain about it on here at the time, I shamelessly use it in my promo material,  so I guess I'm a no good dope too

[Matt_Ward]

Tommy:

Let's be clear when you quote me -- I simply opined my thoughts on Bayonne from personally walking the ENTIRE course and I DISCLOSED as much several times in that particular thread. I hold for a final opinion after I play it.

However, let's keep this clear -- walking the course is far better than those who simply glean thoughts of courses from the opinions of others or from photos or from other third hand accounts. Let me also state again that I don't extrapolate on the collective works of an architect from having only played a mere handful of courses as some do. I try to develop a much richer perspective from a greater volume of courses in order to see what a particular architect is capable in doing with the various sites they handle.

Tommy -- let's be a bit more serious and drop the inane self-created issue you present -- to wit -- this silly thought that I somehow equated myself with Mr. Rubenstein. I simply opined that any writer should base their opinions on a direct personal situation. Mr. Rubenstein doesn't get a free pass simply because he is Mr. Rubenstein.

You also have this mistaken habit in assuming that people cannot weigh in with their opinions unless their circulation size permits it. That is simply rubbish. Informed criticism carries weight irrespective of the person involved, their affiliations and their past comments. Simply put -- you are free to critique Ron Whitten in any aspect you feel merits such discussion. The key to the discussion rests with the arguments you present -- not some sort of status level that insulates such people from any critique.

In regards to Rod Whitman he clearly is a talented fellow, but I would like to hold my comments on specific courses he has designed in Canada until I have played them. I simply concur with what Kelly has stated. Due diligence requires no less.  

[George Pazin]

Matt, Lorne didn't opine anything about Rod's courses. He passed along a few opinions and stories to his readers. He didn't try to deceive anyone. Nowhere does Lorne express a "final opinion" on Rod's work, he simply says more people ought to seek out his work. Given that the piece is in The Globe and Mail, I'd hardly call it anything other than illuminating.

If one-tenth of the folks who play everything (with a name) and post on here about it wrote one-tenth as well as Lorne, a strong site would be even stronger.

[Matt_Ward]

George:

Do you understand due diligence on the part of the writer / reviewer?

Look at Kelly's point / re: Hawk Pointe and I can see very clearly what he is talking about.

Mr. Rubenstein is free to say anything he wishes. I would just think that before suggesting to his readers that people should see such courses that it might be helpful if he himself had played them in order to bolster such a recommendation.

[George Pazin]

Would you say it was wrong for me to suggest people should play a Mackenzie course, even though I haven't played one?

[Mike_Young]

People on this site are too sensitive.....isn't it obvious that all this article was about ....Zokol calls his Buddy Lorne and says he needs some press on his project......LR says "I'll work it in"......he calls a few people that know RW and writes an article.....none of this has anything to do with RW......it is just a common everyday occurence in this business or any other except this time someone came to close to one of the chosen.  JMO

[Robert Thompson]

George: You are right. Lorne was quite clear on using secondary support to develop an argument that Rod's work is worth seeing. I think Bill Coore and Richard Zokol are pretty respected figures, and that's who he used. He didn't critique the course, just spoke about the style in which he worked.
Besides, most of the story was about two courses that don't even exist.

[Tony_Muldoon]

What's the tune?

hmm I think I could just about hum the tune (last night I'd happily have sung it for anyone who wanted to hear it or even if they really didn't).  It's a sort of chant moving towards a thrash at the end if that helps.

I should have credited it to Monty Python - almost certainly the work of Eric Idle and I wouldn't be at all surprised if it wasn't currently wowing Broadway in "Spamalot"!

[Joe Hancock]

Jeff,

You're only entitled to slight regret...this is nowhere near the level of requiring serious regret. That's more for things like affairs, swearing at your pastor, etc.

Some of us happy-go-lucky types don't see all the jaded negativity in such posts, but thankfully there are plenty of others willing to pick up the slack.

Carry on....

Joe

[Mike_Young]

Jeff,
I see no reason to regret posting this article.  And I don't see where LR's integrity is questioned.  Everyone in the business does or IMHO should be trying to have these types of articles written anytime they can.  The big boys have departments that do nothing but try and place these types of items.  People just read too much into these things.  Again this site freaks over idealistic virtues instead of accepting realistic marketing.  Take it and run with it.

[Kelly Blake Moran]

I seriously regret posting this article.
 I wasn't trying to get any "mileage" of out of the column, Kelly. But if you're right, and Rod and I are getting some "mileage", thanks for keeping it atop the board.  


Have fun  

Always happy to do my part for the little guy.  That's what its all about!

[Kelly Blake Moran]

The little guy?

Bumping this back up for ya Jeff. You know the unknown artist, the guy that gets no recognition, the little guy.  That's the part of the premise of the article.  I don't think calling inot question Lorne's devoting his space to an architect whose work he has never seen is calling into question his credibility.  Come on you are trying to disparage my criticism by making me out to be the bad guy.  Geoff Childs comes on here and criticizes my course but I did not take that as any thing serious like question my credibility he was citicising my work.  Is lorne above criticism nio matter how unfounded you may think it is?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Robert Thompson,

If he's never seen the property, then the quotes he's selected for publication could misrepresent the product, and that could be deemed disengenuous.

[Rick Shefchik]

There are many kinds of stories written in daily newspapers, and columnists like Rubenstein have even more latitude than most journalists to write all kinds of pieces. Even within the golf beat, there are course reviews, personal profiles, tournament stories, business stories, product descriptions, trend analyses -- it really is kind of endless.

Those of us who work for newspapers -- even national icons like Lorne Rubenstein -- are responsible for a certain amount of copy each week, or month (I have no idea what his exact schedule is, but he's got one.)

Adam is right -- it's winter, it's Canada, Rubenstein needed a story, and he decided to write about an architect whose work has been noteworthy. Reporters do that all the time; we interview people who've done things that others are talking about, whether we've had a chance to see those things firsthand or not.

The problem here, I think, is that this particular piece has been construed as a course review, when it was a personality piece/trend piece. Yes, absolutely, it would have had more depth if Rubenstein had seen the courses in question, but not having seen them doesn't put the subject matter out of bounds.

I greatly respect Matt Ward's determination -- and ability -- to see every course he writes about, and he writes about a lot of course. But I wouldn't attribute the motivation of this piece to "laziness." It's just a different kind of story. Newspaper budgets are tight and deadlines are demanding. Interviewing an architect whose courses you haven't played is not a journalistic sin; it's just one of the many kinds of stories and columns you'll see in your local paper every day.

[Kelly Blake Moran]

Rick,

I think you make excellent points about the reality of your business and I should probably give more weight to it and relax.  However, despite some here saying that criticising is tantamount to sullying someones credibility which I do not beleive, and in the spirit of what happens to us on a constant basis that is the dissection of our work which is right to do, it is tough to take but the more it happens the better it is for all and there is nothing you can really do about it so you take it as it comes don't complain and maybe learn from it.  Having said that I think it is therefore appropriate for me to raise the issues I have raised.  For instance, now this comes from the article written by someone who has never seen the work of the architect:

"But the Albertan ought to be at the head of any ranking of least-known architects who should be well known.

Then there's Blackhawk, near Edmonton, another exercise in understated, hardy golf. Whitman has remote Scottish linksland in his DNA."

How do you make those statements from secondhand reports and pictures?

[Rick Shefchik]

Kelly --

Fair points. Those comments should have been attributed to someone who had seen the courses. Rubenstein mitigates the situation somewhat by stating up front that he hasn't seen Whitman's work first hand, but, personally, I wouldn't have written those passages that way. Then again, I'm not Lorne Rubenstein.

The piece as a whole, I think, is totally defensable. He just overstepped his critical authority a couple of times.

[Robert Thompson]

Robert Thompson,

If he's never seen the property, then the quotes he's selected for publication could misrepresent the product, and that could be deemed disengenuous.

Pat: With all due respect, the story can't be deemed "disingenuous," in the way you are using the word. And I'm not sure how Rubenstein could have misrepresented two courses that have yet to be built. Whitman is well known to use a certain style of design and that's what Rubenstein is referring to. Disingenuous means lacking in candor -- and I don't see how Rubenstein isn't being honest here. He never says he saw the courses -- in fact he clarifies that to quite the contrary -- and he quotes others when speaking about Whitman's work.
I think Rick brings up excellent points. The reality of the situation is that Rubenstein was never writing a course review story (which the Globe wouldn't likely run anyway). Instread, as Rick points out, it is a personality story. If you are interested in the man, maybe you'll be interested in his golf courses.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Robert Thompson,

If you haven't seen someone's work, how do you determne their style ?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()