Comments on: ECLIPSED VOTING PROCESS

By: Belinda Cuggabe

Belinda Cuggabe — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 23:06:44 +0000

That is a blatant error by Stauffer, it’s akin to a WW2 documentary stating FDR gave his day of Infamy speech the day before Pearl Harbor was bombed.

Gross errors like that lower the standard for the award.

Is the award THAT important to you Vik?

If you still have the award, I implore you to do the right thing and surrender it. Set an example for the future, only excellence and accuracy will be rewarded.

By: Tim

Tim — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:20:09 +0000

Isn’t it ironic that Mr. Stauffer doesn’t seem to think that the accuracy of the date of a suicide is particularly important, yet the accurate date of a birthday is paramount?

Why didn’t he just make up a new birth date for Pincay so he could re-air it?

By: James

James — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 22:07:13 +0000

Merriam-Webster Online defines “unseemly” as: not according with established standards of good form or taste. As a synonym it furthers the definition: unseemly adds a suggestion of special inappropriateness to a situation or an offensiveness to good taste.

Sounds like Mr. Privman has his own “errors” - with the English language.

To label Ms. Hillenbrand’s 2001 submission with “special inappropriateness” would be akin to describing Mr. Privman’s own work as important, interesting, or relevant. Both would be inaccurate (ironically the very stain Privman wants to splatter on Stauffer).

There is a fitting use for the word “unseemly” in this discussion, and it clearly belongs next to the name of Jay Privman

By: Chilli Most

Chilli Most — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 04:00:44 +0000

Vic, should’nt you be making phone calls to get your jock more business, and also dealing with a matter regarding a horse named Cedros? WTF are you doing up here bickering with people over historical events? Get it together man.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:56:33 +0000

Everyone agreed the politics of self-destruction is at work here?

By: Vic Stauffer

Vic Stauffer — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:22:56 +0000

No one ever. Then or now had a problem with the mistake other than Rees and Privman. Of course I could have re-written the piece. I could have made an entirely new and different piece. As I stated before I could have gone back and corrected it but to be eligible for Eclipse consideration it has to appear on an over the airways radio station. The biggest story line was his impending birthday the very next day. It would have sounded stupid to present that several weeks after the fact. You thinking about a grudge is quite correct. In my opinion Privman has had a personal vendetta against me for many many years. Why? I do not know. His words and actions have proved that many times. Do I have a grudge against him? Of course I do. I completely dislike the guy. As for Rees. I have absolutely no grudge. I strongly disagree with her opinion on this matter. At the same time I respect her right to have it. As I stated before I think she does a great job and admire her work.

By: Halle

Halle — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:02:01 +0000

The genesis of the controversy was your mistake about the timing of a suicide, Vic, and the genesis of my thinking a grudge is at work here was your effrontery in calling this mistake “minor.” As for replaying the Pincay piece, Laffit is worthy of honor 365 days a year. You could not have rewritten the piece? Surely this would have required only “minor” work.

By: Vic Stauffer

Vic Stauffer — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:33:32 +0000

The tribute centered around Laffit’s birthday. It played the day before. I could have fixed the error but I could not have re-aired it. It was 11 minutes long and it would have been stupid to play a birthday celebration weeks after the fact. As for venting grudges I’m simply recounting the chronology of what happened. Privman and Rees were the genesis of the controversy. Kip and I just responded and attempted to protect our position.

Let me make another thing clear. I have no personal problem with Jennie Rees. Although I strongly disagree with her opinion on this mattter. She never has taken any personal shots at me. I greatly admire the excellent work she does for the Courier-Journal. When I see her in the press boxes around the country she’s always pleasant and respectful. Ironically it was Jennie herself that presented Kip and myself with the award that year and I felt she handled the situation with class and dignity.

By: Halle

Halle — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:12:58 +0000

How about loving the sport enough to do the work necessary to report on it accurately and to fix mistakes when they are made? Does this require a lot of energy? Of course. But there seems to be no shortage of reporter energy when it comes to haggling over awards and venting grudges.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:16:40 +0000

Vic, you’re in so deep now I don’t think you could climb out if you wanted to.