In my Wednesday column about B.J. Upton, I wrote something that sparked a reaction.

The paragraph read: "The fact that Upton's not perfect makes him perfect. His propensity to be lazy (as witnessed in August when he 'decided' not to run hard on three different occasions), the fact that [Joe] Maddon literally pulled him off the field after not running out a double-play ground ball, the meaningless error in the seventh inning of Game 4 that allowed questions about his lack of focus to surface. All display a flaw in him that almost works to his advantage when kids and wannabe baseball players look at him and say 'I'm not perfect either, but look, he's still standing.'"

For some readers, my choice of words created a misunderstanding. When the word "lazy" appeared in the context of a story about black youth, some concluded I was implying African-American kids would find the flaw of Upton being "lazy" acceptable and endearing.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Upton has survived and triumphed despite numerous flaws. I mentioned several, in an attempt to show that it is his collection of imperfections that make him so publicly "human" — something not always so clearly visible with athletes today. That is also why I chose to finish the paragraph with the image of a kid — any kid, regardless of race, color or creed — who might identify with that humanity, realizing "I'm not perfect either, but look, he's still standing." My point is to highlight that we — as humans — can often identify with somebody through both their strengths and flaws, both of which are apparent in the new "hero." And regardless of the color of any kid's skin, flaws can be overcome.
—Scoop Jackson

Honestly, this is astounding. So instead of really apologizing (which he shouldn't have to, by the way), Scoop essentially has to tack on an extra 200 words explaining what he meant by his silly little one-off paragraph? Like a DVD extra version of Scoop Jackson. This isn't even controversy we're talking about here, but basically a re-edit. And by burying it at the bottom of Page 2 — without commenting capabilities — does that really control any damage? ESPN obviously thought this situation needed to be fixed and this is a truly bizarre way of handling it.

Why not just let him address the whole thing in a follow-up column? Or better yet, why not just make him spend a weekend at Le Anne Schreiber's house? It could be a very special E:60 episode.

Upton Clarification [Page 2] (Waaaay at the bottom)

Observe:

The fact that Upton's not perfect makes him perfect. His propensity to be lazy (as witnessed in August when he "decided" not to run hard on three different occasions), the fact that Maddon literally pulled him off the field after not running out a double-play ground ball, the meaningless error in the seventh inning of Game 4 that allowed questions about his lack of focus to surface. All display a flaw in him that almost works to his advantage when kids and wannabe baseball players look at him and say "I'm not perfect either, but look, he's still standing."

Now, granted, Scoop Jackson has clumsily attempted to establish himself as the columnist for a hip-hop generation since he's been at Page 2, and that has resulted in many more confounding and marginally offensive columns then positive ones. One of his biggest detractors has been the Kansas City Star's Jason Whitlock, who implored SOMEONE to stop Scoop. He volunteered his email for publication:

"Would someone please stop Scoop Jackson since the ***** editors at ESPN won't? Got damn, I don't read his **** but when he writes stupid **** like this people e-mail me and ask my opinion. This **** needs to be stopped. Read the dumb mother*****'s column and see how he equates black culture with being lazy and says Upton is going to make folks love baseball again.

Cork Gaines, proprietor of the extremely entertaining Rays Index, had a similar reaction to Scoop's piece:

Could you imagine Scoop Jackson's reaction if Peter Gammons had written that paragraph? Scoop Jackson just said Upton is a role-model to young African-Americans because he is lazy. Why in the world would anybody ever look to this as a positive quality. This is insanity! And it may be borderline sociopathic. Good lord Scoop. We don't mean to yell, but did you eat paint chips when you were a kid? Of all the positive things Upton does on the baseball field that are worthy of emulating, Jackson picks laziness as why inner-city kids will gravitate to the Rays center fielder. Jesus, this pisses us off...and we're white!

Well, as we all know, that's just Scoop being Scoop.

Still waiting for a response from Mr. Jackson (or somebody from the ESPN dot com side) about the piece, but that will happen eventually. I think. There's apparently a long line.

Scoop Jackson Thinks B.J. Upton Will Be A Role Model To Inner-City Kids Because He Looks Ghetto and Doesn't Hustle [Rays Index]
The True Meaning of B.J. Upton [ESPN]

Photo: Courtesy of The Starting Five

Thusly, we have a conversation between Nation Of Islam Sports Blog and ESPN's Scoop Jackson. Scoop, helpfully, types his answers in all caps.

We notice in the comments section, and have seen on threads on a message board called sportsjournalists.com, complaints that you are a poor writer. For example, in your most recent column, you capitalized the 'c'in the word 'common' at the end of the sentence. This was obviously done as a reference to the popular musician, Common. But a lot of folks that read your columns don't understand your references, assume you made a mistake, and label you ignorant. Do you get any pleasure (we do) from knowing that those critics are unknowingly, yet overtly displaying their own ignorance -clearly showing that you are writing on a higher plane than they are capable of understanding?

THERE'S NEVER A PLEASURE WHEN PEOPLE THINK YOU ARE IGNORANT AND THERE'S NEVER A PLEASURE WHEN PEOPLE DON'T GET IT BECAUSE AS A WRITER YOU'D LIKE FOR THEM TO GET IT SO THAT THEY CAN ENJOY WHAT IT IS THAT YOU WROTE OR WHAT YOU WORKED ON. LIKE THE COMMON THING IN THE BONDS COLUMN THE OTHER DAY. THE SENTENCE WAS "...NOTHING TO STOP HIM FROM FINDING FOREVER IN THE NEXT NUMBER. I KNEW WHAT WAS GOING ON IN HER MIND, WE HAD THAT MUCH IN COMMON." NOW COMMON'S NEW CD IS ENTITLED"FINDING FOREVER." SO OF COURSE FOR ME, AS A WRITER, I THOUGHT THE SENTENCE WAS SLICK, LIKE A CLEVER RHYME VERSE.

Yeah, you should probably go check this interview out.

Scoop Jackson: The NOIS Interview [Nation Of Islam Sports Blog]

I should have just said that I wouldn't want to be on the same team with a gay person because I just don't think it's right for them to be on a team and the team not know that you are gay. ... Nothing happened to me. I just don't condone [being gay]. When I see gay people holding hands or kissing in the streets, I just don't think that's right.

It's a rather outstanding interview, and it's another of example of "the good Scoop." As for Hardaway, he just wants to make it clear that he doesn't "hate" gay people. He'd just rather they knock it off with the whole "humpin' dudes" business.

"I Don't Have A Hate Bone In My Body" [ESPN]
Scoop Jackson's Look Back [Deadspin]

NBA LIVE: BRING IT HOME, hosted by ESPN.com Page 2 columnist Scoop Jackson, is a reality-competition series that brings the EA Sports videogame NBA LIVE 07 to television. Over the course of six episodes, eight of the world's best NBA LIVE gamers will advance through the tournament as they try to win home court advantage by winning NBA LIVE 07 games and coaching NBA players to win online games against other NBA players. Players who win home court advantage will play on their own turf flanked by their family and friends. At the finale held on the home court of the National Champion Miami Heat the winner will take home $100,000.

As Scoop himself will tell you — or already has told you — the show's importance, with him as host, could be "bigger than ESPN." Considering how enthralling the concept of "Madden Nation" was — watching other people play video games — we certainly can't wait for this one. Really.

Scoop Jackson, Coming Soon To a Television Near You! (Not a Joke!) [The Big Lead]
Scoop Jackson's Look Back [Deadspin]

You can understand the frustration, then, of YAYSports, whose coinage of the term "Orange Roundie" for the new NBA basketball has become one of the most lasting in-jokes of the young season. Yesterday, in his mock first-person column from the ball's perspective, ESPN's Scoop Jackson references the Orange Roundie and "a Web site" that coined the term, but he never mentions the site, either by name or by link. (The whole concept of Scoop's column seems cribbed from YAYSports in the first place, which might be why he felt obliged to at least acknowledge this "web site.") Which seems inherently strange, because if you haven't been reading YAYSports all year and know about the term, you probably had no idea what the hell Scoop was talking about.

(UPDATE: The page has JUST included the YAY link, within the last 10 minutes.)

Most of the no-credit vitriol has been directed toward Scoop, though we tend to think that's usually more of an editor's decision than a writer's one. We suspect Scoop probably meant it as an homage — albeit a rather patronizing one, and perhaps one constructed so he would feel better about swiping about someone else's idea — but had his legs cut out from under him by losing the link. But you can understand the frustration; Simmons would have freaked out in the Lupica example, and justifiably so.

But we'll leave the last word to YAYSports, who just posted their reaction to Scoop's column: He stole. He stole a concept, a schtick, a character. He took it and presented it as his own. It's wrong, and people with integrity don't do it. In any creative industry, it's like the RULE. It's the one thing you DON'T DO. He knows it, we know it, everyone else knows it.

Wait: No, the last word to Scoop, who just responded to our inquiry about the situation: I actually thought I was giving them some love, even though ESPN edited out the part about them being the ball's favorite site. Just trying to have some fun. Hope you enjoyed the piece; tell YAY I thought their overall ball coverage was brilliant. The ball, on the other hand, had a few issues.

OK then. Can we all get along now?

Scoop Jackson Is Creative [YAYSports]
The Story Of My Life [ESPN]
That Is Not A Scoop! [3manlift]
Why Your National Radio Host Sucks [Deadspin]

So, as you'd expect, Whitlock is spraying some bullets on the way out the door, with these choice tidbits from an interview with The Big Lead. Some highlights.

• On Scoop Jackson: There's a big dropoff from being associated with Ralph [Wiley], Hunter [S. Thompson] and Bill [Simmons] than being linked to someone doing a bad Nat X impersonation. It pissed me off that the dude tried to call himself the next Ralph Wiley and stated some [shit] about carrying Ralph's legacy. ... Ralph was a grown-ass man who didn't bojangle for anybody. Scoop is a clown. And the publishing of his fake ghetto posturing is an insult to black intelligence, and it interferes with intelligent discussion of important racial issues. Scoop showed up on the scene and all of a sudden I'm getting e-mails from readers connecting what I write to Scoop. And his stuff is being presented like grown folks should take it seriously.

• On Mike Lupica: Lupica is an insecure, mean-spirited busybody. ... The Little Fella probably won't let the producer (Joe Valerio) have me back on ["The Sports Reporters"] again. That's cool. They're mostly upset that I wouldn't participate in their Barry Bonds witch hunt and help them single Bonds out as the creator of steroids. Lupica doesn't like to be disagreed with, and he's spoken so abusively to that producer for years that the producer probably doesn't realize people are allowed to disagree with Lupica. I enjoyed my time on the show. But if the price of admission is stepping to Lupica's drum, I'm more than happy to go without.

Man, we can't wait until Simmons leaves.

Oh Damn, Did Whitlock Really Say That? A Q&A With Jason Whitlock [The Big Lead]
That's All For Whitlock At Page 2 [Deadspin]

Lapchick's study has set off the predictable amount of simple-minded analysis that raw numbers often produce. Scoop Jackson, a black columnist at America's best and most influential online sports section (ESPN.com), filed a rant so juvenile and flawed on this topic that I nearly broke down in tears after reading it. His "column" perfectly exposed the problem within my industry and the sports industry when it comes to diversification.

Here's Scoop's column, by the way. We're going to try to stay out of this feud, though we feel obliged to point out that we can't believe Woody Allen made a whole movie about that guy.

There's No Easy Path To Diversity [Kansas City Star]
The 1.3 Percent Doctrine [ESPN]

We think the problem might be mostly an economy of language. Scoop has a tendency to toss out incendiary language that's even stronger than he probably really believes; we wonder if his editors are tip-toeing around him. A good example can be found in the end-of-year piece. Earlier this year, ESPN's Jason Whitlock wrote a column that, gently, pointed out that Notre Dame's treatment of Charlie Weis might have been a wee bit different than its treatment of Tyrone Willingham. The conceit was arguable, but certainly worthy of consideration, and definitely reasonable. When Scoop tackles the same issue? "Their actions are racist to the core." See what we mean? Reasonable concept that Scoop ends up blatantly overstating the case for. And Scoop, honestly: No one, white or black, is watching "Quite Frankly With Stephen A. Smith." To call the show "bigger than ESPN," well, jeez, that's just plum crazy. Perhaps he meant "bigger than ESPNews." (During a power outage.)

Of course, what do we know? We don't have an editor either.

What Mattered Most In 2005 [ESPN]
Reviewing Scoop Jackson's Year In Review [True Hoop]

"It s a risk-reward kind of thing, said Hendry. If we fire him we get to act on our deep-seeded racist instincts, which would be a lot of fun. But for me, at least, in the excitement of firing a black guy I d probably struggle to hide my giddiness and the media would be on to all of us."

Cubs fans have been clammoring for Baker's firing for almost two years now too, though more because of his role in Steve Stone's firing and his inability to control his children than the team's performance. (Same thing happened to Felipe and Moises Alou this year, by the way.)

Cubs Management Unsure How To Fire Baker Without Exposing That They're Racists [SportsPickle]
Color Blind [ESPN Page 2]