Sunday, October 2, 2016

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: Here is how Gary Striewski DESTROYED John Dennis on Twitter Friday Night

John Dennis (@JohnDennisWEEI) was up to his usual antics of firing off tweets at people Friday night. Except instead of tweeting at eggs with 8 followers, he instead went at Gary Striewski (@GaryStriewski) for saying "we" in an interview with Tom Werner:

Striewski came back with a reply that only a true twitter argument vet could have sent:

Short, doesn't even include any words, just a to the point reply. You start to lose twitter arguments as soon as you get into them if you use long winded replies. Twitter arguments are won or lost in the first reply, and Striewski knocked it out of the park.

Then "Peak Dino" came out, dropping multiple replies as he is known to do:

And Striewski came back and continued to keep it simple:

Dennis came back and tried to argue about how many local emmys he has won:

But the fight was over. The bell had rung. A two round knockout from Striewski. People went as far to change Dennis' wikipedia page to say that Striewski killed him on twitter. When this happens there isn't even a question of who won the argument:

Now I happen to agree with John Dennis that you cannot be objective as a journalist or reporter if you say "we" when referring to the team you are covering. But I don't think Striewski is trying to be the next Dan Shaughnessy. His schtick is being the local guy on the sidelines who enjoys his job and enjoys seeing the team he covers win. Along with this he is not responsible for publishing a Sunday column hammering the Red Sox or Farrell. I wish there were people who would do this, but Striewski, who works for the Red Sox and is doing in game coverage that is meant to entertain the viewer, is not the guy to go to for journalistic objectivity.

If John Dennis wanted to come at Striewski for not being a credible journalist I understand, but sending tweets WITH A TON OF CAPITAL LETTERS and long winded responses is not the way to do it.

Striewski 1, Dino 0. 

No comments:

Post a Comment