![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
An utter piece of garbage masqueraded as a sport piece about a putter and its creator. The writer, ostensibly doing a piece about a putter defying conventional wisdom about putters, is structured to be about the creator of the putter, in direct defiance of the stated wishes of said creator when they agreed to do an interview.
And then, the writer of the piece makes mention of how odd-looking this woman doctor (as in, has a $Foo.D degree) is, and how she sounds deeper than expected. And then trades a paragraph about the putter (which still works, in defiance of conventional wisdom) with two more about the person. Things are going that way until the writer does background research on the creator's education. And the qualifications the creator had turned out to be false. The putter, however, still works (in defiance of conventional wisdom), so, y'know, the article is probably finished, especially when you're writing for a supposedly sport publication.
The writer, however, digs deeper. And all of those hints they've been dropping suddenly come into focus when they reveal the results of their armchair, can't leave-well-enough-alone investigation - the putter creator is a transwoman. Having given sufficient lip service to the story about the putter, the pretense is dropped and the tabloid journalism takes over. Misgendering her when talking about her early life, painting her as mentally disturbed, and then describing a suicide attempt, before the grand finale...
...her actual suicide, described in detail, and probably related to this writer's insistence on uncovering her past. There are no words to describe how this terrible, horrible, no good, extremely bad, and journalistically bankrupt piece managed to pass both editors and their own conscience without raising any flags. It's a lurid piece more suited for yellow sheets than anything else, and the writer believes they can call it a eulogy.
May they understand the consequences of their actions.
Search engines can probably produce the source material in question, if you want to see it yourself. This account should have enough detail of the article.
And then, the writer of the piece makes mention of how odd-looking this woman doctor (as in, has a $Foo.D degree) is, and how she sounds deeper than expected. And then trades a paragraph about the putter (which still works, in defiance of conventional wisdom) with two more about the person. Things are going that way until the writer does background research on the creator's education. And the qualifications the creator had turned out to be false. The putter, however, still works (in defiance of conventional wisdom), so, y'know, the article is probably finished, especially when you're writing for a supposedly sport publication.
The writer, however, digs deeper. And all of those hints they've been dropping suddenly come into focus when they reveal the results of their armchair, can't leave-well-enough-alone investigation - the putter creator is a transwoman. Having given sufficient lip service to the story about the putter, the pretense is dropped and the tabloid journalism takes over. Misgendering her when talking about her early life, painting her as mentally disturbed, and then describing a suicide attempt, before the grand finale...
...her actual suicide, described in detail, and probably related to this writer's insistence on uncovering her past. There are no words to describe how this terrible, horrible, no good, extremely bad, and journalistically bankrupt piece managed to pass both editors and their own conscience without raising any flags. It's a lurid piece more suited for yellow sheets than anything else, and the writer believes they can call it a eulogy.
May they understand the consequences of their actions.
Search engines can probably produce the source material in question, if you want to see it yourself. This account should have enough detail of the article.
