Sportsmap article rebutts Duarte

Call: (713) 362-7891

Content and website feedback:
Email: and digital access issues:
Email: For comments regarding accuracy
Call: (713) 362-6303


Yes, I know several, and have read several of them at some point or another. I mean to say another newspaper with the circulation and influence of the Houston Chronicle. The Houston Chronicle may be among the newspapers with the largest circulation not just in Houston, but all of Texas. See: or There is nothing that claims to be from Houston that comes very close, even if many of the articles are from elsewhere (Austin American Statesman, etc.).





Their subscription numbers are enhanced as the papers they dump on street corners for the homeless to sell are counted as subscribers !!

Do you have any sources to back that up?

“without resorting to vilifying the media.”. I dont understand why the same standard would not apply to what the media reports.

If the media can vilify someone why aren’t the readers afforded the same right?

1 Like

One, I like the idea of free speech and a free press, which is relentlessly under attack nowadays (even if I don’t always care for what people and the press say), and, two, JD was asking an honest question or two, even if they were negative in tone (even though I don’t always agree with the content he puts out, he was not vilifying UH). (If a negative question makes someone evil or an enemy, well, I don’t know what else to say.) However, if an administrator or leader wants to vilify the media, by all means, go ahead and do it (because that is one’s right), but it just ain’t a particularly admirable trait for a leader. If it wasn’t clear, please note that the context of my comments related to UH leadership, and not the average reader of newspapers or fan boards.


Do they have proof of their numbers that they will reveal ??
Of course not !!

They have always viewed their subscription numbers as papers delivered, not necessarily purchased.

ALL newspapers do that.


I have basically given up on the media. I cancelled the crapicle awhile back and do not miss it. All the media has become is a propaganda machine for what they want. I do not watch local news, network news, or even watch late night talk shows. I pick certain outlets and twitter. But even there I am looking more and more to parler as they don’t edit and change stuff or eliminate stuff for a political party.


Yeah, I don’t like the bias either. There’s too much of that nowadays, sadly.

Bias nowadays tends to fall on a spectrum, and even then, I suppose there is always some bias that creeps in into articles within those relatively “unbiased” outlets. Take a look a the following chart (which I’m sure will not be agreeable to everyone):

1 Like
  1. No one is denying JD’s free speech. He’s free to write just as we are free to criticize his writing.

  2. If JD had asked what UH was doing to address covid, then I don’t think you’d find much issue. However, he questioned whether UH cared for our student/athletes as if we aren’t actively taking measures to address it. Then he took a snarky jab at our “power 5” aspirations (how conference affiliation plays into a pandemic response escapes me). These digs are unnecessary and reveal a level of animosity in JD’s writing.

  3. Please tell me you’re not suggesting that UH administrators are “vilifying” JD. At worst he’s being ignored. That’s not vilifying.

JD got his panties twisted because he’s not getting the access he wants. Plain and simple. The condition of our school isn’t depended on how much access JD gets. And not getting access to our administration doesn’t mean we’re failing at our response to covid. I don’t blame UH for ignoring him.


There is a difference between bias creeping in (which will always happen) and making no good faith attempt to be unbiased and, in some cases, taking steps to actively preserve a narrative, which is a new norm. I can live with the former, abhor the latter.

Agreed, but I never said anyone denied his free speech.

I agree, again, in that I don’t care for his tone; as I implied earlier (either in this thread, or another), there were better or bigger questions that one could have asked.

Never once did I suggest that. Although I would have preferred a measured response, I am happy, in retrospect, that Khator was careful not to respond (probably the best thing to do under the circumstances).

So we agree on some basic facts – although I’m not sure if we will agree on whether JD is against UH or not.

And that’s perfectly okay.

Go Coogs!


LOL, ok.

I’m just trying to understand what exactly you’re saying. So help me understand.

You said:
“free speech was under attack”
Were you implying JD’s free speech was under attack?

You said:
if an administrator or leader wants to vilify the media, by all means, go ahead and do it (because that is one’s right ), but it just ain’t a particularly admirable trait for a leader.

Again, are you suggesting the UH administrators are vilifying the media (JD)? I mean no disrespect, but you do know what vilifying means, right?

Lastly, I’m not sure what you mean about his tone. All I’m saying is the conclusion he reached was unfounded.

Go Coogs indeed!

PS - are you related to JD?

Clearly there is some misunderstanding here mixed with stuff that I didn’t say. I don’t intend to retread ground I have already covered, especially when my words are misrepresented. If you want to persist, you are welcome to do so, of course.

But, no, I am not related to JD, but I am happy to defend his right to a negative article. He is not my enemy, and neither are you.

JD, if you are reading, please keep reporting as you do; know that there are several Coogs that still appreciate you; keep asking the tough questions.

Neah, there’s no need to carry this further. I just wanted some clarification, that’s all.

I happen to like JD. He’s been a good reporter for us.

It just seems like the communication between JD and UH has been deteriorating for a while now.

OK, that makes sense. I meandered into topics like free speech in responses to other folks’ questions, but the core point is I that I still like JD, I still support him (despite some negative pieces and comments), and I won’t view him as the bad guy, as it were. I’m glad we agree on this. :slightly_smiling_face:

©Copyright 2017