Mitch Albom was conceived by parents who should have known better. He was born. He's 52, two years over the age to get AARP benefits. The public thinks he's a pathetic windbag. This would be a tragic story if it were an isolated story.
It's more tragic because it's not.
Albom was not the first unfortunate spawn born during the heady post-Atomic era. He wasn't the first born in New Jersey, nor was he the first in Passaic. Just 7 years earlier, Joe Piscopo was born there too. His parents probably did the same thing. Alcohol, according the the town folk, were likely involved in that conception too.
Mitch's stories get more attention than they deserve because he's an untalented, amoral hack who generates a lot of consternation, and thus a lot of ad revenue for the Detroit Free Press and ESPN, a figure most noted for its framing by two elephantine ears and hair that's looked like a bad wig since he was in the 6th grade. Since his career began, the populace has been robbed by opportunity costs and left to wonder what it could have done with all those precious minutes lost reading his tripe. Mitch Albom is widely regarded as a monster or a ghoul.
Many wonder how it is that Albom was never given up for adoption. Most think it preposterous that he earns his living writing opinion pieces for a major media outlet rather than leaping from burning stage pieces into tiny, shallow pools.
Everyone wants to know how a 52 year old man is allowed to contribute to the deterioration of the nation's overall allocation of funds or why nobody will stop him from hurting America in general. Imagine how many auto workers could feed their families on his salary.
In fact, when we ask members of the media about Albom's employment, we're often told that we're being naive, and that his lack of any or all actual literary talent doesn't matter so long as he generates advertising revenue for a dying paper.
Perhaps. And that's the entire problem.
We're not naive about it at all.
If anything, the trade in of talent and integrity for ad revenue is the real story here. Since Albom's journalism and writing career began, he's been published in dozens of advertising outlets. Read that again. Dozens. And I call them advertising outlets because, when it comes to what they really want to serve the public, that's what they are.
Which begs the question, especially given the public's options these days: Why is Albom still able to keep a job? Since when is one poorly explored concept spread across 700 words a good idea for reading material?
How much more evidence do we need to understand that Mitch Albom needs to be put out to pasture? There is an awful history of trite, banal writing with a heavy glaze of saccharine schlock atop it within his body of work. Sometimes, he's busy writing things that many people leave unsaid because most people have too much class to say it, fully understanding that one small anecdote could be forced into a bigger picture if they wanted to serve their own interests of advertising revenue generation at the expense of a grieving family. Sometimes, he's writing Tuesdays with Morrie. Worse still, sometimes he's writing The Five People You Meet in Heaven.
And sometimes, he's the guest on Oprah between the episode featuring Jenny McCarthy's "cure" for autism and the episode where Oprah gets a bunch of women to act like yippy little lap dogs by offering up free slippers.
In any and all cases, Mitch's work is work without any contribution made to his fellow man. I don't care how many times he might earnestly deliver a line during a Sports Reporters monologue. I don't care how many papers syndicate his columns. And I really don't care what his readership say. Come on. Most of us were blessed with a brain. Between the pressure to generate ad revenue, the ease of keeping Albom on staff rather than hiring some actual talent, and the likelihood that Albom will think of any contrary notions as "a good angle," Albom's "work" will always be a waste of resources that harms this planet.
How do you mitigate that?
You don't read his stuff.
Now of course, our prayers go out to the major media players. Watching this country's free press try to kill itself with poor attempts at evolution and the continued employment of high-dollar, low-talent people like Albom is heartbreaking.
But dying in a war is one thing. Dying because you refuse to adapt to the major technological advances of the century is another. There is no kind way to say this. But you cannot, in good conscience, paint the newspaper industry as a tragic hero. At best, it is a victim of folly, thinking that if they just ignore new media and the influx of talent, it'll all go away.
At worst, and more likely, the newspaper industry is an example of brazen hubris that major, institutionalized corporations exude, inevitably with deadly results. What, one imagines, could possibly have made these institutions think that the romance of the presses and their over-inflated staffing numbers in the newsroom would be enough to save them?
Probably something that would make you say, "Eh. That's the way the institutions work." And that's the point. If you are involved in one of these institutions, then you're part of the problem, and you need to fix it. Then, hopefully, Mitch Albom will become unemployed.
Note: After this exercise, I found Albom's style of writing so horrendous that I found the results of the exercise difficult to review. Apologies for typos or anything that doesn't make sense.
By Joe Lowry April 13, 2010 - 2:48 pm
I read Albom’s piece. In fact, I just read it (immedietly after reading this HLS column). I’ve got to side with Albom on this. Why is it that someone tries to talk about how a 17 year-old got his hands on enough alcohol to end up killing himself and the only reaction in return is, “He’s dead. It’s sacrilegious to smear his good name in this way!” It is a very tragic story, but hiding the circumstances is just as likely to cause another 17 year old to have a similar fate. (Note: We’re not linking to Mitch on HLS. So I took down the link. Sorry. -DMQ)
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By NWohioND April 13, 2010 - 2:51 pm
DMQ…I have to ask…what sparked the Album post? Just curious…funny and a good read but some obvious hatred there my friend…
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer.mq April 13, 2010 - 2:59 pm
It’s Albom’s latest piece on Matt James’ death, NWOND. I’ll leave you to find it if you really want to read it. It’s not worth it.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Trey April 13, 2010 - 3:34 pm
Damn, little bit of pent up frustration there, domer?
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By SDI April 13, 2010 - 4:19 pm
I don’t know that much about Albom other than that he has bad hair and wrote some sappy book that sold a bunch of copies and got made into a crummy movie. But I’m not sure I get the point of his article. Underage drinking is a problem. No kidding. What besides making his parents feel worse is the objective of that article? Drinking bad, unsupervised 17 year olds bad. Thanks Mitch for stating the obvious.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By SDI April 13, 2010 - 4:23 pm
and who is hiding anything? It’s not the coach’s job to report the details of the investigation. That’s for the police and/or the DA.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By DeepTeaKup April 13, 2010 - 5:04 pm
Wow. Doesn’t get much better than that.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Tony April 13, 2010 - 5:18 pm
I’m with the first commenter. I think Mitch’s article is a reasonable critique of the “acceptance” of high school kids travelling to Florida to get liquored up on Spring Break. What, specifically, do you take issue with (besides tone and tenor) in this article?
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Pat April 13, 2010 - 8:49 pm
If there was a point to be had, it was lost in the overwhelming cynicism, general sarcasm, the personal attacks and the anger. Even if you believe Albom’s article is a complete piece of crap, I don’t understand doing this at all. Not only is this post extremely bitter and distasteful, it seems downright paranoid, as if you feel an almost ideological duty to trample even the most fleeting criticism. You can’t dislodge reality: Not every, single thing associated with Notre Dame turns to gold. Even for this blog, I’m perplexed by the length gone here to try to discredit and attack someone else because something truly bad happened to Notre Dame.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer_mq April 13, 2010 - 10:13 pm
Yeah, uh, Pat, you missed the point, bud.
I’m hardly thrashing at a guy who dared critique something associated with Notre Dame. I’m thrashing out at a no-talent hack who decided it was his duty, from way upon his righteous horse, to lecture everyone about something that most people already understood without the need to discussion. All Mitch managed to do, essentially, is berate some grieving parents. Way to go, Mitch. I’d hope he’d feel badly about it, but I wont hold my breath.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer_mq April 13, 2010 - 10:16 pm
Tony, see my response to Pat.
There wasn’t one bit of insight delivered by Albom that the least sentient human being couldn’t discover via a moment’s contemplation. The ONLY thing being served by Albom’s piece is more noise in his “ooh ooh, look at me!!!!” efforts that make up the bulk of his career. And this time he did it at the expense of a grieving family. He’s a piece of dirt, deserving of every bit of derision I can throw his way.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By The Biscuit April 13, 2010 - 10:34 pm
to bring another voice to DMQ’s point and a response to those that disagree with his overall idea – i think the main point is that Matt James need not be an example for this. If Albom really cared about just the issue, he could have left out the specifics of James’ death, he could’ve used generalities or some other non-specific example to get the point across just as clearly. But THAT would not have gotten clicks. So he traded on James’ death and his grieving parents for clicks. Do you really think that’s okay? Yes, James was drinking underage, no that’s not okay, but he’s not the only example. Albom picked the example to make $. Horrible. Take issue with DMQs style if you want (I dont, but I can understand those that do), but I dont see how you defend the choice…
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Charlie April 13, 2010 - 10:52 pm
Writing this post shows your age to be honest. If you have any ambition of filling the void left by BGS, you would ask yourself “how will I feel about this post in five years” before clicking submit.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer_mq April 13, 2010 - 11:35 pm
Charlie, I’d love to know what bits, exactly, you think I’ll regret in 5 years. I’ve considered Albom a douche of the highest order for at least the last 15 years already. What will change in 5?
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By NWohioND April 14, 2010 - 6:01 am
After reading the article…it’s similar to what Kevin Blackistone wrote the week after the accident…more critisizing of parents and overall judging…I’ve personally never really cared for Albom on the radio or on sports reports…being a father of 2 little ones, I don’t have to deal with this issue yet…but god only knows how many times I was stupid with alcohol…I won’t even go into it…but life is life and full of decisions…but please remember, the straight A student could get in a car accident and die…are we not let kids in cars either…what about going to the movies at a local mall with gangs hanging out…I simply cite a couple examples that come to mind…can some incidents be avoided? Absolutely but who is Mitch Albom to critisize the James family???
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Pat April 14, 2010 - 6:53 am
Domer, we are supposed to believe you went after Albom because he’s a no talent hack and not because he wrote a negative article associated with Notre Dame? Mere coincidence?
I didn’t particularly think Albom’s article was any stunning piece of journalism (nor would I have even read it had it not show up here), but, after all, this was a national story. The door swings both ways: If Notre Dame is bigger and better, a more robust brand, better name recognition, does things differently, has a national fanbase, etc., yes, it is bound to receive more media attention, for better or worse. In other words, does James deserve to be singled out? Likely not. Will he because he was going to play at Notre Dame? Yes.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer.mq April 14, 2010 - 8:43 am
Pat,
Your logic in trying to rationalize Albom’s profiting on the grief of the James family is, “James was going to go to Notre Dame, so it’s inevitable that this story would be written, so it’s okay that Albom did it.”
Huh?
Inevitability doesn’t make it right. I’m sure as hell going to lash out at someone who profits on the grief of a family, particularly if they’re part of the ND family too.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By The Biscuit April 14, 2010 - 8:42 am
and if an author DOES single out James even though it’s not ‘likely deserved’, is that author going to get an effing spanking from HLS?
HELL YES.
that’s the point here, guys. yes, James made a mistake. no, his family doesnt deserve to have this kind of trash heaped upon them. no, the world doesnt need some douche writer using the kid’s death (hasnt he paid enough for the mistake already?) as a means to get clicks and/or to make a point. yes, ND creates a lot of focus. no, the kids dont deserve it sometimes. and yes, HLS is going to defend them the only way we can – by trashing the author(s).
some people dont like that we get confrontational here. that’s fine. but answer me this – who should we be loyal to? we’re Her LOYAL Sons. we’re defending our own. that doesnt mean that every article critiquing ND is bad – we have plenty of criticisms of ND on this site, just do a search – it means that when you use a kid’s death to make a point, and/or to make money (or anything along those lines), we are going to mock you. every time.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Pat April 14, 2010 - 9:26 am
Profiting on grief? He’s not selling t-shirts. He’s a writer and commentator by profession.
Sometimes a kid’s death does make a point though. The question is whether or not the point is legitimate — which seems completely lost here — not whether the kid was going to play for Notre Dame or not. Don’t whip yourself into a frenzy because you think you are doing a service to the University of Notre Dame. Believe it or not, even though James was going to come to Notre Dame, maybe this tragedy does require some introspection.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer.mq April 14, 2010 - 10:35 am
Pat, consider for a moment what service or product Albom churns out for pay: Opinion Columns. The sports world, in particular this week, was fully of options for his service/product this week. He picked the ND angle because it would generate the most clicks/pay. Not because he actually gives 2 pant loads about underage drinking. Stop being so naive.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Pat April 14, 2010 - 10:40 am
The only reason it is a national story AT ALL is because the kid was going to play football at Notre Dame. Sorry, but they are inseparable.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer.mq April 14, 2010 - 11:00 am
Pat, no f’ing s&%t! But how in the world does that rationalize Albom’s decision to use it as a means of profiting on the grief of the James family? What morality system says that’s a social good?
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer.mq April 14, 2010 - 11:03 am
To further spell this out, Pat, everyone on the planet understands why the story of his death made national headlines. What’s deplorable is Albom’s decision to plant himself in a position of righteousness and essentially lecture the same populace that already grasped all the concepts at hand in so that he may whip out a lazy 700 word piece to meet his deadline and collect another check. If he were worth the money, he’d have brought to light some piece of wisdom or truth that wasn’t already a known to 90% of the world. And if he weren’t a jerk, he’d not have earned his paycheck on the grief of the James family. HOW IS THIS SO DIFFICULT FOR YOU TO GRASP?
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By NWohioND April 14, 2010 - 12:45 pm
Obviously Pat’s ability to grasp your point (or Biscuit’s many points on Urban) is very simple…he thought you figured Mitch was selling T-shirts to generate revenue!
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Pat April 14, 2010 - 2:14 pm
Listen, this is cynical, but here it is: What morality system, you ask? The same morality system that has us grieve a perfect stranger because he was going to block pass rushers at Notre Dame.
We’ve learned now from the comments that you basically deplore Albom’s tone and you think his advice is self explanatory. That’s fair. I think don’t think he’s a jerk, however, merely for writing a piece on the topic.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By theIrishLion10 April 14, 2010 - 3:42 pm
unfortunately, James was used to illustrate a point about a much bigger problem. It’s terrible for the family that the memory of their son is the tragedy of underage drinking, but unfortunately this is blood in the water for media sharks.
james might have been the best kid in the world who made one mistake (a mistake that countless high schoolers make), but he was a high profile athlete headed to notre dame to play football. nobody wants to hear about the no-name kid who died because of drinking, it takes a big name to make a point these days. not saying its right or wrong, thats just the way it is
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By theIrishLion10 April 14, 2010 - 3:49 pm
and i doubt albom was trying to profit off of death and grief, its just the world we live in: big names are the only examples we use.
and im not attacking the authors of this site, either, because i love this site (as well as my fighting irish), but you guys are opinion writers too. I could easily say you are attacking the entire florida fan base for picking on their idiot coach. its opinion writing, someone somewhere will not like it.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By GB April 14, 2010 - 7:09 pm
Domer,
I read the Albom piece. I felt he was sensitive to the situation. It needed to be said. Yes there are lots of articles about the downside to teenage drinking. However, it still goes on and in dangerous circumstances. Different articles are written in different ways to reach different audiences. If Albom’s article even changes one teen or their parent ( to make a decision to prevent their child ) from drinking and especially making stupid decisions regarding drinking, then the whole article will be well worth the the price of the print.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer_mq April 14, 2010 - 7:36 pm
GB, IrishLion10, and probably Pat, consider this: If it’s something so worthy of addressing, why doesn’t Albom address it any other time? Why wait until the Notre Dame kid becomes an example?
Sure this stuff needs to be said, but it should be said and discussed constantly, without the need to wait until a high profile kid dies. The only reason Albom addressed it is because he knew it would up his click rate. And if you really don’t believe that’s the game most of these columnists (and bloggers) are playing, then you’re being naive.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By theIrishLion10 April 15, 2010 - 10:12 am
Like I said, I think it fails to be mentioned any other time by anyone because in today’s world, celebrity and power are all that matter, and the common folk only respond to a situation when they see that even the big names go through these things. Matt James had a name through being a football player headed to Notre Dame, and it made the headlines when he died. Albom probably saw these stories and delved into the subject. Im not saying whether his article was tasteful or not, I’m just saying that the time to address anything in this world is when a big name is involved
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By theIrishLion10 April 15, 2010 - 10:15 am
and for the record, i do realize that “click rate” is a driving factor for many columnists (if not most), i am not so dumb to believe otherwise. I can agree with you on that. I just think that Matt James is not a victim of Albom’s writing, he is a victim of having a name for himself when something went wrong.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Erik '04 April 15, 2010 - 10:27 am
I thought this piece was a well-written parody of the Albom piece. However, I thought your tone was, as Albom’s was, unrightly harsh. Perhaps those two sentences go hand-in-hand, but just as Albom was very wrong to trash James and his family, you might be wrong to *trash* Albom for the douche that he might very well be. You are advocating that he should have brought the issues to light without making an example of James, but perhaps you should have brought the issue of opinion-piece journalist hacks writing unnecessary articles to increase their ad revenue to light without making an example of Albom. You used him because he is well known and had just done something you didn’t agree with. He used James because James was well known and had just done something Albom didn’t agree with.
I’m not saying I agree with Pat or anyone who is against you. I actually agree with your point, and feel that Albom was wrong to do what he did in this instance. His personal attacks on James were unwarranted. I am only hoping to illuminate the underlying hypocrisy of your article in case that is what is fueling your critics.
Being from Detroit I can tell you that he is pretty well loved in that town. I am not familiar with his whole body of work, but he wrote an article last year about the city of Detroit that was quite moving. Opinion drivel fluff, but still moving. He crossed too many lines with this piece on James, though. His point could have been made with lies, damn lies, and statistics, but he chose to focus on one case study instead.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Bad Kermit April 15, 2010 - 10:28 pm
Good lord, it’s no wonder the outside world thinks ND students are a bunch of dorks.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0