The comments sections are typically a miasma of thinly-veiled prejudices being hurled back and forth. Take for instance this high point in Western Civilization, which started from an article about 680 the Fan dropping Bill O'Reilly and devolved into a series of almost-open racist remarks about the Two Live Stews. Or take this reasoned discussion about the safety of Downtown Atlanta after dark, which naturally started with this gem by "Kelly":
Atlanta is very dangerous at night and I will not consider going down there except with a large group of people, and then only to a few places such as the Philips Arena. I'm notsurprisedd that NASCAR didn't pick Atlanta-they wanted a family environment, which downtown Atlanta is not. Maybe Atlanta can after the national rap museum.
Kelly could not be reached for comment afterwards, as she was dining at one of the 17 Applebees in Alpharetta and complaining to the waitress that the Queso Dip & Chips were too spicy, no doubt the result of the infiltration of Mexicans into America.
Where was I? Oh yeah, I was going to discuss John Rocker's radio adventure. The episode illustrated something else, which is the inept way in which Steak interviews guests. He's right that Rocker shouldn't expect to come on the radio without having to reference his SI outburst at some point. It must suck to be known for one particular episode in your life and to be asked about it dozens of times, but that episode is putting food on Rocker's plate now, so he needs to have some level of tolerance for it. (Tolerance might have never been his strong suit, but that's another story.) That said, there's a right way to ask questions and a wrong way. The right way would be to ask an open-ended question like "do you have any regrets from your time in Atlanta?" or "have your views on New York changed in recent years now that you've been playing there?" Instead, doing what he always does, Steak made a banal observation, something to the effect of "You got this gig in New York based on the comments you made to SI" and then turned it into a cross examination question, by adding a "Right?" to the end of it. Ahmad Rashad would have been so proud of that technique.
A question like the one Steak asked will never lead the interviewee to say anything insightful and was clearly designed to provoke an easily-combustible person. Mike Bell then further showed the intentions of the Mayhem crew by referring to Rocker as a "washed-up pitcher." Oooh, how tough to attack an easy target on the radio! I'm not a big fan of Rocker (possibly because I'm bitter that he struck me out every time I batted against him in Little League at Vine-Ingle in Macon,) but I felt sympathetic towards him after his exchange with Steak and Mike. His feelings about the media are legitimate, if this stunt was indicative.
I generally like Mayhem, but the two things that drive me crazy about it are the incessant commercials and the weak interviewing skills of the hosts. They don't understand how to ask open-ended questions that will elicit interesting responses. Chris Dimino is miles better than the Mayhem hosts at asking the right questions to elicit interesting responses, not to mention the fact that he actually does research before talking to a subject, rather than relying on his radio persona to get by. Ryan and Doug Stewart are also better interviewers, mainly because they have credibility with African-American athletes that your typical angry white host does not.
And one other point: Steak's continued references to himself as Rocker's "Public Enemy Number One" could not be any more grandiose. (He made sure to mention it at the outset of the interview, no doubt to grease the wheels of inciting Rocker.) Given the number of people ripping on Rocker when he became one of the most hated men in American sports after the SI article ran, I doubt that his biggest concern was a morning host on AM radio in Atlanta. With Rocker, I wonder how much of his "wild man" image is an act; with Steak, I highly doubt that his delusions of grandeur are anything inauthentic.