Since I posted earlier about the new name for the Winston-Salem Class-A baseball team I've found out a little bit more. First of all here's the team's website. There you'll find the new logo, which I think is fine but over at the Journal they have lots of reader comments (126 as I write this) on their article about the announcement and one of the commenters thinks it looks like an elongated p—s. I'll let you fill in the Dashes. You gotta love the high level of discourse we're getting on the local sites, eh?
BTW, the team is having a name the mascot contest. I could have sworn it was "Dash" but I guess it's going to be "—- Dash" kind of like it was "Wally the Warthog." I am officially announcing here that my nomination is "Balder". You'll get it eventually.
Update: My oldest just got home from school (sophomore in HS) and without any prompting he said the logo looks like a "weener" and that kids at school draw a remarkably similar image on desks all the time. It's not lost on me that I'm wallowing in the gutter here, but honestly these folks can't be the only ones who correlate the logo with an anatomical part. I'm thinking the team may want to make some subtle adjustments to the logo so that they don't continue getting this kind of feedback.
Update #2: The Journal's managing editor noticed the comment too, and talks about an internal debate they had about the choice of leaving the comment up. He points out that they probably would have taken it down if the writer had used any number of synonyms for p—s, but since he used the correct anatomical term they let the comment be. I think they made the right choice. FYI, I'm using dashes in my spelling to be both coy about the team's name and because I really don't feel like turning up high in searches that feature that particular anatomical name.
The Winston-Salem Dash — a day later . . .
Curious what you thought about the WSJ’s coverage. The tagline “But where will they play” on the front page was ridiculous, imho. They are going to play downtown, perhaps not on 4/23, but soon thereafter. And then, in the “What they’re saying” section, to include statements like “I swear what is wrong with the great people of W-S” (that whole comment is just bazaar) as well as “You people are pathetic here” was weak at best, antagonistic at worst.
“But Will The Stadium Open On Time” would have been journalism. A public comment section that focused on the opinions people had about the name (and not about each other) would have been fine. What they did was NY Post-esque.
Just amateurish overall.
I was out of town for the weekend so I’m just catching up with this stuff. The comments were a few of the 100+ left on the article on their website. I agree that they could have chosen those comments better, and as you said they should have chosen the comments that were about the actual story rather than comment flames thrown by commenters at each other.
As for the stadium I think you’re also right that the headline was hyperbolic. Personally I’m thinking that they’re going to be paying rent to WFU to play at the old stadium until at least mid-season, but it won’t be the end of the world. I’m also of the opinion that public financing of stadiums is generally a bad idea unless it is wholly owned by the public, but now that the deal is done and it’s too late to do anything about it I’m looking forward to attending games downtown and I’m hoping that some interesting retail gets built in the area to make it a year-round destination.