WOW! Sally Jenkins actuall responded to my email!

I hate her freakin column because she never ever says anything good about about the Skins, soooo I sent her this email yesterday:

"Ive read your column for the past few years, it seems you are consistently bashing the Redskins either with their play on the field or their front office moves. I perplexed as to why you haven't written a critical column lately or are those only done when its clear that the team sucks?"


Now, I really do dislike her column, but it sure was cool that she responded to my email today, here it is:



Hi,

First, thanks for reading the Washington Post.

To use your phrase, I do write about the Redskins when they don't "suck." I don't know if you saw, but I actually wrote two of my last three columns on the Redskins -- I was in Kansas City, and in Denver the previous week. While they lost, I wouldn't call the columns particularly negative, I thought they were pretty middle of the road ruminations about an uneven team. You may differ.

I'd have been at the game this past week, but I had to fly to Texas for my second family funeral in the space of a month. And I spent much of September in Mississippi covering Hurricane Katrina, so I missed those two great comebacks.

Anyhow, that's why you haven't seen my name in the sports section more lately on any subject, much less the Redskins.

In general, I don't accuse the Redskins of sucking. I do accuse the front office of being a chaotic mess thanks to Dan Snyder's management, but they seem to be stabilizing under Joe Gibbs.

Believe it or not, it's actually a lot more fun to write about the Redskins when they win. I'll be in Giants Stadium this weekend. After that, I'm not sure what the paper has planned for me.

Hope you keep reading. This is a very interesting team. Getting better all the time. Next three weeks are tough tho.

Best, Sally Jenkins

That actually is very cool. I'm not one of her biggest fans, but it wasnet just a half-assed response either and she defended herself, but not in a way that put you down. Pretty interesting.

She scored some points with me on that one.

Nice answer. It will be interesting to read her articles with that in mind. Above all what I got out of it is - she seems like a real fan, she sounded like she was really sorry she missed being at skins game, regardless of what she has to write.

Peter King wrote something last year I will never forget...paraphrased it was: "The only a writer roots for is his own story to sell". I keep that in mind when I read controversial "make a story" trash as well. :)

It still seems convenient that she was only able to write an article after the two losses and has excuses why she was unable to write articles for any of the four wins. If the Skins manage to beat the Giants, we'll see what kind of article she writes then.

I guess I'd do her now.

To use Haslett's term, this is a chicken s**t response. Typical, actually. In her columns, she is writing to no one and at the same time, everyone. This gives her an sense of anonymity (kinda strange, but think about it) and the courage to blast the Skins any chance she gets. Now, when Paul emailed her, she is responding to an actual person with a name. This is more personal, thus the more middle of the road Skins views.

I'll be curious as to see whether or not she follows through if the Skins win.

Wow, I guess Sally is not so bad after all......

To use Haslett's term, this is a chicken s**t response. Typical, actually. In her columns, she is writing to no one and at the same time, everyone. This gives her an sense of anonymity (kinda strange, but think about it) and the courage to blast the Skins any chance she gets. Now, when Paul emailed her, she is responding to an actual person with a name. This is more personal, thus the more middle of the road Skins views.

I agree, she certainly doesn't have this kind of middle of the road tone in her articles where she's much more harsh and negative.