Originally posted by billeau2
View Post
It just goes to show how regular media sources for the masses are on such a base level. McGoorty the truth is that I know this for a fact being I have written for these sources in the martial arts. I have written a post about this and its not to toot my horn, it is to make the point that you are asking about.
When I was writing regularly for Black Belt (among others) which is the most widely circulated martial arts mag, I would deliberately make sure that everything I wrote had a level of content that an average media biased individual would grasp and the reading level would be about that of a very bright fourth grader...thats not really an exxageration by much.
I can almost be certain that people writing for the media making these lists are generally speaking of the same ilk and do not have the knowledge as historians to know about fighters like Les Darcy, hence, the exclusion. Most of the people I wrote with, wrote glorified press releases with the same basic dribble repeated and repackages with a few new technical details in the photos.
Heres a hypothetical example of what 90% of the material looks like in the most widely circulated martial art mag in the world today:
"chim KUm Lee was the third child in a family and his uncle passed the deadly art of egg fu down to him... Lee states " the difference in our art is that we use all ranges of combat, kicks to the outside, punches and grappling closer." But Lees art has an additional twist as he says " we also consider the spiritual side and have meditation techniques that help build a strong mind for combat." (then a few picks showing karate like movements are displayed...yada yada yada....
First off, what is so remarkable about this technical detail? Nothing!!!! its common sense. And what art does not claim to have some form of mental conditioning? Maybe MMA? Most individuals cant even see that they assume martial arts is meditating so that when an art does not they assume a false dichotomy of traditional/nontraditional...and the media plays right into that false dichotomy.
the reason why posters like Jughead get so angry and consider analysis on any meaningful level to be threatening is because THIS IS THE SHIZZLE PEOPLE ARE GESTATED ON!" Most people can't even take the time to read a real article more than a few pages long and get fed this shizzle regulalry and expect to hear it regurgitated back.
So when a case is made for a fighter that is not a media darling....Well try to critisize Bruce Lee in the martial arts media for example. Ever hear of "Riley Hawkins?" he is my "Les Darcey." There is a picture of Sensie Hawkins, who taught one of my teachers, with Bruce Lee and Chuck Norris...but you don't hear of this man unless you really know who the great fighters and innovaters were in the karate circles back in the day. Riley was so good that he actually taught Karate techniques to the Okinawans to modernize the kumite applications of the art. He impressed them that much. His students were feared by all during the dojo busting period which made baltimore an honest place to teach....cause if you taught shizzle you got a the visit!
Why don't we hear of people like hawkins and Darcey? Well I know with Riley it was a combination of things... At first it was racial (he is a black man), then it was the fact that he did most of his work at home in Baltimore. And then it was the fact that there was no BS. No crazy claims, just very rough,elite training that drove off those who had ego or designs. But the fact of the matter is those in the know would put Riley hawkins on a proverbial short list. I can see with Darcey the same applies.
When I was writing regularly for Black Belt (among others) which is the most widely circulated martial arts mag, I would deliberately make sure that everything I wrote had a level of content that an average media biased individual would grasp and the reading level would be about that of a very bright fourth grader...thats not really an exxageration by much.
I can almost be certain that people writing for the media making these lists are generally speaking of the same ilk and do not have the knowledge as historians to know about fighters like Les Darcy, hence, the exclusion. Most of the people I wrote with, wrote glorified press releases with the same basic dribble repeated and repackages with a few new technical details in the photos.
Heres a hypothetical example of what 90% of the material looks like in the most widely circulated martial art mag in the world today:
"chim KUm Lee was the third child in a family and his uncle passed the deadly art of egg fu down to him... Lee states " the difference in our art is that we use all ranges of combat, kicks to the outside, punches and grappling closer." But Lees art has an additional twist as he says " we also consider the spiritual side and have meditation techniques that help build a strong mind for combat." (then a few picks showing karate like movements are displayed...yada yada yada....
First off, what is so remarkable about this technical detail? Nothing!!!! its common sense. And what art does not claim to have some form of mental conditioning? Maybe MMA? Most individuals cant even see that they assume martial arts is meditating so that when an art does not they assume a false dichotomy of traditional/nontraditional...and the media plays right into that false dichotomy.
the reason why posters like Jughead get so angry and consider analysis on any meaningful level to be threatening is because THIS IS THE SHIZZLE PEOPLE ARE GESTATED ON!" Most people can't even take the time to read a real article more than a few pages long and get fed this shizzle regulalry and expect to hear it regurgitated back.
So when a case is made for a fighter that is not a media darling....Well try to critisize Bruce Lee in the martial arts media for example. Ever hear of "Riley Hawkins?" he is my "Les Darcey." There is a picture of Sensie Hawkins, who taught one of my teachers, with Bruce Lee and Chuck Norris...but you don't hear of this man unless you really know who the great fighters and innovaters were in the karate circles back in the day. Riley was so good that he actually taught Karate techniques to the Okinawans to modernize the kumite applications of the art. He impressed them that much. His students were feared by all during the dojo busting period which made baltimore an honest place to teach....cause if you taught shizzle you got a the visit!
Why don't we hear of people like hawkins and Darcey? Well I know with Riley it was a combination of things... At first it was racial (he is a black man), then it was the fact that he did most of his work at home in Baltimore. And then it was the fact that there was no BS. No crazy claims, just very rough,elite training that drove off those who had ego or designs. But the fact of the matter is those in the know would put Riley hawkins on a proverbial short list. I can see with Darcey the same applies.
Comment