Jason Quick opens up about leaving the Blazers' beat

lcjjdnh · Aug 26, 2013

Mizzougrad96 said:

When I was covering colleges I had a radio show and I was friends with the co-host, who traveled with the football and basketball teams and we had gone out drinking many a time and talked shop and bitched and whined about our jobs.

There was an incident at football practice where an out-of-town columnist came in to do a story and the PR staff wouldn't let him into the practice field, even for the last five minutes, which is when they opened it up for everybody else.

The columnist went nuts on the PR guy and it became a bit of a story. CNN/SI and ESPN.com both had stories on it.

Anyway, we're on the radio next morning and my co-host said, "That couldn't have surprised you, you've told me what a pain in the butt their PR staff is."

I said, "I've definitely never said that." (Colossal lie...) and then I scribbled STFU on a piece of paper and held it up.

He regrouped and said, "Maybe I'm thinking of someone else..." I said, "You are..."

Fortunately, this was just a few minutes after 6 am and nobody who mattered was listening.

The Quick interview read like him sitting with the Blazers guy and complaining over drinks. It's a conversation we've all had with colleagues or co-workers, but it is not for public consumption.

Quick's answers are all incredibly honest, but consenting to an interview like that was not the smartest thing for Quick to do.
Click to expand...

So I certainly understand not wanting to put yourself in a position to answer questions that might harm your relationships with sources. And I certainly understand justifying that by telling yourself that your readers will get better information if you maintain somewhat cordial relations with the PR staff. But it is extraordinarily troubling that you would flat-out lie to readers and listeners.

silvercharm · Aug 26, 2013

According to the Oregonian sports' top 10 website page views for the past week, Jason's piece on Behind the Locker Room Door was No. 1.

Mizzougrad96 · Aug 26, 2013

lcjjdnh said:

Mizzougrad96 said:

When I was covering colleges I had a radio show and I was friends with the co-host, who traveled with the football and basketball teams and we had gone out drinking many a time and talked shop and bitched and whined about our jobs.

There was an incident at football practice where an out-of-town columnist came in to do a story and the PR staff wouldn't let him into the practice field, even for the last five minutes, which is when they opened it up for everybody else.

The columnist went nuts on the PR guy and it became a bit of a story. CNN/SI and ESPN.com both had stories on it.

Anyway, we're on the radio next morning and my co-host said, "That couldn't have surprised you, you've told me what a pain in the butt their PR staff is."

I said, "I've definitely never said that." (Colossal lie...) and then I scribbled STFU on a piece of paper and held it up.

He regrouped and said, "Maybe I'm thinking of someone else..." I said, "You are..."

Fortunately, this was just a few minutes after 6 am and nobody who mattered was listening.

The Quick interview read like him sitting with the Blazers guy and complaining over drinks. It's a conversation we've all had with colleagues or co-workers, but it is not for public consumption.

Quick's answers are all incredibly honest, but consenting to an interview like that was not the smartest thing for Quick to do.
Click to expand...

So I certainly understand not wanting to put yourself in a position to answer questions that might harm your relationships with sources. And I certainly understand justifying that by telling yourself that your readers will get better information if you maintain somewhat cordial relations with the PR staff. But it is extraordinarily troubling that you would flat-out lie to readers and listeners.
Click to expand...

Right, because we all want anything we've said in a private conversation while frustrated to be thrown back at us in a public forum.

lcjjdnh · Aug 26, 2013

Mizzougrad96 said:

lcjjdnh said:

Mizzougrad96 said:

When I was covering colleges I had a radio show and I was friends with the co-host, who traveled with the football and basketball teams and we had gone out drinking many a time and talked shop and bitched and whined about our jobs.

There was an incident at football practice where an out-of-town columnist came in to do a story and the PR staff wouldn't let him into the practice field, even for the last five minutes, which is when they opened it up for everybody else.

The columnist went nuts on the PR guy and it became a bit of a story. CNN/SI and ESPN.com both had stories on it.

Anyway, we're on the radio next morning and my co-host said, "That couldn't have surprised you, you've told me what a pain in the butt their PR staff is."

I said, "I've definitely never said that." (Colossal lie...) and then I scribbled STFU on a piece of paper and held it up.

He regrouped and said, "Maybe I'm thinking of someone else..." I said, "You are..."

Fortunately, this was just a few minutes after 6 am and nobody who mattered was listening.

The Quick interview read like him sitting with the Blazers guy and complaining over drinks. It's a conversation we've all had with colleagues or co-workers, but it is not for public consumption.

Quick's answers are all incredibly honest, but consenting to an interview like that was not the smartest thing for Quick to do.
Click to expand...

So I certainly understand not wanting to put yourself in a position to answer questions that might harm your relationships with sources. And I certainly understand justifying that by telling yourself that your readers will get better information if you maintain somewhat cordial relations with the PR staff. But it is extraordinarily troubling that you would flat-out lie to readers and listeners.
Click to expand...

Right, because we all want anything we've said in a private conversation while frustrated to be thrown back at us in a public forum.
Click to expand...

It is unfortunate your co-host put you in a bad position.* It does not give you a license to lie, though.

* Indeed, like I said, I certainly understand trying to avoid those situations.

Captain Obvious · Aug 26, 2013

Mizzougrad96 said:

lcjjdnh said:

Mizzougrad96 said:

When I was covering colleges I had a radio show and I was friends with the co-host, who traveled with the football and basketball teams and we had gone out drinking many a time and talked shop and bitched and whined about our jobs.

There was an incident at football practice where an out-of-town columnist came in to do a story and the PR staff wouldn't let him into the practice field, even for the last five minutes, which is when they opened it up for everybody else.

The columnist went nuts on the PR guy and it became a bit of a story. CNN/SI and ESPN.com both had stories on it.

Anyway, we're on the radio next morning and my co-host said, "That couldn't have surprised you, you've told me what a pain in the butt their PR staff is."

I said, "I've definitely never said that." (Colossal lie...) and then I scribbled STFU on a piece of paper and held it up.

He regrouped and said, "Maybe I'm thinking of someone else..." I said, "You are..."

Fortunately, this was just a few minutes after 6 am and nobody who mattered was listening.

The Quick interview read like him sitting with the Blazers guy and complaining over drinks. It's a conversation we've all had with colleagues or co-workers, but it is not for public consumption.

Quick's answers are all incredibly honest, but consenting to an interview like that was not the smartest thing for Quick to do.
Click to expand...

So I certainly understand not wanting to put yourself in a position to answer questions that might harm your relationships with sources. And I certainly understand justifying that by telling yourself that your readers will get better information if you maintain somewhat cordial relations with the PR staff. But it is extraordinarily troubling that you would flat-out lie to readers and listeners.
Click to expand...

Right, because we all want anything we've said in a private conversation while frustrated to be thrown back at us in a public forum.
Click to expand...

You mean what reporters try to do with sources?

Drip · Sep 4, 2013

Captain Obvious said:

Mizzougrad96 said:

lcjjdnh said:

Mizzougrad96 said:

When I was covering colleges I had a radio show and I was friends with the co-host, who traveled with the football and basketball teams and we had gone out drinking many a time and talked shop and bitched and whined about our jobs.

There was an incident at football practice where an out-of-town columnist came in to do a story and the PR staff wouldn't let him into the practice field, even for the last five minutes, which is when they opened it up for everybody else.

The columnist went nuts on the PR guy and it became a bit of a story. CNN/SI and ESPN.com both had stories on it.

Anyway, we're on the radio next morning and my co-host said, "That couldn't have surprised you, you've told me what a pain in the butt their PR staff is."

I said, "I've definitely never said that." (Colossal lie...) and then I scribbled STFU on a piece of paper and held it up.

He regrouped and said, "Maybe I'm thinking of someone else..." I said, "You are..."

Fortunately, this was just a few minutes after 6 am and nobody who mattered was listening.

The Quick interview read like him sitting with the Blazers guy and complaining over drinks. It's a conversation we've all had with colleagues or co-workers, but it is not for public consumption.

Quick's answers are all incredibly honest, but consenting to an interview like that was not the smartest thing for Quick to do.
Click to expand...

So I certainly understand not wanting to put yourself in a position to answer questions that might harm your relationships with sources. And I certainly understand justifying that by telling yourself that your readers will get better information if you maintain somewhat cordial relations with the PR staff. But it is extraordinarily troubling that you would flat-out lie to readers and listeners.
Click to expand...

Right, because we all want anything we've said in a private conversation while frustrated to be thrown back at us in a public forum.
Click to expand...

You mean what reporters try to do with sources?
Click to expand...

I'm still trying to figure out why Quick opened his mouth in a public forum to begin with.

Mizzougrad96 · Sep 4, 2013

Simers got fired from ATH for making fun of the show in print.

Whitlock got fired from ESPN for talking to The Big Lead.

I'm sure there are other cases, but those are the two that jump out at me.

LongTimeListener · Jan 1, 2014

Big bump here -- he's back on the beat.

Jason Quick ‏@jwquick 30 Dec
Have to say I thoroughly enjoyed covering this Oregon football team. What a class bunch of young men. They were fun, engaging & interesting

Jason Quick ‏@jwquick 30 Dec
Part of me wishes I would stick on them to see what will probably be a memorable run next season. But ... I am headed back to the Blazers.

I don't know enough about the individuals (coach/GM/PR/etc.) to guess about how his return will be received, but this is awkward to say the least.

DanOregon · Jan 1, 2014

I don't know - I'm guessing the O's management realizes they can't put out enough Blazers stuff now and figure he could help out. Portland's kind of a weird town. The Timbers might be the most popular team in the region right now - but the NBA is the NBA. The decision might be a management thing.

Mark2010 · Jan 1, 2014

How many people do they have on that beat?

DanOregon · Jan 1, 2014

Typically it has been two on the beat, one doing the gamer, the other doing the side, and they have a video person, Canzano and perhaps another for home games.

Giggity · Jan 3, 2014

DanOregon said:

I don't know - I'm guessing the O's management realizes they can't put out enough Blazers stuff now and figure he could help out. Portland's kind of a weird town. The Timbers might be the most popular team in the region right now - but the NBA is the NBA. The decision might be a management thing.
Click to expand...

No disrespect, but the Timbers are an exceptionally distant third. The Ducks hold the status of an NFL team, and this Blazers team is catnip for anybody who's been in Portland longer than two years.

Log in or Sign up

Jason Quick opens up about leaving the Blazers' beat

lcjjdnh Well-Known Member

silvercharm Member

Mizzougrad96 Active Member

lcjjdnh Well-Known Member

Captain Obvious Guest

Drip Active Member

Mizzougrad96 Active Member

LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

DanOregon Well-Known Member

Mark2010 Active Member

DanOregon Well-Known Member

Giggity Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Jason Quick opens up about leaving the Blazers' beat

lcjjdnh Well-Known Member

silvercharm Member

Mizzougrad96 Active Member

lcjjdnh Well-Known Member

Captain Obvious Guest

Drip Active Member

Mizzougrad96 Active Member

LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

DanOregon Well-Known Member

Mark2010 Active Member

DanOregon Well-Known Member

Giggity Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches