AP reporter tweets Raiders coach fired, except he wasn't

I know that there is a subset of guys who make their bones in the business chasing stories like this. Schefter. King. Mortensen. It just doesn't seem worth the risk to me. I think Alma has on here talked a lot about how he doesn't put a ton of value into reporting of stories that are going to break soon anyway, and I am tending to lean that way, too. It's not important enough to risk embarrassment, or being in limbo for days on end.

 

There is no risk whatsoever if you're a professional reporter who does his/her job properly.

Everyone gave Chris Sheridan shit for his reporting on LeBron James, but he stood by it for weeks and was right about 95 percent of it. The exact opposite of the chicken shittery we saw in the wake of the Ray Rice debacle.

 

My concern would always be that someone changes his mind. It happens sometimes.

 

If that's the case, there's no reason for embarrassment. If you source it properly, you might even get advance notification of the change of heart prior to releasing the information.

 

Maybe dude meant to say Dennis Allen is sooooooooooo fired.

 

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I think it undermines the public's faith in the news media when we report stories, sourced anonymous, that then change. The use of anonymous sources on these kinds of stories is out of control, and it makes the sports page look like a gossip rag.

 

Anonymous sources are fine when used by people who aren't bullshit artists like Peter King or 95 percent of ESPN's talking heads.

What you're really arguing is that the lack of media credibility is out of control. If credibility exists, both for the reporter and his "sources," you don't get these embarrassing moments. And, part of credibility is having the sack to stand by what you reported in the first place, not cut and run almost immediately.

 

I'm embarrassed that journalism has come to this, but the ship sailed long ago. Journalism has come to this, and everyone involved is patting themselves on the back this morning.

Twitter has aided immeasurably in the dumbing-down of America.

 

False.

 

It's certainly aided in the dumbing down of the media.

 

I don't remotely see how that can even be argued.

 

The problems with twitter -- which aren't really twitter's problems -- get a lot of attention.

The benefits don't get nearly the attention.

It's a net plus, and the members of the media who allow themselves to be dumbed down by it need to look in the mirror for the cause.