1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Cashman vs Pearlman

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by YankeeFan, Mar 13, 2009.

  1. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Pearlman says he should have called Cashman, but if you're not an eyewitness to an event, is one unnamed source enough?

  2. Frank_Ridgeway

    Frank_Ridgeway Well-Known Member

  3. broadway joe

    broadway joe Guest

    No, one source isn't enough. If that's all Pearlman had, how could he not call Cashman for comment? Maybe Cashman would have even confirmed it and said he was only joking, or something. But you can't run it based on just one source, no matter how trustworthy you think he is.
  4. Some Guy

    Some Guy Active Member

    Our rule has always been you need more than one source if it's unnamed. If the "Yankee" was willing to go on-the-record ... fine. Otherwise, nuh-uh.
  5. Double J

    Double J Active Member

    Game, set, match.
  6. BYH

    BYH Active Member

    John Rocker just beat up an immigrant and burned a cross in someone's front yard, but that is unrelated to the glee he feels over this story.
  7. Double Down

    Double Down Well-Known Member

    I think Cashman is lying. But yes, Pearlman should have called him.
  8. clutchcargo

    clutchcargo Active Member

    I can see getting a second source if you are going to write that the person themselevs took steroids, or beat up the wife, or robbed the store, or had a private meeting with Jose Canseco or one of a hundred other things that are illegal, unethical, directly affilated with something or someone illegal or unethical or whatever.

    But to get a second source on some offhand anecdote about a frustrated team official yelling or however much he did or didn't raise his voice at frustration at a player on a TV in the clubhouse is ludicrous. There is nothing about this pearlman anecdote---and I don't even know pearlman or have met him-----that suggests or implies that Cashman had any involvement or direct knowledge of Giambi using PEDs. He was only vocalizing what 99.9% of the baseball world already suspected of Giambi, and this comes across purely as a funny story about an offhanded remark.

    C'mon, guys and gals, does this REALLY deserve being put under a microscope. Of COURSE, Cashman is going to deny the story. Big whoop.

    I was covering a game involving the Texas Rangers once where a young Pudge Rodriguez was having a bad game and struck out or got stolen on or whatever, and a prominent beat baseball writer at the game happened to loudly proclaim in the press box, "For crying out, Rodriguez, don't 'roids make you better than this??!!" It was a funny remark and everyone around him knew exactly what he was saying. Now, if I write a book and include that anecdote and mention the writer's name, am I going to send spj.com into a tizzy???!!! Heck, even if it had been George W. Bush himself (Rangers general managing partner at the time) that had said that and not the writer, am I going to get roasted for putting that in a book without a second source or confirmation from W. himself? Puhhhllllease.
  9. Frank_Ridgeway

    Frank_Ridgeway Well-Known Member

    The example you gave, you witnessed it yourself. Big difference.
  10. spnited

    spnited Active Member

    Amazing how many people here think Pearlman is the shit when really he is full of shit.
  11. Pencil Dick

    Pencil Dick Member

    Don't let the facts get in the way of good Yankee-bashing.
  12. Exactamundo.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page