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!

Conflict of interest at APSE?

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Pulitzer Wannabe, Feb 21, 2008.

  1. JackReacher

    JackReacher Well-Known Member

    The people against Jenks being a judge have hit it right on the head. It's the appearance of the conflict of interest that trumps in this case. He can share a beer with the judges after the competition, but stay out of the judging room, please. Not sure how this can be argued the other way. Seems open and shut to me.
     
  2. EE94

    EE94 Guest

    My guess is Hack was being sarcastic, but it backs up the theory that because Jenks is respected, he should be allowed to stay as an exec at APSE.

    The point of precedence, though, is the key.

    What about the next guy? Or the next?

    You can't make individual exceptions because you like a guy or a he's a "good" guy.

    APSE's key role is to bring strength in resisting how professional sports organizations try to control coverage.

    Having someone on MLB's payroll as an exec is in complete contradiction to the ideals APSE is supposed to uphold.

    Again, nothing against Jenks or any of the other officers of APSE.

    But it is plainly wrong.
     
  3. zebracoy

    zebracoy Guest

    I actually don't have an issue with this. Most of that stems because of who Jenks is - there's no doubt in my mind that he knows his stuff, he knows good writing and he knows what makes a good sports section.

    I can't imagine that after so long in the newspaper business, he would turn around and say, "You know, this paper isn't giving the team I cover enough positive press, I'm going to choose this winner instead."

    Plus, as it was already mentioned, his vote counts just as much as Mark Faller, Doug Tatum and Larry Graham. I doubt he'd be able to pull the wool over their eyes, so to speak, if there was any chance he was trying to pick out a favorite.

    Finally, the disclaimer attached to the MLB.com stories - I don't think that the organization itself cares about what the news is that's out there. If it's a story, it's a story, and MLB.com is providing another alternative for the readers to get the news.

    Maybe it's an issue if Bug Selig is on a panel. But for a guy who is so deeply-rooted in newspapers, not to mention one who is a past president, there's no real concern here.
     
  4. Put yourself in his position.
    If you, Joe Schmoe veteran journalist, made the jump from newspaper to MLB.com, would you judge any differently?
    Of course not. I'd love to see who would admit (strong word on an anonymous forum) to judging differently if they were hired by MLB.com
    Why is it that we are all so smart on this board ... we know what to do to fix this industry, know how to cover every event perfectly, we know the meaning of life, yet there is NO WAY we could trust someone to put bias aside for a fucking APSE competition.
    But I'm sure ol' Bud Selig already has contacted Jenks to inform him of his objective. NO PAPER WINS WITHOUT BASEBALL CENTERPIECE!!!
    Jesus Christ, get over it. You need a microscope to find this molehill.
     
  5. GB-Hack

    GB-Hack Active Member

    Ok, so to answer that, how many editors at Yahoo, ESPN, Foxsports.com, CBSsportsline and the rest do you expect to be named President of the APSE? I honestly think this is an exceptional circumstance.
     
  6. JackReacher

    JackReacher Well-Known Member

    It's not that Jenks, or anyone else, would judge differently. It's the appearance of that possibility. Why not play it safe, do the right thing and remove all doubt?
     
  7. 86Mets

    86Mets New Member

    Why, among the 50-60 judges at APSE this week, are there only 5 or 6 women? Seriously.
    This relates to another thread on this board, which is women and the dot.coms.
    With the atrophy of the newspaper industry and the "niche" marketing of dot.com sports sites populated by "insiders" and "experts," it seems as of da men folks are going to finally squeeze all da womens outta the joint.
    Bravo! And in the words of our Commander in Chief: MIssion Accomplished, mostly. ::) ??? :eek:
     
  8. Joe Williams

    Joe Williams Well-Known Member

    If the man Jenks is so all-mighty respectable, he should recuse himself from this judging. And would have by now, frankly.

    What's so important and exciting about being a judge that he would risk the reputation of APSE and APSE would risk its own reputation? This is a journalism no-brainer: You do not take money from the people that you cover. And anyone who does no longer "covers" those people in the classic sense. Nothing against any of them, but once they're partners with the folks being covered, they're not journalists.

    I think it's already a gray area for ESPN.com folks and CBSSports.com, since the people who pay them also write big checks to sports leagues and associations that their people then "cover." You can talk all you want about a firewall -- the MLB.com "disclaimer" at the end of stories and columns -- but the potential for influence is there, along with the potential for more than just subtle influence.

    I know it's hard to leave old cronies behind and the gatherings for APSE judges might be swell times. But the integrity of the organization and its contest matter most.

    I don't even know why we talk about "conflict of interest" and "appearance of conflict of interest" as two different things. They aren't. There is an inherent conflict of interest in this and most other instances where folks try to make a distinction.
     
  9. wickedwritah

    wickedwritah Guest

    Do we know for sure that Jim hasn't recused himself by now?

    I would say that the decision is a slam dunk that he should, but it's not my choice to make.
     
  10. Frank_Ridgeway

    Frank_Ridgeway Well-Known Member

    If Jenks does understand the separation of church and state, as Micco contends, then he should have already removed himself. If he hasn't, to me that says he doesn't understand it. If the situation is, as Micco states, a "sticky wicket" for APSE, Jenks could make it easy for APSE by removing the acknowledged stickiness. I do not understand what the motives could be for making people uncomfortable about this, as it is not a case of money and Jenks has achieved enough status in his career that he does not need further APSE service on his resume. It is not about him, it is a larger issue than any one man.
     
  11. EE94

    EE94 Guest

    Jenks and APSE is not about the judging, because that's merely window dressing to the organization's real duty as an advocate for sports journalists.

    It's about being a member of both teams - the APSE and MLB.com

    That Micco rationalizes Jenks' inclusion because the bylaws are old and that Jenks is a swell guy only shows how weak the argument is.

    Time for APSE to show what its made of
     
  12. EE94

    EE94 Guest

    Good post.
    What's making APSE uncomfortable is having to tell a friend he is no longer welcome.

    Make the tough decision. It's what we demand of our leaders all the time
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page