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!

'How Sports Illustrated Botched the Michael Sam Story'

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Dick Whitman, Feb 25, 2014.

  1. MisterCreosote

    MisterCreosote Well-Known Member

    If you sub "Jim McGreevey" for "Michael Sam," I might agree with you.

    Probably not, but I could be more easily persuaded.
     
  2. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    They compete for news. Sports Illustrated frequently beats them. Sports Illustrated, Tom Verducci notwithstanding, has more journalistic credibility in its pinkie finger than ESPN, as an overall organization, has in its Andre the Giant-sized body, owing to ESPN's partnerships with the leagues it covers.

    The notion that Jon Wertheim should defer to ESPN because ESPN is bigger is absolute nonsense.
     
  3. Bob Cook

    Bob Cook Active Member

    If Michael Sam were the legislator behind that law in Arizona that says you don't have to serve gay people, there is a public interest in outing him. As a football player, there isn't, any more than there was a public interest in identifying how much Rex Ryan loved his wife's feet. There's no harm being done, and no reason to feel like you've got to beat the competition.

    The thing with SI's strategy, though, is that it was perfect for revving up the click rate, which is what it's all about.
     
  4. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    A friend who works at ESPN said 20+ years ago a baseball player agreed to come out and filmed the interview with Dick Schaap. The next day, he changed his mind and asked them not to air it and ESPN agreed to it, in part because Schaap said he wanted nothing to do with it if the guy didn't want it out there.

    Two decades later the player has still not publicly come out.
     
  5. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    So?
     
  6. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    This has nothing to do with broadcast vs. print. It has everything to do with ESPN's financial relationships with its sources. That taints everything it does.
     
  7. MisterCreosote

    MisterCreosote Well-Known Member

    Exactly.

    "Breaking" the story before your source announces it serves the reporter's selfish ends and nothing more.
     
  8. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    Did you wait until police press conferences to break news?
     
  9. Rhody31

    Rhody31 Well-Known Member

    No idea. Which is why I'm so back and forth on this.
    I'm more curious to how the second player who comes out in the NFL or NBA gets treated.
     
  10. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    It'll be big-time diminishing returns, particularly if it continues to be unknowns like Jason Collins and Michael Sam.
     
  11. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    My goodness.

    Is this just midday mental gymnastics, or do you really hold no difference between a person coming out and the various analogies you're posting here?
     
  12. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    I think that MisterCreosote is making statements about breaking news in very generalized language.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page