Irresponsible reporting in the Pitt coaching job?

A hypothetical? You mean like the time Herbstreit hypothetically reported that Miles was taking the Michigan job on the morning of LSU's championship game?

 

I didn't say he doesn't.

He gets a lot right. But because of the nature of his job, he also gets a lot wrong.

 

Yep, the recent trend has been to lunge at rumors, especially on things like coaching searches and recruiting. I almost got caught up in it a few weeks back, but was very careful with the words I used since no one would talk on the record.

To me, that's the problem. I have no issue with reporting what someone says. But when no one returns your calls or declines comment, what do you have to go on? Basically rumors and speculation.

Frankly, I prefer not to put too much weight on those and wait to let things play out unless I have something solid to go on.

But, no, no need to "punish" a reporter because he guessed and got it wrong, unless he libeled someone in the process. Otherwise, just being wrong is punishment enough.

 

Never trust any local tv station's reporting on coaching searches. They're never both first and accurate - if it's a "scoop", it's generally wrong. Too many NDs willing to gamble in hopes of looking good by having an "exclusive", I guess.

 

Exactly. People still make Russ Grimm jokes regarding the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

 

And he's wrong a lot.
And they never issue corrections.

 

This guy wasn't a sportswriter. He was an electronic puke. Don't lump his type with us.

 

I should have gone across the board and said sports journalists in general.

 

imho, print journos are held to a much higher standard in terms of 'taking a shot' at breaking news than the tv/radio guys are. print journos are encouraged to be right; electronic 'journos' are encouraged to throw whatever they hear against the wall and hope it sticks.

of course, schad is very good, as is schefter, mort, glazer, et al. but they also (understandably, i suppose) tweet and blog and all that nonsense 24/7 to cover their asses. when they're right, we're reminded ad nauseam. when they're wrong it's treated like it never happened.

none of this is particularly new. viewers and readers make up their own minds on who to believe and who to roll their eyes out. unless it's a libelous matter of some sort, do you really expect them or even lesser known local guys to be publicly spanked when they're wrong?

of course not. if it happens often enough they'll inevitably have to pay a price..

 

You have to report rumors these days. If you don't there's no reason for anyone to go the site or watch the show.

 

And that, little Johnny, is how the internet killed journalism.