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!

Lute Olson's Leave of Absence

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by eyeonsportsmedia, Dec 7, 2007.

?

Should the media respect Lute Olson's request for privacy during his leave of absence for personal r

  1. Yes, the media has no right to obtain or publish this information

    3 vote(s)
    6.4%
  2. Yes, Lute Olson is not a public figure and this information has nothing to do with the performance o

    6 vote(s)
    12.8%
  3. No, Lute Olson is a state employee and this information should be public

    7 vote(s)
    14.9%
  4. No, Lute Olson is a public figure and has no reasonable expectation of privacy

    31 vote(s)
    66.0%
  1. Angola!

    Angola! Guest

    Sorry, it took me a little bit to understand you guys were saying it was more than the divorce. Thank you.
     
  2. Well one of the latest visitors to my site got there doing a search on - "Lute Olson" AIDS -

    what wonderful things speculation brings to the mind of a google searcher...
     
  3. PCLoadLetter

    PCLoadLetter Well-Known Member

    From what I'm hearing about the situation, the reason for the leave of absence is not the divorce, although I would imagine that isn't helping things. And if what I'm hearing about the real cause for the leave is correct, it's something the public has no right or need to know, and the public explanation he has given is all he owes anyone.
     
  4. wickedwritah

    wickedwritah Guest

    Not doubting you, PC.

    But where do we draw the line? What is too personal and what should be shielded from the public?

    Not trying to start a flame war here, just open up some discussion.
     
  5. fishwrapper

    fishwrapper Active Member

    Get your pen out.
    Right here with this one.
     
  6. What right does the public have to know anything if it involves only him or his family, and and nobody else?
     
  7. fishwrapper

    fishwrapper Active Member

    Be careful here. You are on a sight site full of journalists.
    These topics have been exhausted here and elsewhere.
     
  8. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member


    I'll continue to abstain from speculating re the meat of the matter, here . . .

    But as for this . . .

    You're addressing a bunch of newshounds about going out of their way not to uncover news.

    Talk about waving a fresh, dripping steak, within clear sight . . .
     
  9. wickedwritah

    wickedwritah Guest

    You're right to an extent, fish, though we haven't had a such a high-profile case like this in too recent memory.
     
  10. fishwrapper

    fishwrapper Active Member

    I agree. And, with that I need to be careful here.
     
  11. beefncheddar

    beefncheddar Guest

    That's just awesum.
     
  12. fishwrapper

    fishwrapper Active Member

    Yeah. Whoops.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page