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. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    I don't know why Lute Olsen is exempt from speculation on reason. Lets say that one of Bob Knight's kids contracted AIDS and Knight took season off to help his son. Would the media provide the same respect to Knight? I doubt it.
     
  2. If Olson's son had cancer, would this be such a secret? I worry that, if this is indeed the case, that the secrecy is just adding to the stigma of the disease. Like Lute is ashamed. Even if that isn't necessarily the case, it's sure starting to feel that way.
     
  3. fishwrapper

    fishwrapper Active Member

    His first wife, Bobbi, fought a very public battle with ovarian cancer.
    There are foundations and endowments set up in her name.
    You think that's the case?

    http://www.collegeinsider.com/lute/bobbi.html
     
  4. spinning27

    spinning27 New Member

    Olson should have just come out at the beginning of this and said, "My son is suffering from a serious illness right now, and I am taking a leave of absence to deal with it. My family is very important to me, and please understand that I can not devote my full attention to being the head coach of the Arizona basketball program at this time. I will take the rest of this season off with every intention to return in 2008-09."

    If Olson had just said that right there, it's end of story.
     
  5. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    No offense, but, seriously: Retire. If you're hit with so many things from so many sides in a short span of time, a leave of absence isn't the solution when you're 73 years old. Retirement is.

    Truth is, Olson had many opportunities. Plenty of ripe moments. He is a good coach, and a kind man in his own way, but also a vain man. Yeah, he is and always has been a little bit. He hasn't nothing left to prove or accomplish, Arizona hasn't ruled the roost in the Pac 10 for three years, and he's beset by family problems. It's past time to to walk away.
     
  6. PCLoadLetter

    PCLoadLetter Well-Known Member

    Oh, I agree it's a perfectly valid topic for discussion, and frankly, I don't know where the line is, but I know this one's on the wrong side of it for me.

    In this case, the problem triggering the leave is not a noteworthy public matter, and it's not something that will be helped by a public discussion of it, so I think it's best left alone. (That's assuming my information is correct, and I think it probably is, but I couldn't swear to it.)

    And, to be honest, the answer isn't particularly salacious or interesting, so I don't think anyone who knows is in a rush to report it.
     
  7. fishwrapper

    fishwrapper Active Member

    Ding! Ding! Ding!
     
  8. What surprises me is that four of you felt that the information should be public because he is a state employee. I cannot imagine that the reason for a leave of absence is something that is covered under any open records laws...
     
  9. Frank_Ridgeway

    Frank_Ridgeway Well-Known Member

    I do not have an especially high regard for Olson, and I wrote here when he announced -- or rather his PR firm announced -- the leave of absence that I would not want to respect his wishes to leave it alone, that I would want to pursue the story and then make a decision whether to publish. I still feel we should not allow a public figure to dictate what we look into, if only to send a "fuck you, we'll decide what we do" in his direction. And I still feel that just because we find out what it is doesn't necessarily mean we need to print it. Each news organization must decide its own standards of newsworthiness and decency. There are some stories that I wouldn't mind being beaten on -- if someone else wants it that bad, they can have it.
     
  10. fishwrapper

    fishwrapper Active Member

    Well stated, Frank.
     
  11. BB Bobcat

    BB Bobcat Active Member

    I agree that if I were covering this beat I would first try to find out what it is, and then decide whether to report it.

    If it is, as I suspect, a serious illness to someone in his family, I absolutely respect his right to privacy and I would not print it (although I believe even that will find its way into the public domain eventually, certainly when he comes back and the person has either recovered or died).

    If it turns out that he's trying to prepare for a major IRS audit because he hasn't paid taxes in 30 years, that's different.
     
  12. BillyT

    BillyT Active Member

    And an Arrogant Bastard, too.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page