Palm Beach, Tweets, Virginia Tech, Miami

I would have to imagine that the coach didn't know that a reporter was listening to the conversation. However, I can usually tell when somebody has me on speaker phone so I'm not sure why he would say something like that because you never know who could be listening besides the recruit. Perhaps the coach, like the reporter, just got caught up in the moment.

To answer your second question, no.

 

On another note, if a reporter has landed this kind of access and it results in such great stuff, why the hell is he/she reporting it via Twitter? Assuming there were no other reporters listening in on the call, why not use it as a spring board for a really good profile or piece of enterprise? What good does it do you, or your publication, to throw it out to the masses on Twitter?

 

Beyond that, if the reporter by chance was recording it, in Florida, it's illegal.

Doesn't say he was though.

 

I don't see that the reporter did anything wrong (other than misidentifying the coach, which he corrected). If you're invited into a room, are given no restrictions on what you can or can't write, and you get to overhear a juicy conversation like that, go for it. Like I said, that was great stuff.

 

If you're in a room, the parties involved can see you. If you're on two speakerphones and the other party has no idea the conversation is "on the record" its an entirely different matter, ethically.

NCAA rules prohibit public comment on unsigned recruits. I wonder if there's any precedent for "fly on the wall" type comments like this? In the strictest sense, a compliance officer could argue the comments reported constitute violations because they were reported. Unlikely but still something a compliance person at VaTech has to waste their time on this morning.

 

At the U.S. Army Bowl on Jan. 8, Cal got three big-time "commits," including the top-ranked player in the state. Of those three, two are going to Washington and one is going to UCLA. There's also another de-commit who is going to Stanford and one who is now deciding between Cal and USC.

 

Can we just agree that recruiting coverage before signing day is pretty close to worthless? And that way too many fans still can't get enough of it?

 

How is it worthless then?

 

Commitments are worth the paper they're printed on.

Newsprint.

 

Several years ago, Dave Bliss' assistant at Baylor secretly recorded conversations in which Bliss told the assistant and players to make it look like murder victim Patrick Dennehy was a drug dealer (hoping to cover up the fact he was getting money against NCAA rules). The assistant leaked the tapes to a reporter, who published them. Great reporting, right?

Now, obviously the stakes are much lower here and the exact circumstances are different, but how, ethically, is this situation different?

In the Baylor story, the reporter and one party in the conversation knew it was going to be published, but Bliss didn't. In this case, the player and reporter knew, but the VT assistant didn't.

Is there a difference here? And if so, what if Bliss' assistant had let the reporter listen in on a phone call with Bliss and had the same conversation, rather than bringing the reporter tapes? Would that be unethical or still great reporting?

 

You have to know state and federal taping laws. NCAA rules don't govern us, but the law does.
Also, ask yourself if you'd be OK with a source sharing a recording with you after the fact (with the coach not knowing). Is your gut reaction any different? I think it's more natural to feel like a "voyeur" during a live call than while listening to a recording. You can still call the third party and ask "Did you say ...?" I think it's an interesting scale to consider, though.

Still need to know the law. Still need to know your paper's ethics policy. Then, does the public's right to know trump that? It's a call your bosses make, not one you make on the spot with live tweeting.

Or at least run it past Rob Lowe.