Paper writes story of star high school player's failure to graduate

The real shame of it is his inability to pass the test was relegated to a brite. This is what's wrong with American journalism. When a teenage football player that doesn't graduate can't rate takeout coverage on the Sunday front, complete with lead columnist wagging his finger, then we might as well just throw the fourth estate under the bus and let the bloggers rule the world through a network of basements.

 

That happens the first time he gets his name in the headline or photo in the paper.

I can see arguments both ways. However, if you decide that high school sports are a big enough deal in your town to merit major resources and play, then don't be afraid to run stories like this or when the big shot jock gets arrested. Can't have it both ways.

 

You ARE kidding, right?

 

-

I don't think anyone on the thread is arguing against writing anything negative about a high school athlete (people do make those arguments, but not in this thread so far). The issue is whether this is newsworthy. I don't think anyone would advocate for an A1 story if he graduated.

 

Some of you guys make it seem as though newspapers cover high school sports out of the goodness of their hearts. They cover high school sports to attract readers and make money. I really don't see why teenagers should have to suffer so that some preps reporter can feel more noble about his job. The newspaper has unilaterally decided that they want to publish the athletic exploits of these kids--none of the teenagers agreed to this implicit bargain some of you have made up where they only get good publicity if they're willing to accept bad publicity, too. Indeed, I assume if the Star QB of the local football squad said he would sacrifice any public mention of his touchdowns in the fall to avoid any mention of private details of his life, no preps reporter would accede. The argument that these kids must accept the bad press because they get good press--solely because newspapers themselves have decided they want to report about the good things--is absurd.

 

You realize the reason those athletes get scholarships is due to newspaper coverage, right?

 

My point is how big of a celebrity is he? In some small towns, a high school football star is more recognizable than the mayor (sad, but true).

I understand his high school football eligibility may be over, but if he's big news, he's big news. Just like Lindsay Lohan getting arrested for DUI (or whatever). Doesn't affect me one bit, but the star syndrome in our culture is out of control.

 

He's a huge star. Some consider him the best RB to have played for the county.

Still doesn't make it right.

 

How so? If he's a "huge star", it's probably not the first time his name has been in print. So unless there are factual errors in the reporting, what's the problem?

My point is you can't endulge in the attention when it suits you and then claim some right to privacy when the news is harsh.

 

OK, my apologies, I was apparently told wrong that the story was on 1A. It ran on 10A. That doesn't make it nearly as bad, IMO, though I now think the placement is odd.

Wanted to add that my debate is whether it's worth a story or not, not necessarily where it should be placed. Just wanted to be clear on that as well, as I think it makes for an interesting topic of discussion.

 

To bring up a question another poster bought up, is 10A a news page or a sports page?

 

My understanding is it's a news page. The sports section is separate from the news section.