Peter King (again)

So in today's MMQB, King writes that Dan Snyder said on Sirius Radio over the weekend that the Redskins and Steelers had a draft-day trade that fell through. No attribution, Peter treats it as his own. Only problem is, Snyder wasn't on Sirius Radio over the weekend. When this info comes out, SI suddenly decides its important to give proper attribution to the erroneous report of the Snyder interview. They added the "reportedly" and a link to the twitter feed; they weren't there when King's column was first posted.

I just find it incredible that a national writer such as King pulls something like that, and apparently gets away with it.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/05/15/mmqb/1.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-sports-bog/post/dan-snyder-did-not-say-anything-about-the-steelers/2011/05/16/AFMxxq4G_blog.html

 

I love when I'm debating a hot topic in sports and someone brings up Peter King as someone who disagrees with me as if that makes me wrong. My response is typically laughing at them and telling them Peter King disagreeing with me only makes me more right.

 

Peter King : print :: Chris Berman : television. Guys who did some really good stuff back (back back back) in the day, but who seem like silly anachronisms now. Well, unless you love Starbucks or the Buffalo Bills.

 

Can someone post the original version? How is this not a bigger deal? King actually reported it as his own, then X hours later, a link showed up, then he threw the writer under the bus, even after reporting it without attribution?

 

Ironically on a day that he received the National Sportswriter of The Year Award from the National Sportscasters and Sportswriters Association .

 

This week's Fun with PK was pretty good, too.

 

What he first wrote on MMQB:

Washington owner Dan Snyder reportedly said on Sirius Radio last week that the 'Skins and Steelers had a deal in place for Washington to trade the 16th overall pick to Pittsburgh for the 31st pick plus other choices ... but the Steelers didn't do the deal when it came time to pull the trigger. Seems the player Pittsburgh wanted was gone by the time the 16th pick rolled around.


His follow up explanation:

After writing the above early Monday morning, I heard from Redskins general manager Bruce Allen. He denied the original report and said the Steelers never called about the pick. Steelers GM Kevin Colbert, through a spokesperson, corroborated Allen's denial and said talks didn't take place. Also, the writer who first reported the non-trade has issued an apology.

Funny that King is now directing blame on writer instead of his own laziness in verifying story.

 

So SI does a good thing and keeps the original copy but in writethru -- PK linked to tweet by Jim Wexell, who apparently covers Steelers for Scout.com. He's deleted the original tweet to which PK linked, issued a "my bad; my blunder" tweet yesterday. All kinds of indirect reporting ...

 

I thought what he first wrote on MMQB didn't have the word "reportedly" in there.

 

It didn't.

 

SI seems really proud of the LENGHTH of MMQB, but I think that's one of Peter;s major problems (other than having no filter as to what is an amusing off-topic anecdote and what is just really boring and pointless.)
I think he makes mistakes like this because he's shoveling so much stuff into the column, he can't really check it all out.

 

"Just between us, I made up the Snyder story"

King pictured at his National Sportswriter of The Year reception.