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!

The Michael Grimm thing

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Moderator1, Jan 29, 2014.

  1. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Bill Simmons sees no problem.
     
  2. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    There is no reason to believe that. It's just not likely that happened, given what reporters do.

    Either way, let's say they had a discussion beforehand, and the reporter said, "I am a reporter, but I am not going to do what reporters do. So I am not going to ask you about the campaign finance probe, for which your friend was just arrested for purported straw donations," and he then asked about it anyhow. ...

    Physically threatening the reporter isn't an acceptable response.
     
  3. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    Didn't someone point out that the golf putter reporter said the "conversation" would be about the science, not the scientist?

    That is an enormous difference between saying the story would be about the science, not the scientist, and I think you sacrifice credibility in your objection to the story when you keep coming back to this. You're reaching.
     
  4. bigpern23

    bigpern23 Well-Known Member

    Yep. Guy handled it properly at first by saying he was only there to talk about the topic at hand and would not answer questions off topic. He ends the interview and walks off. If he leaves it at that, there is no story.

    Coming back after walking away shows he considered what had just happened and made a conscious decision to return and make a physical threat. He should be arrested.
     
  5. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    I agree. Besides, if you were in that Congressman's position, wouldn't you just assume you're going to be asked about it and have a non-answer answer on the ready? I know I would.
     
  6. blacktitleist

    blacktitleist Member

    Not his first instance of exhibiting this kind of behavior.

    http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2011/04/congressman-michael-grimm-at-the-caribbean-tropics.html
     
  7. Bob Cook

    Bob Cook Active Member

    All he had to do was smile and say, "Look, I'm only talking about the State of the Union address right now. I won't address questions on any other topic." Or something. He can always, off camera and in his office, curse the reporter. The only thing I can figure is that he hired Ryan Leaf as his media consultant.
     
  8. Point of Order

    Point of Order Active Member

    So the defense is that he was angry because the guy said one thing in order to get what he wanted and then did something entirely different from what he had previously promised.

    I can see why he would be upset. Politicians never do that.
     
  9. MisterCreosote

    MisterCreosote Well-Known Member

    Nobody knows what, if anything, the reporter agreed to beforehand.
     
  10. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Is anyone actually defending the guy?

    All jokes aside, the guy is a bully and a thug.
     
  11. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    He's African American?
     
  12. MisterCreosote

    MisterCreosote Well-Known Member

    You'll also be kind to note the reporter never actually asked him the "off-topic" question.

    Grimm walked off before the question was asked, and the reporter started explaining what he was going to ask and how the congressman didn't want to talk about it. That's when Grimm came back.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page