What media knows and ethical and legal responsibility

Lieutenant: "Yes."

 

"Wait. Is it that same guy who came to us last year? No thanks."

 

Has ESPN described their "investigation" the way the Post-Standard has?

 

I don't know. Has it?

 

And, that's fine.

For ESPN & the Post-Standard, their job isn't to investigate this with the goal of securing an arrest or prosecution.

They have to look at its news value. For the Post-Standard, they have to consider the possibility that a respected member of their community is in fact a sexual predator, who preys on young boys.

For me, the reason they approach the police is to try to get more info in order to investigate the claims.

Maybe the cops tell them the guy is a nut. Maybe they play the tape for the cops and the cops change their opinion of him.

 

What about this decision:

I understand you don't go straight to Fine. You don't want to tip him off that your poking around. He might be able to pressure other potential witnesses.

But, before you decide to just drop it for 9 years, don't you eventually talk to him?

 

How?

 

What do you mean, how?

Just knock on his front door.

Sandusky's interview with Costas was pretty revealing, wasn't it?

Besides, the Post-Standard says they talked to Bernie's wife about the tape recording. There's a pretty good chance Bernie was aware they were looking at him.

Why would you not ask him about the accusations?

 

Seriously?

Sandusky had already been indicted on 40 counts of felony child molestation. He's out on bail. He and his lawyer are grasping at any opportunity to tell "his side" of it.

Fine? C'mon.

[knock-knock]

"Yes?"

"Are you coach Fine of Syracuse University?"

"Yes I am."

"Are you a pedophile?"

"No."

"Thank you for your time. Good luck against St. John's."

 

Deitsch, SI.


sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/richard_deitsch/12/01/espn.mark.schwarz.syracuse.bernie.fine/index.html

 

Thanks for taking the time to expand. If I could read minds, I wouldn't have asked.

 

So Doria makes the expected utilitarian counterargument for going to be police. That is, people wouldn't come to us with stories if they couldn't trust us. But for that to be valid, wouldn't ESPN have to report some socially beneficial stories? Has it? Getting sources to trust you scoops about Brett Favre's bowel movements isn't exactly God's work. But maybe they've done some big things I'm forgetting.