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!

Whose credibility takes more of a hit: A-Rod or Gammons?

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by daemon, Feb 9, 2009.

  1. clutchcargo

    clutchcargo Active Member

    Gawd almighty, is this really that big a deal? Some folks really have invested a lot into this thread. Let's call it a draw and move on.
     
  2. gingerbread

    gingerbread Well-Known Member

    There must be some fascinating discussions taking place behind ESPN doors. Because some of its reporters already are mentioning what Gammons should have known.
    But yeah, blame it all on "that lady."

    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=3895129&sportCat=mlb
    Rodriguez said Monday he didn't definitively know whether he was one of the 104 players who had failed the 2003 drug test. But a source told ESPN on Saturday that A-Rod has been aware of the test results for nearly five years. The Mitchell report also said all 104 players were notified. Whom do you believe? Sorry, but Rodriguez no longer gets the benefit of the doubt.
     
  3. GRUDGE

    GRUDGE Member

     
  4. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member

    Once the "ESPN as major sports PARTNER" paradigm is digested and understood, things become clear . . . and in this case, it's not at all flattering to Gammons' legacy.
     
  5. DanOregon

    DanOregon Well-Known Member

    I really wish news orgs would publish all circumstances of how interviews like this come about. Whether it is Katie Couric interviewing Sully and the flight crew, or the ground rules on the Gammons interview (time, areas of questioning, whether the interviewer will have an earpiece to get additional info from a producer for follow-up or have breaks) when they land these. Whether its Bobby Knight and Roy Firestone, the mother of octuplets, or the celebrity/political scandal of the week, people really should understand the context of an interview.
    To often these "gets" aren't so much dogged pursuit, but a media entity offering a better deal, a choice of interviewer, or a lesser evil as viewed by a PR rep.

    Gammons still has credibility, but I don't think he's the guy who will pull stuff out of you that you might not have wanted to say.
     
  6. Double J

    Double J Active Member

    The only thing Gammons broke was wind.
     
  7. Gene Parmesan

    Gene Parmesan Member

    When faced with the following issue, how would you guys (and girls) handle it:

    You get the interview, but can't ask the hard questions.
    or
    You don't get the interview at all.

    I think most of you take the interview and hope for the best to come out of it. And, let's be honest, all the hard-hitting questions in the world are going to only get so much out of a guy who frosts his goddamn tips and evidently spends his offseason in a fucking Mystic Tan.
     
  8. silentbob

    silentbob Member

    A. I'm amazed that so many of you still hold ESPN to journalistic standards of any kind. That ship sailed years ago.

    B. Michael Gee nailed this thread a while back. A-Rod was smart to handle this the way he did. Go on national TV. Say youre sorry, avoid specifics. Be done with it. Besides, the days of a newspaper landing this type of interview are LONG gone. ESPN brings a national audience, a sense of control and also the chance to star in one of the network's funny commercials alongside Scott Van Pelt.

    How can we compete?
     
  9. Double J

    Double J Active Member

    That doesn't mean you don't try.
     
  10. DirtyDeeds

    DirtyDeeds Guest

    I agree, DoubleJ, but I think Gene's got it right. I'm sure there were ground rules set as part of the conditions for granting/continuing the interview. That probably meant Gammons was not permitted to ask follow-upstough questions. I'm guessing A-Rod's people were controlling this. Now, whether ESPN should have allowed that or accepted those conditions is another matter.
     
  11. -Scoop-

    -Scoop- Member

    The interview seemed scripted right from the beginning. Never a good sign.
     
  12. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member

    "Gammons . . . in knee pads . . . "

    (sung to the tune of "Venus in Blue Jeans")
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page