Sun-Times Practices Crappy Journalism

[doodah]

From a journalism point, how does someone like O'Brien get to know these sources the way he apparently has, enough to A) get their phone numbers and B) get them to say something like this?

 

[Ace]

Jon,

If you are going to be critical of other journalists -- and the Sun-Times story certainly was ripe for criticism -- perhaps you should act more like a journalist and less like a UK fanboi.

And maybe take a design class or something.

 

[TheSportsPredictor]

Nobody cares.

 

[SF_Express]

You've had a lot more important things to do since August 2010? During that entire time?

Lot of leeway on this board. "Documenting for posterity" 525 days later? Silly.

 

[JPSS]

You've had a lot more important things to do since August 2010? During that entire time?

Lot of leeway on this board. "Documenting for posterity" 525 days later? Silly.

Well, one of the Kentucky-related projects I was working on involved recounting the series history between Kentucky and Transylvania, a series which ended over 100 years ago and was long forgotten.

http://www.bigbluehistory.net/bb/rivalTransylvania.html

So in comparison, 525 days is positively current.

Jon

 

[doodah]

From a journalism point, how does someone like O'Brien get to know these sources the way he apparently has, enough to A) get their phone numbers and B) get them to say something like this?

Well?

 

[JPSS]

Jon,

If you are going to be critical of other journalists -- and the Sun-Times story certainly was ripe for criticism -- perhaps you should act more like a journalist and less like a UK fanboi.

And maybe take a design class or something.

That's fair, although I never claimed to be a journalist. If you have specific examples where you think I crossed the line then let me know, either here or off-line. BTW, that's exactly what I did on the page, pointed out specific examples where I think these journalists crossed the line.

I make mistakes all the time and try to correct them when they're pointed out. (Which is more than can be said for a few newspapers of late). I don't expect any different with this page. And frankly what better place to find constructive criticism than a place like this.

As far as design, no doubt that's true. That's just not a priority of mine, but any suggestions are welcome.

Thanks

Jon

 

[doodah]

Jon,

If you are going to be critical of other journalists -- and the Sun-Times story certainly was ripe for criticism -- perhaps you should act more like a journalist and less like a UK fanboi.

And maybe take a design class or something.

That's fair, although I never claimed to be a journalist. If you have specific examples where you think I crossed the line then let me know, either here or off-line. BTW, that's exactly what I did on the page, pointed out specific examples where I think these journalists crossed the line.

I make mistakes all the time and try to correct them when they're pointed out. (Which is more than can be said for a few newspapers of late). I don't expect any different with this page. And frankly what better place to find constructive criticism than a place like this.

As far as design, no doubt that's true. That's just not a priority of mine, but any suggestions are welcome.

Thanks

Jon

What are you hoping to get out of this rant? Noted cheater John Calipari being accused of cheating, and there being three noted sources going along with this? No way! Calipari's cheating past begs for these articles, because he's still cheating and good journalists will expose it.

 

[Ace]

Jon,

If you are going to be critical of other journalists -- and the Sun-Times story certainly was ripe for criticism -- perhaps you should act more like a journalist and less like a UK fanboi.

And maybe take a design class or something.

That's fair, although I never claimed to be a journalist. If you have specific examples where you think I crossed the line then let me know, either here or off-line. BTW, that's exactly what I did on the page, pointed out specific examples where I think these journalists crossed the line.

I make mistakes all the time and try to correct them when they're pointed out. (Which is more than can be said for a few newspapers of late). I don't expect any different with this page. And frankly what better place to find constructive criticism than a place like this.

As far as design, no doubt that's true. That's just not a priority of mine, but any suggestions are welcome.

Thanks

Jon

1. The cartoon image of "yellow journalism" and saying that Michael O'Brien was guilty of it.

2. Calling Michael O'Brien an "osbscure prep reporter."

3. Saying "the damage had already been done" after the Sun-Times had reworked the story.

What damage? Anthony Davis ended up at UK, hasn't missed any games and is expected to the the top pick in the draft.

4. Your overall tone. The Sun-Times "is in dire financial straits." While UK's outraged lawyers fire off letters (but can't even spell the reporter's name right.)

4. It's pretty common for newspapers to stand by their stories and refuse to talk about them further.

5. It's entirely possible the allegations are true. Something you might want to keep in your back pocket when acting all outraged.

6. It's very unlikely that the Sun-Times and the reporter have any kind of vendetta against Anthony Davis or Kentucky. It's more likely the reporter was hearing things and rushed them into print too hastily.

7. Ironically, Matt Jones' take on what happened is probably pretty close.

 

[Football_Bat]

I just hope more counts against Conrad Black get voided. Sounds like the fewer charges he faces, the more PMITA time he faces for the convictions that stick. Cool by me.

 

[JPSS]

1. The cartoon image of "yellow journalism" and saying that Michael O'Brien was guilty of it.

I think use of yellow journalism is appropriate. But I did change it to say the Sun-Times revived its practice, rather than O'Brien personally.

2. Calling Michael O'Brien an "osbscure prep reporter."

Changed.

3. Saying "the damage had already been done" after the Sun-Times had reworked the story.

What damage? Anthony Davis ended up at UK, hasn't missed any games and is expected to the the top pick in the draft.

I agree with you from the standpoint that Davis didn't receive significant harm from the story, as I explain in why I believe the Davis family ultimately didn't go through with a lawsuit against the paper.

But he certainly did receive fall-out from it, and it continues to this day. All one needs to do is pay attention to the signs and chants and jeers he receives in opposing arenas, or check out something like his Wikipedia page where this allegation will no doubt stay for a long time (despite the fact the paper itself removed it).

I don't think this is fair for any 18-year old to have to deal with, and certainly think my claim that the 'damage was done' is entirely accurate.

4. Your overall tone. The Sun-Times "is in dire financial straits." While UK's outraged lawyers fire off letters (but can't even spell the reporter's name right.)

The part about the Sun-Times being in dire financial straights is potentially an important factor in how they acted to try to avoid a lawsuit. But I went ahead and removed the original mention of it, as it's unnecessary at that point and is mentioned later on.

As far the letter getting the reporter's name incorrect, I did note this already.

In terms of overall tone, you're correct. I do take a harsh tone towards the specific actions of these reporters and their newspapers. But again, this is my opinion on a webpage. I never try to claim that it is completely unbiased.

4. It's pretty common for newspapers to stand by their stories and refuse to talk about them further.

May be common but not very good practice IMO. Especially in a case like this where the paper did not in fact stand behind their original story, but instead quickly removed it. All they did later on was claim they have three unnamed sources, none of whom even corroborated the original story.

5. It's entirely possible the allegations are true. Something you might want to keep in your back pocket when acting all outraged.

You're quite right. The allegations could be true. Still doesn't excuse the way the reporter and the paper mishandled the story, which is what I am critical of them of.

6. It's very unlikely that the Sun-Times and the reporter have any kind of vendetta against Anthony Davis or Kentucky. It's more likely the reporter was hearing things and rushed them into print too hastily.

I don't know that I accused them of having a vendetta, beyond noting that there's a possibility that the way Davis came onto the scene could have played some role. What I wrote was:

One area which was not explored but which I suspect played some role in the whole controversy was the fact that Davis chose not to enter the rat-race of high profile Chicago basketball circles in the first place. Given his late growth-spurt, he was largely ignored by the traditional Chicago basketball powerhouses until relatively late in his high school career. Davis chose to stay at his charter school and play with his childhood buddies, which may have rubbed the establishment (including possibly O'Brien who covers Chicago area hoops) the wrong way. This resulted in a number of slights in terms of coverage and honors, including the interesting juxtaposition of Davis being named the #1 rated player in the country by national recruiting experts, yet not only did he fail to be named the top prep player in the state of Illinois, he came in fourth place as voted on by coaches and local sportswriters. Sportswriters also failed to name Davis the top player in the city of Chicago.

Now obviously I don't know for sure what prompted O'Brien's actions. If I had to guess I would think that initially it probably was along the lines you describe (i.e. he heard rumors and rushed into print). However I thought it was worthwhile to comment on this other aspect, since I do think it may have played some role, however small.

7. Ironically, Matt Jones' take on what happened is probably pretty close.

His take is one of the few that actually seems to make sense. Some people may not like him personally, but then I haven't heard any compelling counter-theories from these people.

Thanks for the comments.

Jon

 

[doodah]

It's a well-known fact that Calipari is a cheater. He's been a cheater at UMass, he's been a cheater at Memphis and I'm fairly certain he's probably cheating at Kentucky. So can we take the journalist's side based upon reasonable doubt?

 

[JPSS]

It's a well-known fact that Calipari is a cheater. He's been a cheater at UMass, he's been a cheater at Memphis and I'm fairly certain he's probably cheating at Kentucky. So can we take the journalist's side based upon reasonable doubt?

Unfortunately, this appears to be the same attitude that got the Sun-Times in trouble in the first place.

Jon

 

[LongTimeListener]

What "trouble" has the Sun-Times found? I have lost track of this while you were doing your 17-month expose, but is there some lawsuit or have there been other penalties?

Calipari is a cheater. That's a fact. That has never mattered to Kentucky fans, but their opinion of it doesn't change its status as a fact.

 

[gregcrews]

I'm a little confused as to why everyone is considering it a fact that Calipari is a cheater.

At UMASS, Marcus Camby started talking to an agent before he was allowed to. I'm not seeing where Cal comes into that. It happened under his watch but he could have been (and most likely was) hidden from him. Why would Camby inform his coach he was about to break NCAA rules? He wouldn't.

At Memphis, Derrick Rose supposedly had somebody take the SAT for him. This time it didn't even happen under Cal's watch, and again, how was he supposed to know about that?

He has certainly been at programs where players have broken rules (I guess that happens when you are going after future NBA millionaires, who don't want to wait for their payday, especially since the NBA changed the rules and no longer allows HS kids to make the jump), but I don't see how my fellow "journalists" can be so bold as to refer to Cal as a cheater as if it a bona fide fact.

At a previous paper, part of my beat was covering UK (mainly football, we had somebody else for basketball), so I am well aware of how difficult the fan base can be. But some of the opinions on here are a bit disturbing. We are supposed to be unbiased (fans are allowed to be biased and crazy), but some seem to think that Cal's and UK's reputations make it okay to publish a story without the same sourcing that one would need to publish the same story about a school like Duke.

As for the comments that there were no damages, that may still come down the road. Some NBA teams may shy away at draft time if they think that Davis has a spotty background, which could cost him millions.

I, for one, would still like to know if Davis got paid to come to UK. If somebody wants to tackle that project, and find real evidence (like a money trail or a named source) I would love to read it.

 

[LongTimeListener]

1) Calipari hasn't been "found guilty" because the group supposedly doing the finding doesn't want to find anything. Cam Newton is in the clear too.

2) And Calipari and Worldwide Wes met in book club, that's the basis of their friendship?

 

[doodah]

Seriously. His relationship with Wes is shady at best, criminal at worst.

 

[Ace]

I'm a little confused as to why everyone is considering it a fact that Calipari is a cheater.

At UMASS, Marcus Camby started talking to an agent before he was allowed to. I'm not seeing where Cal comes into that. It happened under his watch but he could have been (and most likely was) hidden from him. Why would Camby inform his coach he was about to break NCAA rules? He wouldn't.

At Memphis, Derrick Rose supposedly had somebody take the SAT for him. This time it didn't even happen under Cal's watch, and again, how was he supposed to know about that?

He has certainly been at programs where players have broken rules (I guess that happens when you are going after future NBA millionaires, who don't want to wait for their payday, especially since the NBA changed the rules and no longer allows HS kids to make the jump), but I don't see how my fellow "journalists" can be so bold as to refer to Cal as a cheater as if it a bona fide fact.

At a previous paper, part of my beat was covering UK (mainly football, we had somebody else for basketball), so I am well aware of how difficult the fan base can be. But some of the opinions on here are a bit disturbing. We are supposed to be unbiased (fans are allowed to be biased and crazy), but some seem to think that Cal's and UK's reputations make it okay to publish a story without the same sourcing that one would need to publish the same story about a school like Duke.

As for the comments that there were no damages, that may still come down the road. Some NBA teams may shy away at draft time if they think that Davis has a spotty background, which could cost him millions.

I, for one, would still like to know if Davis got paid to come to UK. If somebody wants to tackle that project, and find real evidence (like a money trail or a named source) I would love to read it.

Greg,

Can you show me examples where pro teams shied away from kids because they received improper benefits in violation of NCAA rules?

Do you think the NBA and NFL care at all about that?

 

[SF_Express]

Greg,

Can you show me examples where pro teams shied away from kids because they received improper benefits in violation of NCAA rules?

Do you think the NBA and NFL care at all about that?

Boy, no **** on this one. Concern over NCAA issues if the kid has lottery pick talent? Never.

And questions about what happened to him certainly hurt Cam Newton.