NYCU 12/07/06

[No? in Austin]

This may sting a little for me, but when I read what JDJO said in his blog (via the NYCU for today), I had to agree with most if not all of his points.

Yesterday I made the indictment of shoddy work on the part of the Houston newsprint media guy and given what he said in his blog plus what I've learned, he's not entirely indictable.  Of course, neither is the Houston front office either.  What should've happened of course is a little more restraint, like what was practiced by Alyson Footer at the home page for the 'stros.  But to be fair to JDJO, he had enough to run with a story.  He may not want to admit he and others got a lot of what they considered the "story" from the Chicago side and that Tal Smith did little to disuade them from the information they were getting, but overall his blog today is a very fair assessment of what happened in Orlando.

Houston is working hard, they want to make sure they have the fires warm enough to strike a deal if they have to.  Meaning, don't wait on Andy Pettitte if you feel he can possibly bolt to the Bronx.  The Garland deal should never have been announced as a done deal but rather more of a contingency deal.  The Buchholz physical angle was a misnomer, it was medical people talking to medical people and thus concerns raised if he was the cornerstone of the deal.

All in all, I'd say a newsprint guy has a lot to compete with nowadays and the electronic media being what it is today, you have to take a chance and run with a story that you may not have ten years ago when cable television and the internet weren't prominent news outlets.

[pravata]

Quote:
This may sting a little for me, but when I read what JDJO said in his blog (via the NYCU for today), I had to agree with most if not all of his points.

Yesterday I made the indictment of shoddy work on the part of the Houston newsprint media guy and given what he said in his blog plus what I've learned, he's not entirely indictable.  Of course, neither is the Houston front office either.  What should've happened of course is a little more restraint, like what was practiced by Alyson Footer at the home page for the 'stros.  But to be fair to JDJO, he had enough to run with a story.  He may not want to admit he and others got a lot of what they considered the "story" from the Chicago side and that Tal Smith did little to disuade them from the information they were getting, but overall his blog today is a very fair assessment of what happened in Orlando.

Houston is working hard, they want to make sure they have the fires warm enough to strike a deal if they have to.  Meaning, don't wait on Andy Pettitte if you feel he can possibly bolt to the Bronx.  The Garland deal should never have been announced as a done deal but rather more of a contingency deal.  The Buchholz physical angle was a misnomer, it was medical people talking to medical people and thus concerns raised if he was the cornerstone of the deal.

All in all, I'd say a newsprint guy has a lot to compete with nowadays and the electronic media being what it is today, you have to take a chance and run with a story that you may not have ten years ago when cable television and the internet weren't prominent news outlets.

In the short term, maybe. But all a reporter has is his reputation.  If it's worth it to them to take a chance with a story while it is still developing and characterize it as imminent, and it doesn't happen (although it still might, but that'd be another story altogether) then their long term reputation for accuracy is going to take a hit.

The thing about 24 hour news cycles and immediacy is an excuse for poor journalistic practices.  It's what they criticize bloggers for in the Chron regularly.

The part I found really funny is that Ortiz had such a hard day, presumably because of that story, he's wanting to go to bed at 6:03.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
In the short term, maybe. But all a reporter has is his reputation.

Ortiz's rep is one of being a good "human interest" writer when it comes to baseball players.  He likes to get friendly with players, be their pal, get to know their family, find the human interest angle, blah, blah, blah.  It is not necessarily that he is a solid beat reporter.  Facts get in the way.  I find it interesting that McTaggart handles the beat writing along with Ortiz now so JDJO can go get those stories he is better at getting (the player's story) and let McTaggart deal with the beat stuff.  Perhaps it should've been Brian Mac-T at the winter meetings?

Quote:
If it's worth it to them to take a chance with a story while it is still developing and characterize it as imminent, and it doesn't happen (although it still might, but that'd be another story altogether) then their long term reputation for accuracy is going to take a hit.

What bit him in the arse is how he used Tal Smith as his angle to justify his story.  All other media outlets ran with it and got burned, so they needed to point back to the Chron as somewhat of a bunch of hayseeds.  Or go with the Buchholz angle, which again burns the relationship that Ortiz tries to have with players.  (You know, so he can write his "inside the players world" pieces and/or books).  So either Ortiz has to defend the player and semi-indict the Team President (one that has threaten to beat the crap out of him in the past) or fall on the sword himself.  He should've fell on the sword and said that he is competing with so much in terms of media and that he got much of his story from Chicago, but he didn't.

Quote:
The thing about 24 hour news cycles and immediacy is an excuse for poor journalistic practices.  It's what they criticize bloggers for in the Chron regularly.

ESPN is a bigger threat to newsprint than anything else.  They can afford to look stupid because they're so big now, they're teflon.

Quote:
The part I found really funny is that Ortiz had such a hard day, presumably because of that story, he's wanting to go to bed at 6:03.

Mommy, make this day go away!

[pravata]

Quote:
...What bit him in the arse is how he used Tal Smith as his angle to justify his story.  ....So either Ortiz has to defend the player and semi-indict the Team President (one that has threaten to beat the crap out of him in the past) ...

Are the Astros acting like the Orioles were at the Deadline?  Or, is Tal Smith going to come looking for Ortiz asking why he's putting words in his mouth?

[Arky Vaughan]

Quote:
The thing about 24 hour news cycles and immediacy is an excuse for poor journalistic practices.  It's what they criticize bloggers for in the Chron regularly.

Case in point is the prolific use of unattributed sources. It used to be very frowned upon to rely on leaks and anonymous disclosures. Information received from such sources needed to be corroborated with verifiable sources.  It is now commonplace just to go with the unattributed source. It fundamentally undermines the ability to confirm the credibility of what the reporter is relaying to the reader. Which renders much reporting now to be little more than gossip.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
Are the Astros acting like the Orioles were at the Deadline?  Or, is Tal Smith going to come looking for Ortiz asking why he's putting words in his mouth?

I'm thinking the latter, seeing as how you can probably put the sarcasm meter on really high when Ortiz writes "a man of impeccable honesty... blah, blah, blah" when he writes about Smith.

The same Tal Smith he wrote was an avowed racist with a track record to prove it.  Smith was going to beat his arse  then, and may want to do it now as well.

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:
The thing about 24 hour news cycles and immediacy is an excuse for poor journalistic practices.  It's what they criticize bloggers for in the Chron regularly.

Case in point is the prolific use of unattributed sources. It used to be very frowned upon to rely on leaks and anonymous disclosures. This is now commonplace. It fundamentally undermines the ability to confirm the credibility of what the reporter is relaying to the reader. Which renders much reporting now to be little more than gossip.

Much, but not all.  The diligent reader has no excuse to throw up his hands and dismiss them all.

[Arky Vaughan]

Quote:
Much, but not all.  The diligent reader has no excuse to throw up his hands and dismiss them all.

True. Although our ability as readers to corroborate stories ourselves using the Internet is hindered by the fact that the reporters then use each other's unattributed sources incestuously.

This all raises a question: is there even a sports editor at the Chronicle, or are these guys just left alone to publish whatever they want?

[No? in Austin]

Quote:

Quote:
The thing about 24 hour news cycles and immediacy is an excuse for poor journalistic practices.  It's what they criticize bloggers for in the Chron regularly.

Case in point is the prolific use of unattributed sources. It used to be very frowned upon to rely on leaks and anonymous disclosures. Information received from such sources needed to be corroborated with verifiable sources.  It is now commonplace just to go with the unattributed source. It fundamentally undermines the ability to confirm the credibility of what the reporter is relaying to the reader. Which renders much reporting now to be little more than gossip.

The gossip in this case came from Chicago and was deemed hot enough to try and get the Astros (*ie: Tal Smith because Purpura never comments on on-going trades) to confirm.  What Smith may of said to JDJO is in doubt, perhaps not the now infamous "we're close" and "press conference soon" quotes attributed to him.  Perhaps more of "we're talking to the WhiteSoxs... yes" when he was asked about what Chicago was saying in terms of a deal being red-hot.  We'll never really know though.

[pravata]

Quote:
...True. Although our ability as readers to corroborate stories ourselves using the Internet is hindered by the fact that the reporters then use each other's unattributed sources incestuously....

And, by using multiple news sources, is easy to track.

[Arky Vaughan]

Quote:
And, by using multiple news sources, is easy to track.

Copy and paste, one of the handiest of tools in the modern reporter's toolbox.

[Limey]

Quote:
This all raises a question: is there even a sports editor at the Chronicle, or are these guys just left alone to publish whatever they want?

Most of this tripe is spouted via their blogs, which by definition would be outside the editor's purview.  Having said that, the print articles display a similar cavalier attitude towards truth and accuracy (and composition), so who knows.

[Greg]

I feel as if I should pass this on...

The Link

This is a research paper done by the University of Chicago over media bias in daily newspapers. The findings are that news papers slant their news to the preference of the average consumer in their target market. Pretty good business practice, if you ask me.

Even though it doesn?t deal with sports specifically, it?s very interesting and makes sense. I think it does have some implications for sports writing and some of you have touched up on some critical issues, such as newspapers competing with the electronic media. Anyways, I hope some of you can get something out of it.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
The thing about 24 hour news cycles and immediacy is an excuse for poor journalistic practices.  It's what they criticize bloggers for in the Chron regularly.

Case in point is the prolific use of unattributed sources. It used to be very frowned upon to rely on leaks and anonymous disclosures. Information received from such sources needed to be corroborated with verifiable sources.  It is now commonplace just to go with the unattributed source. It fundamentally undermines the ability to confirm the credibility of what the reporter is relaying to the reader. Which renders much reporting now to be little more than gossip.

The gossip in this case came from Chicago and was deemed hot enough to try and get the Astros (*ie: Tal Smith because Purpura never comments on on-going trades) to confirm.  What Smith may of said to JDJO is in doubt, perhaps not the now infamous "we're close" and "press conference soon" quotes attributed to him.  Perhaps more of "we're talking to the WhiteSoxs... yes" when he was asked about what Chicago was saying in terms of a deal being red-hot.  We'll never really know though.

Or, Tal Smith could have been thinking, "hmmm... this is the prick that called me a racist and accused the Astros organization of racism. I think I'll make some sarcastic remarks and let him run with it." Smith then replies, "What?  Trade for Garland?  I'm scheduling a news conference for this morning as we speak (mocks phone call to someone)!"

I can appreciate the challenges of trying to report hot "scoops" and yet verify information before others beat you to the punch.  Blaming ESPN is a classic "indefensible yet unassailable excuse, if they are using it.  You don't jump off a bridge because your bigger neighbor did it or does so regularly.  This wasn't a gossip piece.  And ESPN does identify Rumor as just that, reporting it in "Rumor Central".  While sports coverage is relatively unimportant in the grand scheme of things, if I took the Chron writers' approach in my job I'd be fired.

[pravata]

Quote:
I feel as if I should pass this on...

The Link

This is a research paper done by the University of Chicago over media bias in daily newspapers. The findings are that news papers slant their news to the preference of the average consumer in their target market. Pretty good business practice, if you ask me.

Even though it doesn?t deal with sports specifically, it?s very interesting and makes sense. I think it does have some implications for sports writing and some of you have touched up on some critical issues, such as newspapers competing with the electronic media. Anyways, I hope some of you can get something out of it.

Thus, "Pinwheel" which is swayed by the prevailing winds.

[NeilT]

When have sports page ever been known for factual integrity?  I'm sorry, but that's kindofa recent concept in sports reporting, isn't it?  Until, say, the 60s, wasn't all that kinda secondary to entertainment?

[pravata]

In his blog Ortiz, in defense mode, says  
"Tyler Kepner of the New York Times, whom I respect highly since way before we competed against each other on the Mets' beat, came away with the same conclusions after speaking with the highly respected Tal Smith on Thursday."

By TYLER KEPNER, NY Times, Published: December 8, 2006

As Purpura spoke, Tal Smith, the Astros? president, took a lengthy call on his cellphone, roaming through several corridors of the hotel before arriving in a room reserved for news conferences. He finished the call, and two reporters approached him to ask about Pettitte.

Smith declined to answer questions, but promised to be back. He said the Astros had traded for a starting pitcher and would announce the deal soon. He said the announcement would answer some obvious questions about Pettitte.

But Smith never returned. The conference room was soon cleared out to prepare for a function. Meanwhile, in the lobby, the White Sox executives were checking out.

?When we have something to announce, we?ll announce it,? the White Sox owner, Jerry Reinsdorf, said. ?We?re always interested in improving our team.?
The Link

Yet, heres the story Kepner files on Thursday 12/7  The Link no mention of the deal at all.

The difference is that Kepner did not publish a story on 12/7 in which the Astros were "set to get ...".  By the way, I no longer find an article on the Chronicle website with that phrase.  Nor do I find the reference to Tal Smith, other than in the blogs.

[Taras Bulba]

The beagle has a helluva nose.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
In his blog Ortiz, in defense mode, says  
"Tyler Kepner of the New York Times, whom I respect highly since way before we competed against each other on the Mets' beat, came away with the same conclusions after speaking with the highly respected Tal Smith on Thursday."

By TYLER KEPNER, NY Times, Published: December 8, 2006

As Purpura spoke, Tal Smith, the Astros? president, took a lengthy call on his cellphone, roaming through several corridors of the hotel before arriving in a room reserved for news conferences. He finished the call, and two reporters approached him to ask about Pettitte.

Smith declined to answer questions, but promised to be back. He said the Astros had traded for a starting pitcher and would announce the deal soon. He said the announcement would answer some obvious questions about Pettitte.

But Smith never returned. The conference room was soon cleared out to prepare for a function. Meanwhile, in the lobby, the White Sox executives were checking out.

?When we have something to announce, we?ll announce it,? the White Sox owner, Jerry Reinsdorf, said. ?We?re always interested in improving our team.?
The Link

Yet, heres the story Kepner files on Thursday 12/7  The Link no mention of the deal at all.

The difference is that Kepner did not publish a story on 12/7 in which the Astros were "set to get ...".  By the way, I no longer find an article on the Chronicle website with that phrase.  Nor do I find the reference to Tal Smith, other than in the blogs.

Yup, it's about restraint and feeling you have to beat the other guy (electronic media) to the punch.  Do I blame JDJO for the lack of restraint?  Not entirely.  But I do think he needs to fall on the sword just a tad more for the lack of restraint because to run with a story, you typically have to verify your information.  Did he?  The Times reporter is saying no, they couldn't have.  So to lay it at Smith's feet with the sarcastic tone about "highly respected" crap is horrible on JDJO's part.

It is this part and not the reporting faux pax that irks many about the smug attitude on the Chron.  For once, just go ahead and say you reported something quickly because it's the nature of the biz and be done with it.

Just once!

[BUWebguy]

Quote:
Nor do I find the reference to Tal Smith, other than in the blogs.

 This is the URL where the "Astros set to get pitcher Jon Garland..." story went up and was edited yesterday; it's still linked off of chron.com/astros, though under "Garland deal stalls...". It does include this tidbit, way down at the bottom:

 

Quote:
Pettitte almost seemed out of the Astros? plans on Thursday morning after Astros president of baseball operations Tal Smith admitted to the Chronicle that a deal was close for Garland.  

So, they didn't edit it out completely, at least not yet.

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:
In his blog Ortiz, in defense mode, says  
"Tyler Kepner of the New York Times, whom I respect highly since way before we competed against each other on the Mets' beat, came away with the same conclusions after speaking with the highly respected Tal Smith on Thursday."

By TYLER KEPNER, NY Times, Published: December 8, 2006

As Purpura spoke, Tal Smith, the Astros? president, took a lengthy call on his cellphone, roaming through several corridors of the hotel before arriving in a room reserved for news conferences. He finished the call, and two reporters approached him to ask about Pettitte.

Smith declined to answer questions, but promised to be back. He said the Astros had traded for a starting pitcher and would announce the deal soon. He said the announcement would answer some obvious questions about Pettitte.

But Smith never returned. The conference room was soon cleared out to prepare for a function. Meanwhile, in the lobby, the White Sox executives were checking out.

?When we have something to announce, we?ll announce it,? the White Sox owner, Jerry Reinsdorf, said. ?We?re always interested in improving our team.?
The Link

Yet, heres the story Kepner files on Thursday 12/7  The Link no mention of the deal at all.

The difference is that Kepner did not publish a story on 12/7 in which the Astros were "set to get ...".  By the way, I no longer find an article on the Chronicle website with that phrase.  Nor do I find the reference to Tal Smith, other than in the blogs.

Yup, it's about restraint and feeling you have to beat the other guy (electronic media) to the punch.  Do I blame JDJO for the lack of restraint?  Not entirely.  But I do think he needs to fall on the sword just a tad more for the lack of restraint because to run with a story, you typically have to verify your information.  Did he?  The Times reporter is saying no, they couldn't have.  So to lay it at Smith's feet with the sarcastic tone about "highly respected" crap is horrible on JDJO's part.

It is this part and not the reporting faux pax that irks many about the smug attitude on the Chron.  For once, just go ahead and say you reported something quickly because it's the nature of the biz and be done with it.

Just once!

I would cut him some slack myself, if he were not persisting at trying to justify what he did by comparing himself to another writer who approached the story in the right way.  And  exactly the opposite of the way in which he approached it.

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:
Nor do I find the reference to Tal Smith, other than in the blogs.

 This is the URL where the "Astros set to get pitcher Jon Garland..." story went up and was edited yesterday; it's still linked off of chron.com/astros, though under "Garland deal stalls...". It does include this tidbit, way down at the bottom:

 

Quote:
Pettitte almost seemed out of the Astros? plans on Thursday morning after Astros president of baseball operations Tal Smith admitted to the Chronicle that a deal was close for Garland.  

So, they didn't edit it out completely, at least not yet.

Thanks, missed that part. (Even using the find feature) They're still trying to pin their unprofessionalism on Smith.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
I would cut him some slack myself, if he were not persisting at trying to justify what he did by comparing himself to another writer who approached the story in the right way.  And  exactly the opposite of the way in which he approached it.

He is weakly justifying that as well.  Saying the New York media *only* cared about Pettitte and not Garland.  Okay, this means that JDJO has absolutely no, nada, zip, zero, zilch respect for his readers.  Or his readers intelligence.  

And he may be right judging by the tripe comments he's recieved.

*IF* the Astros *HAD A DEAL SET* (as reported by the Chron and nobody else), it directly *EFFECTS* Andy Pettitte and as a New York media member, you darn well report it!

But then again, you're not going to do it without confirmation either.  One of JDJO's readers said it was Smith's fault for not *confirming a deal was made*.  Ahum... excuse me?!?!  It's up to the source and not the reporter to *confirm* facts in a report?  How in the hell does JDJO manage to get his readers to offer him excuses for failing to adhere to Journalism 101?

Bunch of morons!  No wonder JDJO serves up delicious tripe for them to chew on... they're all stupid!

[Froback]

I know this thread has become a huge JDJO bashing-fest (which I support), but I thought I would look like a total ass for re-posting links I have read and followed before.  I need my sleep!

[pravata]

Quote:

Quote:
I would cut him some slack myself, if he were not persisting at trying to justify what he did by comparing himself to another writer who approached the story in the right way.  And  exactly the opposite of the way in which he approached it.

He is weakly justifying that as well.  Saying the New York media *only* cared about Pettitte and not Garland.  Okay, this means that JDJO has absolutely no, nada, zip, zero, zilch respect for his readers.  Or his readers intelligence.  

And he may be right judging by the tripe comments he's recieved.

*IF* the Astros *HAD A DEAL SET* (as reported by the Chron and nobody else), it directly *EFFECTS* Andy Pettitte and as a New York media member, you darn well report it!

But then again, you're not going to do it without confirmation either.  One of JDJO's readers said it was Smith's fault for not *confirming a deal was made*.  Ahum... excuse me?!?!  It's up to the source and not the reporter to *confirm* facts in a report?  How in the hell does JDJO manage to get his readers to offer him excuses for failing to adhere to Journalism 101?

Bunch of morons!  No wonder JDJO serves up delicious tripe for them to chew on... they're all stupid!

They are, they deserve each other and I suspect there are also people who are wondering why we care so much about this.  

As for the NY Times angle, Astros trade for another legitimate salary and Pettitte falls into the Yankees lap, despite Hendricks' boras tactics.

[BizidyDizidy]

Quote:
I know this thread has become a huge JDJO bashing-fest (which I support), but I thought I would throw in Jayson Stark's opinion on the Pettitte/Garland thingy.  From my interpretation, I think it is a good sign for the Astros, and perhaps the Astros shot down the deal when Pettitte said he would come back... just a thought:

 Link (mid-way down)
 

Quote:
Originally, Pettitte wasn't planning to decide whether he'll play next year until Christmas. But he abruptly sent word Wednesday, through agent Randy Hendricks, that he was giving the old thumbs-up to another season or two.
That seemed curious, but innocent enough, until reports surfaced Thursday that his hometown team, the Astros, was working hard to deal for White Sox starter Jon Garland. Even though that trade apparently fell apart by lunch time, it was a clear indication that Houston was busy planning for Life After Andy.

"Obviously," said an official of another team, "if the Astros got Garland, they'd be done with Pettitte. So why else would he move up the timetable? It makes too much sense. If he wants to go back there, he has to let them know now."

If Pettitte loses Houston as an option, indications are that the Yankees would love to pounce, after passing on Zito and Lilly. But the Yankees have been more cautious and patient this winter than ever, with GM Brian Cashman clearly in total control. So they might not be willing to get lured into any bidding derbies with the Astros if the tea leaves point toward Pettitte staying home.
 

I was just thinking this should be posted a third time.

[pravata]

Quote:
..."Obviously," said an official of another team, "if the Astros got Garland, they'd be done with Pettitte. So why else would he move up the timetable? It makes too much sense. If he wants to go back there, he has to let them know now." ...

More than a little gamesmanship going on on both sides.

[No? in Austin]

Quote:
I know this thread has become a huge JDJO bashing-fest (which I support)...

Actually, I started this whole thing as a mild support for the  *reason* a journalist in today's market may jump into a story like this head first and hope for the best.  Competition today for readership (and thus advertising dollars that pay the salaries) is about your market share.

He who garners the reptuation for being a "leader" in breaking the news, being "first on the scene" et. al. has a leg up.  The electronic media is pushing the print media daily and they have to join in or die.

And thus you have this sort of rush to print errors.  No problem, just move on and admit it's *now* the nature of the business.  People are smart enough to give the *it's okay, we understand* thumbs up to that.

But what is the bashing *now* is the smug punkish attitude of blaming a source like Tal Smith and trying to put yourself into a high integrity, high podium mode by the writer.

That stinks and deserves to be the call out now.  Not that the story was a mistake, but that the writer is wrong for persuing the after effect of finger pointing.  Especially at someone who wants to kick your arse any way.

[BizidyDizidy]

Quote:

Quote:
..."Obviously," said an official of another team, "if the Astros got Garland, they'd be done with Pettitte. So why else would he move up the timetable? It makes too much sense. If he wants to go back there, he has to let them know now." ...

More than a little gamesmanship going on on both sides.

And this is also why it is not entirely clear whether the Astros were 100% for real on Garland. It's possible that they weren't and played JDJO like a fiddle, but it's not exactly the kind of thing I've come to expect from the Astros front office.