Friday, January 30, 2009

Breaking News: Chris Mortensen Doesn't Understand Journalistic Integrity

Okay, so that's not really breaking news.

As I take a break between shifts at the Oolitic kanuter valve plant, I'd like to point out a fairly old story, but one worth telling. As you probably know, Chris Mortensen is an ESPN reporter. His job is to do investigative reporting on the NFL. Many of his stories involve using unnamed sources to get "behind the scenes" stories.

Mort has many critics, who say that he is seldom right about the news he breaks, and that he basically reports rumors. One such story happened earlier this month.

Back on January 4th, Mortensen wrote a story concerning the Oakland Raiders possibly negotiating to sell off part of the team to a billionaire who has wanted to move a team to Los Angeles. The Raiders denied the story, with team chief executive Amy Trask saying, "Chris' report is not true." Trask also went on to say that Mortensen never contacted the Raiders for their response.

Denials of this type are pretty common, so no big deal, right? However, what happened next isn't so common--in standing by his report, Mortensen said:

'The Raiders have lost the privilege with me of running stories past them for comment,' he said. 'This stems from their history of denials to most stories I have reported — as well as others in the media — when those stories have eventually proven to be true.'

So we have a reporter admitting that he has stopped giving the subject of a story he is writing a chance to respond--one of the most basic tenets of journalism! Yes, many times teams will categorically deny stories, even when those stories turn out to be true. However, a journalist must always ask the subject of his or her story for comment. Period. The fact that Mortensen called it a "privilege" for him to actually do what he is supposed to do as a reporter shows exactly how arrogant Mortensen is.

Later that night Mortensen backed off:

Upon further review, I should not have qualified any potential communication with the Raiders as a 'privilege.' I'd say they have repeatedly diminished and discouraged efforts to reach out for an official comment based on the repeated denials of prior stories...

Not much of an apology. At least Mortensen admitted that using the word "privilege" was dumb, but he still made no apology or admission that he was wrong in not contacting the Raiders for their side of the story. Again, one of the most basic principles of journalism is allow subjects of a story a chance to respond.

This is yet another case of a reporter using questionable sources (or more likely, only one source) to get information and then not bothering to check the facts. The sad thing is, where was the ESPN producer who should have been checking Mortensen's work? And why didn't ESPN issue its own apology?

It's clear that Mortensen doesn't think he needs to follow journalistic principles. It's also very clear that ESPN also feels it doesn't need to hold its reporters accountable, even when those reporters repeatedly ignore the basic standards of journalism.

Labels: , ,

Friday, July 11, 2008

Just the facts, ma'am...

The mainstream media lives to bash the bloggers of the world about our incredible lack of grammar skills and use of the English language. While they are generally correct on that assumption, we bloggers enjoy bashing mainstream writers on their inability to present the facts correctly or bash their broad opinions on minuscule amounts of data and/or statistics.

I ran across this AP article on MSNBC.com regarding the Pirates win over the Yankees in a make-up date from a June rain-out. Here is the headline from the article:

Pirates snap Yankees' 4-game winning streak

And here is a paragraph from the article:

Damaso Marte finished for his fourth save in six opportunities, helping end New York’s five-game winning streak.

OK. I do not nor have I ever worked for a newspaper or online media source, but I will go with the assumption that at least one person if not two are supposed to read a story prior to its publishing. I don't think I'm reaching here by saying that someone should have caught the fact that you have "4-game winning streak" in the headline and "five-game winning streak" in the article. (The correct answer is the Pirates ended the Yankees four-game winning streak by the way.)

If my lack of grammar and English language skills can catch that one from just a casual reading of the article, shouldn't someone else whose job to catch this type of error have caught that? It's not like we are nitpicking on someone's OPS+ or VORP or EqA which makes most media writers scratch their heads or their backsides about what we are talking about or yell at us about how it is about runs batted in, batting average and wins and not some convoluted statistic that we used Big Blue to come up with.

Come on people! The Buzz Bissinger's feel we bloggers have no "journalistic integrity". Well the more the "real" journalists continue to make mistakes like this, the more bloggers will gain on them. I know...out of 100 blogging sites there are maybe only one or a small few that you could classify as a quality and worthwhile site. (We'll eave it up to you on where you feel we belong.) Yet slowly more and more sites and bloggers are getting better while the sports media is getting worse and worse.

The first rule in journalism...OK, my first rule I just made up... is to GET THE FACTS STRAIGHT!!!!!!

The second rule is go bash the idiot who can't follow rule #1.

Labels: , ,