Mainstream Sports Media Scared Stiff and Not Sure of Next Move

Since you mentioned that you “viewed and reviewed” ESPN’s “Outside the Lines” today, I can only assume that you also read and reread Gonzalez’ Philadelphia Inquirer article, “A Cheap Shot at Ibanez”. Ken Rosenthal may not have made it to the end of your blog, but I question whether or not you yourself read John Gonzalez’ article in its entirety.

If you had, you would have read the following:

“I’m not a blog hater. I’m not an old-school newspaper guy who fears the Internet the way children fear what’s under their bed. Far from it. And I’m no apologist for Major League Baseball or the players who chose a quick way to get better and forever tarnished their sport as a result.

MLB started the fire, but that doesn’t mean we have to keep it going by tossing players and their Louisville sluggers into the flames. At a time when anybody’s opinion can be quickly amplified and the weakest voices can suddenly make the loudest noise, I worry about fairness.

Ibanez hasn’t tested positive, and he’s denied taking PEDs on multiple occasions. Until there’s proof to the contrary, shouldn’t all of us – from the traditional mainstream media to bloggers – be judicious about calling people cheaters? It’s easier to sling mud than ever before, which is why we need to be careful when taking aim.”

Gonzalez explained quite clearly where he stood on the matter days ago and seems to have both contradicted your suggestions about him today and made you seem like a hypocrite for accusing Rosenthal of not reading/digesting your blog.

Hi, Kettle? This is MSF. You’re black!

John Gonzalez didn’t misunderstand your article. He didn’t mischaracterize it. He wasn’t ‘force-feeding’ his readers information and, contrary to what many in the media said today, he didn’t provide footing for a rumor that wouldn’t have otherwise had any. He simply joined a pre-existing conversation. Whether you like it or not, both he and Ken Rosenthal have as much right to be participants in the conversation as you or I (or anyone else for that matter) do. That’s the beauty of that First Amendment you keep mentioning.

Further, both your blog and Gonzalez’ Inquirer article were the subject of heated debates today – in Philadelphia and across the country. I followed the story and found that out of everyone, John Gonzalez was one of the few people willing to acknowledge the sprawling reach of the blogosphere. Gonzalez defended bloggers against gross generalizations suggesting that they are 42 year olds who live in their parents’ basements. Like he himself stated, he is not clinging to the ideologies of the mainstream media “boys club”, but rather quite willing to recognize blogs for what they are: a powerful and permanent fixture in the new media. He simply suggests that the bloggers themselves consider that power before they post, for as today demonstrated, the fallout can be pretty extensive. When stripped of all journalistic flourishes and trimmings, it seems that all Gonzalez really said was this: Think about what you say before you say it. My mom told me the same thing when I was in elementary school. It was as valid then as it is now and my sweet mother didn’t get crucified for imparting her wisdom with me.

You said in your post today that “People now have options when it comes to where they will get their sports news and info”. That’s true. But was you projected about Ibanez in your blog was neither – it was speculation…speculation that has now slapped a scarlet letter on a baseball player’s uniform and planted seeds of doubt in the minds of baseball fans everywhere. THAT was the bottom line of the Inquirer article. THAT is what Gonzalez was warning against.

PS – Ibanez referred to the blogger as a 42 year old living in his mom’s basement —> Gonzalez said on TV that “people who think bloggers are irrelevant and living in their parent’s basement are painfully out of touch”, thus defending bloggers—> blogger accuses Gonzales of suggesting Ibanez is out of touch. —> huh?

What kind of convoluted high school game of telephone are you playing?

@Ryan Russell,

And you SAID you were a writer.

Sorry – that was a cheap shot. And yes, I took it. Again, Sorry.

I DID understand the joke (thanks for all the —>, this feeble-minded reader with hole-filled logic found them very helpful)- it just wasn’t that funny.

Yes, I did use the pronoun “you”. In essence, I was really addressing the website, “JRod”, you the writer, and anyone of that mindset. Thank god you can’t get sued on technicalities or we’d BOTH be in big trouble.

And when did I claim to be an expert in the steroid era? I’m not so self-important as to assert that I’m an expert in anything.

I really think you’re missing the point of the article by claiming he’s amplifying the story to sell papers. We all know nobody buys papers these days! Ha. And like Gonzalez himself said on Outside the Lines (see your own link), the story had legs before he commented on it. That’s the beauty of blogs and the new media – you click “publish” and in the time it takes to sneeze that link is posted in a hundred more blogs, tweets, facebook posts, myspace bulletins, etc. You know that.

Alright, Ryan. I don’t really have the energy nor the desire for a full-on comment/reply war with you. I simply find it frustrating when a situation like this snowballs into something unnecessarily large. If everybody- EVERYBODY- just stepped back and took a moment to digest, Ryan and Ronald, Rosenthal and Raul, and even that darn Gonzalez could all just be buddies who like baseball.

I stand by the core sentiment of what I wrote before (which had nothing to do with the steroid era): Gonzalez’ article simply meant to comment on the increasing relevance of the blogosphere and reiterate those ever-potent words “think before you speak”.

You and I both could probably heed Mr. Gonzalez’ advice. Fair?

As someone who writes a blog and has run a media organization before, I see both sides to this issue. In order for Ken Rosenthal to pass along the same take as JROD, he has to go through an army of suits and lawyers. He also has first person relationships with players and GMs which get him his scoops. For him to be able to write what JROD did would cost him a lot of cred with those players and those GMs which, in turn, costs FOX cred, which weakens their product and Rosenthal’s position in it.

So if Rosenthal is railing against bloggers, it’s because JROD does his job without handcuffs and the same constraints Kenny does.

This is not an issue over journalistic responsibility, it’s an issue over the fact that Rosenthal spends hours everyday cultivating sources, working the phones, talking to people and then carefully crafiting a column that passes the smell test for a small army of fact checkers and corporate types. And, everytime he goes to the ballpark, he has to face the players on the field and in the locker room.

JROD is a fan with an opinion.

As I said, there are no rights or wrongs here. Just differences of opinion and a little frustration on behalf of the rank and file media who has to operate under much tighter regulation.

If you had to politicize it, JRod was to the left, John was in the middle, Ken was the far right. That’s how you debate. It was good TV and that was the point of the OTL segment. It was not to get the truth out of the original JRod article…..or any sort of apology…it was to create the best debate possible. From that stand point- success.