E-Mail '#BruceFreed: Bruce Feldman suspension (or was it?) lifted by ESPN after impressive groundswell of support and outrage from fellow journalists' To A Friend

My point in calling it the "easy path" above was to point out just what you said. James isn's calling the shots at ESPN anymore than you or I. I do, however, think that the way ESPN handled the story with Adam James and how they allowed Craig to use their airwaves has painted them into a corner with their response to the book and the way that Leach describes things. So as opposed to backing off of the way they reported that story initially, ESPN chooses to stand by the side of the story they gave backing to, which is in direct opposition to Leach's story in the book. In my opinion, they stood by that at the expense of Feldman, so it isn't specific to Craig James but more to how that story unfolded and what they chose to report about it. The reality is that Feldman isn't taking sides here, so why punish him?

The fact that James worked there gave ESPN an inside track to that side of the story, and anyone in their position would have put him on the air. My issue is more with the fact that James enlisted a PR firm in the process, and ESPN certainly didn't go out of its way to get Leach's side of things. There are certainly plenty of people who don't have a great opinion of Craig or Adam, but those aspects of the story weren't nearly as pervasive in their coverage. That said, the shed incident is unacceptable if things went down the way they were reported, and in no way would I condone that. Leach is eccentric to put it nicely, and very few things would surprise me with him. For me, I'm trying to separate what happened with how it was handled from a reporting standpoint. At this point, they are standing behind the way they handled it, and Feldman got caught up in the crossfire, which is truly unfortunate for him.