Nick Adenhart and the Media

This is a rather sensitive subject but I am going to tackle it anyway.

To start, I want to say that I am deeply sadden by the tragic loss of Nick Adenhart, Courtney Stewart, and Henry Pearson and my condolences go out to their family, friends and anyone who was connected to the situation.

Here is a little backstory...

Nick Adenhart was tragically killed in an accident on April 9th which took the lives of two others and left one person in critical condition.  A driver believed to be three times over the legal limit ran through a red light and struck two cars before the driver fled by foot.  Stewart and Pearson died on impact and Adenhart was rushed to a local hospital where he inevitably passed away. 

Adenhart, who was twenty-two years old and had just pitched in a major league baseball game for the LA Angels of Anaheim, was going out with some friends to enjoy what should have been a glorious night.  Adenhart was a top prospect in the Angels organization and made his fourth career start in the majors earlier that night.

Overall, I feel the media did a great job covering the story about Nick Adenhart, however I do feel there were some flaws in the way they merely brushed over the other two people who had been killed.  Obviously, the story must include Nick Adenhart because he was one of the people involved.  The media did a nice job covering his story however I have issues with the proportion of this story and the lack of recognition to the other victims.

To start, lets focus on Stewart and Pearson.  I understand that they were not as high profile as Nick Adenhart but both deserve a bit more recognition.  There were full tributes including the one listed here, however there were very few (if any) newspapers or other media outlets that payed tribute to Stewart or Pearson.  Was Nick Adenhart any more important that Stewart or Pearson?  Now I don't want to sound insensitive but I feel that Stewart and Pearson should have been given the same tributes in the media as Adenhart did.  Which brings me to the next issue.

With all of the media coverage on Adenhart, I feel that the amount of media coverage surrounding this situation was a bit excessive. (once again, I feel for the families of all the victims involved, I am just looking at this issue critically)  Fatal accidents due to drunk driving happen almost on a daily basis yet because Adenhart was a baseball star, the story deserves to be the lead story on Cnn.com?  I have no problem making this the lead story as long as the same organizations do the same coverage for someone who is not "famous."

I know I am probably the minority with this view point, but I feel like the media could do a better job covering similar stories with less famous people.  I am not naive to the fact that the reason this story was the lead was due to the fact that a major league baseball player was killed at 22 years old. (which is very sad)  I just feel that it is the job of the news organization to put the same coverage if a 22 year old factory worker from Camden, New Jersey was in a similar situation. (not likely)

The Validity of Contracts in Today’s Sports

Every year, in every sport, there is something called the coaching and free agent “carousel” that occurs. It is when both player’s and coach’s change teams as a result of a variety of reasons. Every major sport goes through this in their respective off-seasons and it can be one of the most exciting or disappointing times of year. However, with each passing year it seems as though it has become more about personal gains. Take a look at the recent saga that broke out between the Denver Broncos and Jay Cutler. 

A rumor was leaked that the Broncos had tried to get quarterback from the New England Patriots while also listening to trade offers for their current quarterback, Jay Cutler. Cutler, who heard about the rumors from the media, became angered by the fact that they had tried to trade him and felt the Broncos were not honest with him about what actually happened. Due to this, he publicly demanded to be traded out of Denver. It is troubling to see a player acting like this because he did not like the business aspect of these major sports. Millions of dollars are poured into teams like the Broncos in order to put a winning product out on the field. When players like Cutler refuse to honor the contracts they signed by demanding to be let out of it or to be traded, they are lessening the importance of contracts in sports. 

If a player can act in this manner, they just show how unimportant the contract has become in today’s contract has become. As shown in this situation, the way the system works gives the player almost a complete advantage in the situation. The team has almost no choice but to work things out and give the player what they want or get rid of him. Even when trying to get rid of the player, the team is at a disadvantage. They cannot simply release the player because, as done in the MLB, they have to honor their side of the contract and pay the player what he was promised. And when trying to trade the player, the team almost certainly gets less than market value because the other teams know they need to trade the player more than he is wanted and thus do not have the same bargaining power. 

Although it is can be said that the sports organizations also have the ability to violate the contract, the obvious power resides with the player. It is sad to see our society make such things as the Cutler situation or a coach voiding the rest of his contract in order to get that “better looking” job. Players have forgotten what it means when they agree to terms with a team. They are getting more and more money every year, the least these players could do is respect their side of the contract more. Not to say that both side could make some changes to avoid these situations, but players to understand the importance of their signature on the “dotted line.” 

Coaching Changes and the Media

As an avid sports watcher, I have become dependent on the reporting of such major networks as ESPN and Fox Sports News. Most of the time, the news that is reported is one accurate and from reliable sources. However, it seems that the media has become more dependent on the so called “unnamed” source to report the latest story. So many reporters want to be the first one to break a potential blockbuster move, that they will resort to untrustworthy sources to break stories that sometimes turn out to be completely false. 

Just in the news recently was the story about USC men’s basketball coach Tim Floyd. For almost a full day it was reported that he would take the head coaching vacancy at the University of Arizona. It was later found that he had only interviewed for the job and had then turned down their offer in order to remain at his current position.  Although the matter was quickly resolved and the rumor discounted, there is no measure to the issues that this type of reporting can do to all the parties involved. Coach Floyd now has to reestablish his commitment to the USC program and possibly gain back the trust and faith of not only his current players but the kids he is recruiting. It can be said that this is an aspect of sports that is unavoidable, but I do not believe it needs to be so. 

As reporting has become more intrusive on the lives of players and coaches in sports, the line between what is public and what is private has become blurred. This story could have potentially avoided many of the problems it has caused if those who first reported the “believed” hiring had done more to research the story and verify their sources. Another example of this type of poor reporting is the story of Billy Gillespie, the head basketball coach at the University of Kentucky.  In this particular story, the reports were circulating that Gillespie would be fired to a point that the University had to issue a statement specifically saying that no move had been made in order to dispel further inquiry. Then a week later, Gillespie would be fired by the University of Kentucky. Although this story turned out to be true, the fact that it was reported as early as it was creates problems. These types of rumors distract the program from moving in a positive direction and promote negative coverage of the entire University. It is sad to think that this has become the norm of the modern day media and only continues to grow. 

Plagiarism and blogging

Being from California, I am a big time Dodgers fan.  I read several blogs about the Dodgers along with the Los Angeles Times online on an almost daily basis.  A few weeks ago, one of the blogs I follow, firenedcollettinow.com, called out Scout.com for plagiarizing from their website.  Scout.com is a website that forces its subscribers to pay fees for their content.  Firenedcollettinow.com is a blog that provides free information to its readers.  Scout.com took word for word posts from FNCN and claimed it as its own.  The most troubling thing about the situation is the response from the scout.com writer, Tot Holmes.

FNCN does a great job looking at many aspects of the Dodgers, including their minor league system.  On August 31st, 2008, FNCN did a feature on up and coming Dodgers prospect Josh Bell.  The feature looks at many aspects of Bell’s ability including his fielding, hitting, and base running.  On February 9th, 2009, Tot Holmes did a similar feature for scout.com.  As you can see by the links, Holmes blatantly plagiarized almost the entire article.

After an email was sent from FNCN to scout.com writer Tot Holmes, Holmes had a very interesting response.  I find it very interesting for two reasons.  The first thing that I was impressed with is Holmes admitting fault.  Sometimes in life, that is half the battle.  The more troubling thing to me was the wording in the email.  Holmes thanked FNCN for “bringing it to his attention.”  Was Holmes really not aware that he stole the entire article?  It had to be brought to his attention?  I find this concept a bit ridiculous. I also find the fact that there was not retraction written also very troubling.

First off, I think the fact that scout.com feels the need to steal this content speaks volumes to how impressive of a job FNCN does with their content.  In my opinion, this is a sad display of journalism on the part of Tot Holmes.  Not only did he blatantly steal this content, but he also failed to take responsibility by not addressing it.  This is just one of many instances where bloggers are taken advantage of.  It is sad the journalists are not doing their part by covering things properly and plagiarizing material.  Because of the magnitude of the world wide web, it is difficult for bloggers to always catch journalists in the act.  Overall, I feel that it is unfortunate that bloggers have to deal with this however it is also reassuring that people are actually reading what you blog.   

UConn Coach and irresponsible reporting

Jim Calhoun, current University of Connecticut Men’s basketball coach, told a journalist that he needed to “shut up” and surprisingly was not the one wrong.  Ken Krayeske, a freelance reporter in the state of Connecticut, recently got into a verbal argument with Calhoun regarding the current economic situation in the state of Connecticut.  Calhoun told members of the press that he would “not [give] a dime back” of his 1.6 million dollar contract.  

Post game press conferences are designed to talk about the game that just transpired and a look ahead at the next game or the rest of the season.  These press conferences are used to talk basketball and not politics.  Krayeske clearly had his own agenda.  Because UConn is one of the top teams in the country, ESPN and other national media outlets were there to cover this press conference.  Krayeske used this idea to get his own name in the national news.  It is being reported that Krayeske was only given a photo pass which is used to only take pictures, not ask questions.  Instead he opened his big mouth because he knew it would invoke a reaction out of Calhoun.

After opening the can of worms, Krayeske continued with his agenda.  First, he failed to acknowledge that Calhoun actually makes more money that his 1.6 million dollar contract in side deals (would have supported his own agenda).  

Krayeske also failed to look at the bigger picture that is intercollegiate athletics.  UConn basketball makes almost 12 million dollars a year according to Calhoun.  The basketball team’s revenue helps support other athletic programs within the university.  On top of that, Calhoun isnt even in the top 5 of the highest paid NCAA men’s basketball coaches.  If Krayeske wanted to question the system, I have no problem with that.  As an American citizen, he has every right to question the system but there are better ways to do that.  He could have asked board members from the NCAA if they would consider putting caps on salary to coaches.  He could have talked to Coach Calhoun in a private environment or spoke to the athletic department that gave Calhoun the contract.  It is ridiculous to ask a coach on national television to give money back after he signed a contract.  

When Krayeske told Calhoun that he was doing what the other journalists would not do, he was right.  The other journalists in the room would not ask a loaded question without doing the research.  The other journalists in the room would not want to be responsible for irresponsible reporting. The other journalists would not cause a scene in order to get get his name out.  The other journalists in the room would not carry a major agenda.  Its people like this that give journalists a bad name.  So Ken Krayeske please take the advice from Coach Calhoun.  Shut up.