RIP Tyler Skaggs

Legit question: Are the circumstances of Tyler Skaggs' death - and its location - in any way analogous to Prince's or Michael Jackson's?

Should the results of any investigation of Skaggs' death be released as soon or on a similar timetable as those of MJ or Prince? I honestly don't know this answer.

 

It's only analogous in terms of celebrity and on a much, much lower and localized level.

Assuming the toxicology report is a public record it should be released whenever it's ready. There's no valid reason to fast-track it, if that's even a possibility. There's no legitimate public interest in it.

 

Hey scum bag you admittedly are “speculating” on someone’s death, congrats, hope you’re enjoying your accomplishment.

 

Local Paper's Take on Former Samohi Star's Death Sparks Outrage


Santa Monica Newspaper Publisher Explains Why He Removed Tyler Skaggs Story


This is my hometown and where I worked the first 25 years of my career. I am an alumni of this high school and the baseball program.

The newspapers that cover this city are pathetic. There are 6 of them. One is 5 days a week, one is daily online only, the other four are weeklies. Of the group, the SM Observer probably ranks fifth and the publisher, Ganezer, is an idiot. The idea of all of them merging to have one good paper never happens and I think Ganezer is the main reason -- he wants his say all the time.

The two links are from an online news source The Lookout, which is staffed by my former paper, The Outlook, which folded in 1998. The writer is very good. In the second link, he takes some shots at the writer of the Observer story, Stan Greene, who I don't know.

 

I’m not so sure that a timely toxicology report quells uncertainty if there are any amount of certain drugs in his system, even if the amounts are well below a level that is considered fatal.

If more investigation is necessary, it’s now a confirmed drug-related mystery instead of just a mystery. Meanwhile, the team is traveling around the country, so the story is going to resurface every week. If there’s trace amounts of a drug in his system, that same old story is: “We don’t know why Tyler Skaggs died, but we do know THIS” as opposed to, “We don’t know why Tyler Skaggs died.”

So if the release of any details is up to the family, and not part of the public record, I think a delay doesn’t immediately suggest a cover-up.

That’s not to say it should be passively covered. To me, a litmus test is: If the person checked into rehab, would you cover it? If so, I think it’s fair to seek out facts about the death in a responsible and ethical manner.

I have no issue with a properly vetted and edited story that brings the facts to light before they are officially cleared to be released.

 

Me, neither. That's how most breaking stories are, particularly with regard to something about which you beat any official "release": Someone might be upset. That doesn't mean you shouldn't run it. Others don't get to determine when responsible reporters/newspapers put out the news. There should be an element of consideration and compassion involved when warranted, but others don't, or shouldn't, get to make the decision.

 

I'd be hesitant just because if there is a false positive and it comes out later your reporting was wrong, you look like a jackass. Through your proper vetting, I would just be extra careful to figure out why the information is awaiting clearance. If it is just someone's boss needs to sign a paper and the information is not going to change, OK. But if they are waiting for another test to come back but "felt confident in the results" I might hedge.

I had a situation where (through no fault of the paper's) we reported a guy died in a crash as the result of drugs or alcohol in his system. Turns out, the hospital that ran the tests got a false positive. We vetted the info through the police and thought we were good to go, but the information was wrong. The guy's dad was furious and caused headaches for us for about 6 months after that. Out vetting didn't matter because we were the ones who put it out to the public. In that case, I'm not sure if there was much we could have done differently, but if faced with a "the information has not been cleared," because of that I would delay until I was sure.

 

I believe it was reported pretty early on that Kile had pot in his system.

 

I don't even post here any more, but JFC the paper you guys are talking about isn't real. It is fake.

The Angels fell for it, too, so it's not a shock you guys did, but come on.

EDIT: Here are some links

Did Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Announce She Will Be Retiring in January 2019?

A fake news site triggered a real response over the death of Tyler Skaggs

 

Chris Long says he knows the publisher. Being a sleazy local gossip rag isn't the same as being the Babylon Bee.

Unless Chris Long is full of shit, which, whatever.

 

If I call myself a publisher, I can run an imaginary publication with imaginary writers too.