Coaches wife confronts columnist in press box

I knew that. No, really. I did.

But Canzano's blog is on a major newspaper's Web site. No knock on Canzano -- this goes for any journalist -- but his blog wouldn't have readers in Oregon if The Oregonian hadn't brought him to Portland from wherever he was before -- Fresno, San Jose? His audience exists because of his connection with the paper. They gave it to him. Before that audience belonged to Canzano, it belonged to whoever had the column before him. He didn't build that audience -- it was given to him. So it's not the equivalent of the blog anyone can set up, not even close. As I said earlier, no problem if he wants to crab on his Myspace page or whatever.

 

Frank, we covered this earlier in the thread. I acknowledged that maybe there should be some sort of boilerplate disclaimer that runs with newspaper blogs explaining that the blog is meant to be a personal account by the writer, yada yada yada. I'm not saying that a reporter shouldn't strive for accuracy, or that he has carte blanche to write whatever he wants, but blogs have at least occasionally include material that wouldn't appear in the paper, or they would serve no purpose.

And I don't think it's asking too much to expect readers to realize there's a difference between blogs and the regular paper. The readers we're talking about are mostly younger ones who are quite familiar with true blogs, probably more familiar with them than some of the journalists who are posting on this thread. It doesn't take a genius to recognize that there's a different tone, a different point of view, on a blog than in a newspaper.

 

Unfortunately, these days that is a lot to ask of our readers. Nearly every story I write, when I'm asked about in public is referred to as a column by the general public.
Given those difficulties, I'd seriously doubt they know the difference between a blog and a column.
Besides, in their eyes, all we're there to do is report negatively on Oregon or whatever bum-fuck school, college or pro team you're reporting on.

 

Why do you hate my team, Q Man?

Can't argue with that last bit. Local HS football coach gets nailed for his second DUI in three years; both local papers write the story... and get letters about what horrible people they are, for putting coach's family and friends through such an ordeal. No, coach managed to do that all by his own self when he got busted. Again.

 

And he's right about the public calling everything a "column." Biggest reason why I don't think we can rely on them differentiating between a news story and a blog.

 

People don't know insider terms, so they call everything a "column" or a "write-up." It's not a big deal.

TV people sneer every time they hear someone say, "Film at 11" because they've been using tape instead of film for the last 30 years. Nobody cares.

If someone doesn't understand that the tone and content of a blog are different than a formal newspaper story, they're beyond hope anyway.

 

Well, per usual, I don't agree with you. No biggie.

 

Yeah, it is. He's giving everyone a first-hand account as to how the coach's wife -- at least at that very moment -- dealt with the DUI of her son, who just so happens to be on the football team. All the time, you see stories about mothers, fathers, sons and daughters dealing with life experiences in the news and sports section. And this is no different, except for the first-hand approach when the story is usually done by a lurking reporter who's observing daily life.

 

I haven't been in the business for about 18 months, so consider the source. Still, I had a couple of views I felt compelled to share:

1) Mrs. Bellotti, no matter her marital status, is a public figure in Eugene, mostly because she benefits from a (former) relationship with the state's highest paid employee. It would be much like the mayor's wife, the governor's wife, etc., acting this way. It was/is news.

2) A few people have noted Mrs. Belotti didn't have a chance for rebuttal before the blog was posted. She had her chance when she spoke with John in the pressbox; it is much like Bob Knight, Bill Parcells or Ryan Leaf going off on someone during an interview. Is a reporter supposed to go back and ask one of them: "Coach, I'm writing a blog on our exchange today. How did you see it go down? I have it down that you called me a no-talent hack. Is that accurate?" Pretty much all y'all do (I can't be included anymore) is report on what is said or what happens. That's what John did in his blog. It would be the same as describing a one-on-one exchange he had with any column subject. Does it matter that she instigated it, instead of him going to her with his notebook? Would it have mattered if he walked up to her and said, "Colleen, what do you think of how the school handled your son's two DUIIs?" If she laid the smackdown on him then, would it be appropriate to use?

 

I can't speak for everyone else, but that's not what I was saying. Even if Canzano had called a calmed-down Colleen Bellotti later for further comment, the fact remains that the only writing The Oregonian provided came through the prism of one participant in an argument. The Oregonian either should have reported the situation only in a news story, reported it in a news story in addition to Canzano's blog, or left it alone. I don't care if it's John Canzano, Ben Bradlee or Ghandi -- the person who was just screamed at is never credible enough to be the only source of what happened.

 

"Canzano, I've got something to say to you, you *^&(&)#$$#! "And this is off-the-record you *&$(*&&%^! OF *&(%*$!er!"....okay, maybe you can use this as deep background or attribute it to a source close to the football program."

Honestly, if you expect privacy or discretion, the last place you should expect it is in a press box.