Erin Andrews and the Cubs locker room: Discuss

Again, today I saw a male reporter hug a pro team owner in greeting -- and it was completely unremarkable. These kinds of things happen all the time between writers and athletes etc. and it goes unnoticed because it is mundane.

The only reason anyone even noticed the contact with Andrews was because she was being watched like a hawk.

I think you have to dress like a professional and act like one, but Gate House needs to run her response to the salacious innuendo. If she goes over to see a player's kid pictures and it comes off like she's coming on to him -- that's not being a columnist or reporter, it's just gossipy.

 

Elvis Grbac sees your point.

 

I submit the name Erin Andrews is recognized more than the name of whomever manages the Kansas City Royals or coaches the Detroit Lions.

 

Smasher, you are defending this column more strenuously than even Nadel did. Even he acknowledged that it would have been a good idea to talk to Andrews for the column, and given the answers we now know he would have gotten, that's even more obvious.

 

Like Lisa Guerrero before her, if Erin Andrews didn't want so much attention to be on her, she would take action to make sure that didn't happen.
She doesn't have to wear a bag over her head, but her wardrobe selection and interaction with athletes could be changed IF she doesn't want the focus on her. For her to say they view her as a sister or daughter makes her seem dense at best.
Plenty of on-air television people understand the focus should be on the subjects of the reporting and not the reporters. A few would rather be celebrities instead of journalists and their employers don't seem to mind. ESPN encourages it.
Chris Berman and Craig Segar are in the same boat.

 

I'm responding to specific points that I think are worthy of dispute.

As far as Ms. Andrews' answers, did you expect her to say, "Damn, Nadel nailed it. I was acting like a hoochie?"

It's not like she doesn't have a stake in this. As much as some elements at ESPN are probably happy with the publicity, I suspect there's another side that has already expressed their concerns to her, which could very well propel her into damage control.

 

Andrews' answers were quite plausible explanations for some of the behavior Nadel witnessed. You're right, maybe it was damage control, now that she's had time to come up with a good story. It would have been nice to compare it to the answers she gave Nadel when it originally happened. Oh, that's right ... he never bothered to ask her for any.

 

The raccoon is drowned.

And I don't even know what that means.

 

Her answers are plausible and defensible right until she says she touched Soriano. Arm, hand, whatever, don't initiate contact with the people you're covering no matter how noble your motivation is. Nothing good comes from it.

 

Especially when that subject is of a different gender.

 

No, Slappy. Any gender. It's inappropriate, regardless. (Otherwise, we get back into the, "well then, should females really be allowed into male locker rooms?" debate. And I think that issue's been settled -- or should have been -- years ago.) If it's inappropriate for one gender, it's inappropriate for the other. Period.

Whether her intentions were good or not, that doesn't add to her understanding of the injury and it wasn't appropriate in the clubhouse or anywhere else. That doesn't make it "suggestive," necessarily, but it certainly wasn't appropriate.

 

So handshakes are a no-no?

Huh.