Even The Wolf likely can't clean up Harvey Weinstein's pending troubles

Anne Peterson is the AP writer who wrote the Solo-Blatter story that initially characterized Solo’s allegation as an accusation of “sexual assault.” Most publications appear to have used that version of the AP story. Later, the characterization in the lede and headline was changed to “grabbed,” which is how it now reads on the AP’s website and Peterson’s Twitter feed.

Peterson appears to be a hard-working sports writer. I have respect for the fact that she’s on the AP grind with, as she notes on her Twitter feed, two young children at home. A lot of us can relate.

But her Twitter feed also reveals her to be an enthusiastic liberal, and in particular an enthusiastic supporter of this and other social issues.

Her reaction to the Roy Moore story:



Some additional political Tweets and re-Tweets:







Within hours, she was re-Tweeting people professing that they “believe” Hope Solo.

This dovetails with the “Quitting Social Media” thread: You can’t have your AP reporter, covering a story like this, and making it this obvious that she’s invested in the cause. It clearly colored her work to the degree that the content of her story did not support the lede and headline that ended up going out everywhere. Don’t take my word for it. Her editors ultimately re-worked the story and re-sent it.

 

You quoted two different Anne Peterso(e)ns.

And, I denounce Ms. Footybedsheets.

 

Agreed on the Twitter front.

But we'll soon reach the point - if not already - where, whatever a woman says, that's what is printed in all but a handful of conservative publications and small-town rags.

That's what I mean by obsolete paradigm. Men have behaved so badly in media that they either heel to now or risk having their behavior exposed later, or the concern of insensitivity will be so great that it'll produce the same effect.

 

Oddly enough, AP Anne M. Petersen re-Tweeted Anne Helen Petersen. Anne M. Petersen re-Tweets a lot of stories about sex abuse in sports. Which is fine. But if you’re doing that, I think you have to play it much straighter when you end up having to cover a story.

 

What makes this story unique is that Solo didn’t say it.

 

Some "causes" are so basic to being a functional human being that alignment with them should not be criticized from a reporter, they should be respected.

The idea that every issue has two sides equally worthy of a place at the table is a blight on modern journalism.

 

It's concerning that it appears to have negatively impacted how she covered a story.

It's concerning that she was re-Tweeting "You go, girl!" Tweets about Hope Solo while her story was still hot on the wire.

Not for nothing, Sepp Blatter denied the allegation.

 

I find none of it concerning. The only people who find it concerning always seem very, very concerned with the outcomes of abusive men or just like finding weird things to be concerned about for the sake of pedantry.

 

Her editors at the Associated Press found it concerning.

 

Does anyone else see the larger problem perfectly reflected in the fact that this conversation has largely centered on the alleged victimization of Sepp Blatter?

 

He might be. She made an allegation. He denied it. The reporter, who has made no secret that she is invested in the issue of sex abuse in sports, characterized the allegation as "sexual assault." Hope Solo did not use that term. The threadbare facts in the story don't support that term.

Is Sepp Blatter a victim here? I don't know enough to make that judgment. But if my reporter is covering the story, I would go through the roof if she were re-Tweeting #IStandWithHope-style Tweets practically minutes after I had to re-write her copy.

 

I agree that if you're covering a story for the AP, you should shut the fuck up about it on Twitter.

But, then again, I think people on Twitter should generally just shut the fuck up anyway.