1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is Canzano being unethical?

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by statrat, Aug 15, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Page 6 of 14
  1. gingerbread

    gingerbread Well-Known Member

    Interesting how some people here rip reporters for sleeping with sources/people they cover, yet have no problem with reporters taking money from sources/people they cover.
    Neither is acceptable.
    We keep blurring the lines, then wonder why the public is skeptical.

    (And yep, Canzano is a fine reporter and columnist. So why give readers a reason to question his or his paper's integrity?)
     
    gingerbread, Aug 16, 2007
    #61
  2. friend of the friendless

    friend of the friendless Active Member

    Sirs, Madames,

    Canzano should not get a pass because of his spotless record and body of work and character.

    The idea is to hold your friends, co-workers and heroes to the same standard as your worst rival, competitor or sworn enemy. And your friends etc shouldn't have a problem with it.

    YHS, etc
     
    friend of the friendless, Aug 17, 2007
    #62
  3. Tom Petty

    Tom Petty Guest

    again, agreeing with you, shit like this can't be judged on a case-by-case basis.
     
    Tom Petty, Aug 17, 2007
    #63
  4. Twoback

    Twoback Active Member

    You people keep dancing away from the truth.
    The Tribune owned the Cubs. The Tribune covered the Cubs.
    Time Warner owned the Braves. SI covered the Braves.
    Were all those people unethical?
     
    Twoback, Aug 17, 2007
    #64
  5. Tom Petty

    Tom Petty Guest

    hey dumb, dumb, the tribune had to cover the cubs. canzano doesn't have to work for allen.
     
    Tom Petty, Aug 17, 2007
    #65
  6. friend of the friendless

    friend of the friendless Active Member

    Sirs, Madames,

    Further to Mr Petty's point: If Canzano wants to work for Mr Allen, fine, he can do so and maintain his integrity. He just can't keep working for the paper.

    I mis-stated an earlier point ... you should hold your friends, co-workers and heroes to a higher standard than those you'd apply to your worst enemy. And not only should they have no problem with it, they should also respect you for it.

    If the lines blur, get your eyes checked. You might be going blind.

    YHS, etc
     
    friend of the friendless, Aug 17, 2007
    #66
  7. Twoback

    Twoback Active Member

    Great. You fellas keep rewriting the rule book however you see fit.
    And make sure you get an OK from the alt weekly rag in Portland before you finalize.
     
    Twoback, Aug 17, 2007
    #67
  8. Elliotte Friedman

    Elliotte Friedman Moderator Staff Member

    Personally, I don't care what Poynter thinks. Didn't one of its papers sponsor the building the Tampa Bay Lightning play in?

    The biggest question I have is: What happens if Paul Allen/the Blazers do say something to Canzano about one of his columns/radio comments? Have Canzano and his bosses at the Oregonian discussed that internally?

    Haven't covered the NBA for a few years, but it's no secret how draconian that organization has been with its media. I can't remember if it was Kerry Eggers or Dwight Jaynes who first coined the "Jail Blazers" phrase, but I do know that one of them to was demoted to junior hockey because the team complained so much about that individual's coverage.

    And maybe Paul Allen doesn't care too much about this station. OK. But you know when he will care? When one of his buddies or business partners says, "Why are you paying some guy to kill your team on your own station?" That's where the problems start.

    I know teams say all the time, "We're going to create our own TV/radio station and hire unbiased people to report on us. We want fans to hear the truth." It sounds nice, but it doesn't happen. Look at all of the threads here ripping John Sterling or Suzyn Waldman or Ken Harrelson or whoever else. Why do they do it that way? Because they are told to.

    Look at the Toronto Maple Leafs. They created this Sunday Morning two-hour program called The Reporters. They said people -- including myself -- who were invited on could say whatever they wanted. Last year, as the team went into the tank, it was cancelled. Sports owners talk a big game, but please.

    I don't fault Canzano for trying. $80,000 is a great incentive, and a lot of people talk about how they wouldn't take it until that kind of cheque is thrown in their faces. I read his stuff a great deal and he seems very, very professional. I have no doubt he goes in with the most ethical of intentions. But I'm curious to know if there has been discussion about ownership intereference. Because it will come. You'd be naive to think it won't.
     
    Elliotte Friedman, Aug 17, 2007
    #68
  9. Tom Petty

    Tom Petty Guest

    actually, dumb, dumb, the WW is a good read, and most folks around portland respect what they have to say. but please keep pontificating on shit you know nothing about. it's won a pulitzer ... has your rag?
     
    Tom Petty, Aug 17, 2007
    #69
  10. Tom Petty

    Tom Petty Guest

    i'm not an elitist fuck, grad. i'm simply saying it raises too many questions. yes, canzano is a solid cat, but working for "the man" he's made a name by ripping the past few years is too much.
     
    Tom Petty, Aug 17, 2007
    #70
  11. jgmacg

    jgmacg Guest

    So if the deal raises no ethical questions worth discussing, why the pre-emptive apologia from Mr. Canzano?
     
    jgmacg, Aug 17, 2007
    #71
  12. Joe Williams

    Joe Williams Well-Known Member

    what's the old saying about, "Now we know what you are, all we needed to find out was your price"?

    In Canzano's case, it's 80K.

    At 10K, he would have stayed ethically clean. At 20K, at 30K and at 40K, same thing.

    At 50K? Hmm...

    At 80K? Ding ding ding! We've got a winner.

    That "ding ding ding" never should have happened at all. Or it only should have happened when the money got big enough to allow him to leave the newspaper, head held high.

    That newspaper should never, ever employ a writer who is on Paul Allen's payroll. And Canzano, based on everything we know about him as a journalist, should never, ever want to be that guy.
     
    Joe Williams, Aug 17, 2007
    #72
Page 6 of 14
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page