Media Bowl Gifts

I would guess that Pete Thamel is rather busy this week, what with the Final Four and all. But he found time to get Nate Miles on the phone. Miles says things he's never said publicly, contradicting the testimony of the UConn coach, Jim Calhoun.

That's what I'm talking about. It's a story that's within his beat, because Thamel has decided that covering the beat means more than just covering the games.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/02/sports/ncaabasketball/02uconn.html?_r=1&hp

There's no doubt: Any reporter on the NCAA beat, or the UConn. beat, who didn't get Nate Miles on the phone, has a thousand good excuses. Heck, this week of all weeks, how could he possibly be expected to do that?!

Yet, he did. Because he thought it was important.

 

Are you now equating making one phone call to the work it took to unearth the Fiesta Bowl story?
Again, you have fair points to consider. You are just doing a terrible job of making them.

 

Oh, yes, that UConn. story took "one phone call." Jeez. Anyone who has done any reporting would know better.

My point remains: We should be digging more than we do. Being cozy with the people we cover is a sign that digging into the behind-the-scenes stories of college sports (money, recruiting, etc.) is not enough in our DNA. (I would think these would be noncontroversial.)

 

Yet the story reads this way: "In two interviews in Toledo, Miles offered a window into major college sports."

You make it sound like in between his other work, the writer figured why not call Miles into and it happened to turn into something more. When in fact his newspaper sent him to Toledo to get the story. Which, again, is a resources issue.

 

Pete Thamel is the national college sports writer for The New York Times. His ability to break a story like that Final Four week is quite a bit different than an OU beat writer from Tulsa taking down the Fiesta Bowl because Oklahoma happens to be there for two weeks.

 

Just wanted Mr. Crusade to read this twice, that's all.

 

I'll make it three.

 

Sure, he works for The Times. And he got sent to Toledo.

The question remains: How much digging are we doing, on the teams we cover, on the conferences and bowls in our area, on our beat?

And why not?

Sorry, "we're not The New York Times" has been taken. So has, "We're busy that week." And, "my editor won't let me." And "The reporters in News handle that sort of thing."

All that matters is whether or not it's a priority in your shop, and whether it's a priority for you.

 

How much digging are you doing on the team you cover on the conferences and bowls in your area?

Since no answer is reasonable enough for you at this point, I'd like to see how an ideal journalists spends his time.

 

Yeah, I guess it's a reasonable question overall, but the fact remains he's bringing it up on a thread that he has no business bringing it up on. The people who should be all over this story -- the Arizona Republic -- were. They broke it in 2009 and are certainly a big, if not the biggest, influence on this whole report taking place. They've been all over it ever since, and have done a pretty darn good job on it. They've done it despite being a huge sponsor to the bowl and having its CEO on the bowl's board. All of this squashes many of Burbs' arguments on this thread -- ethics, digging deeper, etc.

The one paper that needed to do this, did it.

 

I'll close with this (that part will make you happy).

We all miss stories. I certainly have. Maybe the guy who follows me on the beat figures out some shenanigans that were going on, stuff I missed. I hate it when that happens. None of us is perfect.

But if you don't have a pang of regret when you miss a story -- even if you were only tangentially on that beat or interviewed that person just once or even if you just happened to be on vacation in that town that weekend when if you'd had your eyes just a little more open you might have noticed a thread you could pull -- if you don't kick yourself and say, man, I wish I'd gotten just a little bit of that story, then you're not a journalist. Or not my kind of journalist.

Now add to that: You took gifts from these people. You ate their food. You played in their golf tournaments. You accepted their trinkets. In other words, you shilled for them, and then it turns out that they're the worst kind of liars, they were corrupt, they corrupted others, they lied to investigators, they falsified documents, they claimed tax-exempt status while abusing it, all while you were wearing their jacket and promoting them by carrying their computer bag. That is more than a pang of regret. That's a heaping cup of embarrassment.

So why put yourself out on a limb, why risk embarrassing yourself. If you want to be in PR, take the free stuff. If you want to be a journalist, be a journalist, and say no to the free stuff.

 

This has nothing to do with covering bowl games.

It has to do with ethics and class.