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!

Murray Chass and "sources"

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Left_Coast, Dec 8, 2006.

  1. Frank_Ridgeway

    Frank_Ridgeway Well-Known Member

    He's had a good career, mostly on mags, including Newsweek. Not really a sports guy but wrote a book about the Bosox.
     
  2. casty33

    casty33 Active Member

    Thanks, Frank, that's all I wanted to know.
     
  3. And that policy on anonymous sources has been honored more in the breach elsewhere in the paper to the point whereit doesn't appear to be anything more than camouflage in reaction to the Jayson Blair problems.
     
  4. Gold

    Gold Active Member

    If you are reporting on baseball trades, there are always going to be anonymous sources. That's how it is done. The trick is to know who is reliable and what is reliable. Murray Chass has earned his credibility over more than 35 years. Unlike, say, Judith Miller who pretty much bought the Bush line lock, stock, and barrel. Or Seth Mnookin, a guy with a last name spelled funny who has a blog and appears to be a fanboy - another bigshot writer who thinks he knows more about sports than sports writers.
     
  5. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    Murray's column is better suited for one of NY tabs. Times readers are not interested in this type of minutia.
     
  6. Double Down

    Double Down Well-Known Member

    This is not a case of trades though, Gold. This is just whining. And even though I understand the whole "That's how it's done" argument, today's example of Rich Rodriguez is yet another reminder in our business that just because it's always been done that way doesn't mean it's right, or that we should continue to do things that way. If you're going to basically let people accuse the Sox of something like tampering and operating outside baseball's rules, I think you need a little more than whispers over drinks while everyone watches Dave Sheinin hammer out Rhapsody In Blue on the ivories.

    Mnookin, who is a very good writer and good journalist, has an ax to grind because he wrote an entire book about the Times lack of ethics in the wake of Jayson Blair, and so he's particularly in tune with the fact that the ethical overhaul the Times promised after Blair/Miller/Bragg was just lip service. I think he's quite obviously a Red Sox fan, perhaps playing some defense for the Also-Kind-Of-Evil Empire, but I think he has a point here, whether Chass has been in the business for 35 years or not.
     
  7. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    " Dave Sheinin hammer out Rhapsody In Blue on the ivories."

    Folks DD knows what he is talking about. Happens every baseball meeting. Lobby bar- everyone standing around trading lies that with each beer sound more plausible.

    Next day writer wakes up convinced what is heard was true.
     
  8. Frank_Ridgeway

    Frank_Ridgeway Well-Known Member


    Years ago a baseball writer checks in for a story length from the Winter Meetings, I make an off-the-cuff joke about a player. A few days later I'm reading a respected baseball writer's notes column on the KR wire, and there's my joke, reported as fact. Holy shit, I think, either this sports writing legend is a total fucking idiot or this is what the baseball meetings can devolve into in years when there isn't much trading going on -- writers just report whatever bullshit they hear without even a minimal attempt to check it out to see if it contains an iota of truth.
     
  9. shockey

    shockey Active Member

    i greatly admire/respect murray. that said...

    it's curious to me that the sports sections of the ny times and washington post -- the leaders in the watergate era -- lead the league in citing anonymous sources. the sports sections of both broadsheets are right up there with the ny tabs with the free use of unnamed sources in an era when most papers are putting more restrictions than ever on the usage.

    just an observation. at my paper, we're not even supposed to use the word "source," because it's too vague. the person must be identified as specifically as possible, short of exposing who it is. like, "a baseball executive from an american league team."

    that is all. a person who also appears on my wedding license is beckoning. ;D ;D ;D
     
  10. Double Down

    Double Down Well-Known Member

    I've heard several versions of that kind of story, and one of the primary offenders happens to be "a writer who is now a member the Baseball Hall of Fame."

    I won't name names though.

    Best to keep it vague when sourcing that kind of scandalous gossip.
     
  11. HoopsMcCann

    HoopsMcCann Active Member

    uh oh... buck is coming soon to let you know the writer isn't a member of the baseball hall of fame, but he won the spinks award

    i valid point

    and i've got a guess. but won't name names
     
  12. Frank_Ridgeway

    Frank_Ridgeway Well-Known Member

    Actually, you made me look and he hasn't won the Spink award.


    http://www.baseballhalloffame.org/hofers_and_honorees/spink_bios/index.htm
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page