Reporting on Trade Rumors?

This is just my first step in the process. I thought I would feel out what some professionals had to say about it. I wasn't planning on quoting or using anyone here as a source.

Any time I google "reporting on trade rumors" I just get a bunch of links to the Bleacher Report. Not a whole lot of help there.

Thanks for those who did offer some advice.

 

Shouldn't the first stop in any grad school research paper be to reputable journals?

 

Just call up or e-mail some columnists. I was talking to ombuds for a senior group project when I was in college, and I was shocked about some of them who got back to me - the guy from ESPN, New York Times, Toledo Blade, a couple others. If you're approaching a professional in a respectful way as a soon-to-be professional yourself, most of them are happy to get back to you, or at least acknowledge your presence.

 

If I know the team I cover has been asking what it will take to acquire Joe Slugger from the Padres, I can write that. It's not a rumor. I know they have an interest in Joe Slugger. It doesn't mean a trade will be made, it means exactly what it says: They have an interest in Joe Slugger and have inquired about him.

If I find out the Padres are asking for Masanori Sinker in return, I can write that. It doesn't mean a deal will be made, it just means exactly what it says: That's what the Mariners have asked for.

That's reporting. It's up to the reader to understand what's being said. If Sports Bulldog on Sportsradio 96 runs with that as a "rumor," it's not my fault.

If you're not connected enough to know things that are going on, you're not doing a good job of covering the beat. You get information from scouts, from agents, from executives on other teams, from reporters who cover those teams. It's your job to determine who has good information and who's full of shit. Some GMs (Kevin Towers) are very open about what they're doing. Most scouts will spill what they know as long as they trust you not to attach their name to it.

 

In your Google account settings, go to Manage Blocked Sites here:

https://www.google.com/reviews/t?hl=en

Under "Manually block a site," type: http://www.bleacherreport.com

Now you don't see that crap anymore.

 

Advice for everyone.

I guess I can give one point of advice: We don't (seek to) report rumors. Rumors are manufactured out of thin air. We (attempt to) report discussions and agreements and news.

 

Nice. Am going to do that...like yesterday!

 

It doesn't say it's a research paper. It says "report." I read that differently. I could be wrong.

 

Not a bad way to supplement your income. Ever seen what a well-written term paper goes for at some of those universities? Those lazy rich kids can pay well.

 

Smasher,

Very true. The difference in what you are saying there, to me, is that you have legitimate, reputable sources you can cite.

I don't know the policy of your organization, but a lot of editors I have worked for are very strongly against the use of unnamed sources. I would always have to clear it in advance and often the whole thing got nixed by management because it went against company policy.

So I'd either have to use a name, or not run it all. That sort of made it tough in some instances.

 

If you can't use unnamed sources, you basically can't do your job.