Rivals site screws up?

i think you know what i meant. would this fly on a newspaper website? because i have to say, i would think this type of offense would get some (most?) reporters fired. i don't think there would be any reason for criticism if powercat said "we stand by the story" and left it on the site. we see that all the time, and often times, the story ends up true. that's ok.

but by taking down the story, you've essentially done two things.....

a) admitted the story wasn't solid
b) got weak as others--patterson, ad, agent--got strong

rivals sites play by a different set of rules. there's no accountability whatsoever, and really, if you think about it, there's no real reason to try to break these kinds of stories. rivals sites are "fan sites." fans don't care if your site "breaks news." all they care about is that they have a safe haven, where they can be shielded from the negative coverage elsewhere.

this will ultimately cost the site a few subscribers. but these sites are so cult-like, i wouldn't be surprised if the masses come running to the admins defense and start deflecting blame elsewhere.

 

C'mon. I don't believe it. Who would want to live in Manhattan?

 

Try channel 3.

 

I can't believe people are forgiving this "reporter" by saying it is probably ultimately going to be true. At this point, it's not true. If a newspaper guy did this, he'd be disciplined and so would the editors that allowed it to be put on the web w/out getting comment from Patterson, his agent, Kansas State officials and TCU officials. Since it's on a fan website it's no big deal. None at all.

 

From what I've heard......it's true. From multiple sources, including one deep in the K-State athletic department.

My best guess is it wasn't supposed to be released until after TCU's season ended (because K-State's sure not going bowling...unless it's at a bowling alley) but that little piece of information didn't get relayed thoroughly.

 

Does Rivals get its journalistic advice from the Pittsburgh Tribune?

 

Actually, he didn't. A poster on his message board broke that story for him.

And if it is true, and you have the sources who back it up, then why not keep the story up, stand by every word and take the abuse until it happens?

 

that was sort of the point of the thread. if the guy is so sure that he's right, which, from what i hear, is exactly what he is telling everyone...then why take the story down? and again, from an ethical standpoint, shouldn't all stories that the rivals site publishes from here on out regarding patterson make mention of the original one that was taken down?

this crap wouldn't fly at newspapers. it seems the guy wanted all the glory but couldn't take the inevitable abuse that would come with having to wait two weeks until something actually happened.

my theory: since most rivals sites are "in bed" with the team they cover, i bet he felt pressure from the athletic dept., took heat from paid subscribers, and then let this become a business move rather than a journalistic one.

if true, pathetic.