What Lee Jenkins' LeBron scoop says about our industry

You think he admits that because he's using phrases you think you understand but actually don't.

 

When you interview someone, buff their quotes, and send what you've written to them for final approval as their first person, we as current and former journalists should be honest.

It's a highly unorthodox way to break huge news. It's common in more reflective pieces and, obviously, it's a go-to in autobiographies.

As breaking news with a third party involved? Rare. Worthy of scrutiny.

Why: Because of a comment in that Deadspin story:

<i>"The day before the meeting, on Saturday, July 5, Sports Illustrated senior writer Lee Jenkins had emailed his boss, managing editor Chris Stone. "Remember that thing I sent you in the spring?" Jenkins wrote him, according to Stone. "I think it's a possibility."

That "thing" was Jenkins's nebulous pitch, made around the end of the regular season, on how to tell the story of James's pending free-agency decision. <b>Jenkins, Stone says, didn't necessarily want to break the news of James's choice, but "wanted to tell the story in a new, better way than it was told in 2010."</b></i>

and

<i>If that news had gotten reported elsewhere first? Stone says SI didn't have a plan B. The essay was everything. "We made a commitment to telling the larger story," Stone says. "We're just not going to out-Woj Woj"—referring to Yahoo's Adrian Wojnarowski—"or be able to take on the entire ESPN armada. As good as Lee is, we invested all our energy in the story that posted today. The fact that we got the double of the newsbreak as well was like hitting the lottery."</i>

In other words, getting the scoop was apparently immaterial.

Being artful -- telling the story in a "new way" -- was paramount.

And when huge breaking news becomes "presentation paramount" rather than "fact paramount" I find it hard to believe a current or former journalist could day "you, reader or critic, <i>can't</i> can't lift an eyebrow to that."

I wonder why some editor didn't just say: Lee, play it straight.

 

"LeBron, on which streets did you cry? Is that also where you bled?"

 

You've brought this up twice -- that YF's questioning of this piece is in some tied to some vague notion that LeBron James isn't articulate enough to have said all of this.

I'll take it one question further: If LeBron was articulate enough to have said it -- and I believe he is -- why didn't SI just let him write it?

 

I'm pretty sure I know what, "my biggest priority was his voice," means.

When Tom Verducci and Joe Torre partner on a book, should I believe every word in it is from Torre's mouth, and Verducci just "sewed" them together?

If I'm not supposed to believe that, why should I believe every word in this essay is from LeBron's mouth -- especially when Jenkins does not claim that?

I'm also not sure why saying that somehow implies that James is not smart, or is a meat head. Between he and Jenkins, he is not the better writer of the two. That's why Jenkins was brought in; to write a better essay than James could have written on his own.

 

I wouldn't play down the resources of other media outlets to be...creative...in trying to reach LeBron.

That said, Jenkins will have the best story and the best info. It's clear he pitched this for awhile. <i>Hey, when it comes time for you to decide, I think we could do it like this.</i> He'd done all the necessary foundation-laying to make it happen. It's impressive, tactically-speaking. Jenkins is a skilled writer -- part of a strong roster of young talent there -- and clearly a strong tactician. Trust, so I've heard, is hard to build with NBA players, he's done it, and he's written several profiles I liked.

I just wish this story had just been played straight.

But this stuff is also how big-boy, celebrity journalism is played.

 

Actually you don't have a clue. And this is great fun to me, watching you show your ass trying to play the know it all. As I said before, enjoy thinking you've won. I'm good here.

 

If the essay had been presented as being by LeBron James & Lee Jenkins, or LeBron James with Lee Jenkins, what I'm saying would not be questioned. Everyone would assume Jenkins helped with the actual writing.

But, SI presented this as being by LeBron James, as told to Lee Jenkins.

Because of that -- the way they titled/promoted the piece -- we are going to assume that every word came out of LeBron's mouth?

Really?

 

What part of "I literally have zero incentive to explain any of the nuances here to you" is all that difficult to grasp?

 

You don't have to take on the responsibility of responding to every post of mine.

I understand your position.

My posts are not meant exclusively for or to you.

But, if I'm the only one on the board who thinks Jenkins wrote parts of the essay in James' voice, as opposed to having sewn together a serious of quotes, I would find that surprising.

 

I absolutely assume much of the essay was reworked to capture sentiments in a more nuanced and intelligent matter. That's why Lee Jenkins was brought in.

And there's no issue with that. "As told to" is transparent enough. Sports writers co-author and ghostwrite autobiographies all the time.

 

My argument would simply be "it doesn't matter either way in this specific instance."