What Lee Jenkins' LeBron scoop says about our industry

It's not like that.

The Cheneys -- or other folks, like some CEO -- might have people who help them write their piece. These would be people that work for them.

They aren't assigned a journalist from the paper/magazine to craft it with/for them, who then send it to them for final approval. You do see the difference, don't you?

 

I had read that he had a "series of interviews/" Whatever. A good reporter can get a lot of information in an hour. Certainly enough to write a few hundred words. And LeBron is a smart guy who knows how to craft his image, so I don't understand why it's so hard to believe he uttered these words. He's been doing these interviews for at least 11 years.

 

So, you were wrong, but I'm clueless.

I thought the hours of interviews were part of why we believed he could have elicited such full, well worded quotes from him, that just needed to be sewed together.

Now it was "about an hour" and we still have no skepticism.

It's preposterous. This isn't how people talk. It's inconceivable that everything in that essay was spoken by LeBron in an hour long interview, and then stitched together.

It reads like an essay, that began as the written word, not the spoken word.

 

No, it's really not inconceivable. At all. MEDIA BAD. Argh!



And I wasn't necessarily wrong. I just didn't have all the information yet.

http://deadspin.com/how-cleveland-and-sports-illustrated-won-the-lebron-jam-1603763328

Thursday night in Las Vegas, James sat with Jenkins for a series of interviews that Jenkins used to write the piece that would bear James's byline.

 

Yeah, so Deadspin got it wrong. I'm shocked.

Don't believe everything you read.

It's hysterical how defensive folks are being. Even Jenkins quote in the Sandomir article isn't as definitive as some are making it out to be.

Here's what he says:

“I was able to get those quotes and present the news to readers,” Jenkins said. “It’s a feat of editing, to put it together in a simple structure that made sense.”

He added, “I felt that, in order to get his voice, it was worth it.”

Which quotes? What question even got this answer?

Jenkins doesn't say that every word is James'. He says he got "his (James') voice". That's true.

But, Jenkins wrote it, and submitted it to James "for his approval, and changes".

And, in the interview I linked to, he does not get into any specifics. He sounded reluctant to get into specifics to me.

 

First, there was no assignment. Jenkins got some information, and told his bosses that he could get the story. There was no editors picking and choosing which writer to do the work. James could have gone elsewhere, or even posted something on his own web site or tweeted about it. Instead, he wanted his story told, using his own words. No analysis or interpretation. Just his words.

Second, even with guest editorials, I'm assuming that a news outlet might have a copy editor or two, or some other editors look the piece over, fixing grammar and other style issues. Does that mean the copy editors are helping the guest writers?

 

Baron, i understand that DD and others are frustrated with my posts. And, that's fine.

But, you are wrong here. This is not akin to a guest editorial. Even if we assume such a submission is edited for spelling, grammar, or length, it's still not the same thing.

 

It is the same thing. A news outlet is allowing a guest to use their forum (newspaper, web site, whatever) to express themselves. In this case, the guest is actually announcing breaking news, unlike some others, who are merely spouting their opinion. And in this case, just like any other one in which a copy editor might fix the guest's grammar, the news outlet's employee is helping the guest make his piece to be more readable.

 

Not so sure Baron. You could argue, as YF has, that editing the LeBron piece's content would be altering quotes. But a guest columnist's words are essentially quotes, as well, and I personally have edited some of those. Hmmmm. I tend to side with you, but I honestly don't know the answer. My impression is that Jenkins just put the quotes in the order that presented the best story, and LeBron looked it over. But only YF knows that they actually changed the content of the quotes during that process. Could have just been fixing typos. Nobody knows, and I have no reason not to trust Jenkins' integrity or journalistic ethics.

 

What happened is Lee laid the groundwork for this PR'esque piece in 2012 with the story he wrote. He was banking on this moment to beat ESPN, and everyone else, knowing the race would be on. That's why he won. He thought this out 2 years ago. Quite brilliant.

 

Yep. Genius!
But in seriousness, anyone being critical of the previous piece on LeBron is being a bit silly. Of course it had a severely positive slant. It was a Sportsman of the Year piece.

 

Apparently "good graces" goes a long way.

http://www.sportsworldnews.com/articles/15694/20140712/espns-role-in-first-decision-helped-si-get-scoop-on-lebron-james-cleveland-return-video.htm

Not saying it was the end-all be-all but it helped a great deal. And the fact he didn't want Circus 2.0.