AP: What the F'ing F??

[shotglass]

This shirt bothers me from the wire service we depend on for professional writing.

The right-hander had a 5-3 lead when he came out. Sosa has pitched well in his first season with the Mets after a terrible year last season with Atlanta and St. Louis.

Nothing to back up that he had a terrible year; no stats, nothing. We're just supposed to take their word for it in this straight news story. Very shoddy.

 

[sportschick]

I hate, hate, hate, it when they refer to someone has having pitched XXXX strong innings in capsules without any stats to back it up. Makes me hostile.

 

[Mystery_Meat]

I hate, hate, hate, it when they refer to someone has having pitched XXXX strong innings in capsules without any stats to back it up. Makes me hostile.

To say nothing of their inappropriate use of Roman numerals.

 

[sportschick]

I hate, hate, hate, it when they refer to someone has having pitched XXXX strong innings in capsules without any stats to back it up. Makes me hostile.

To say nothing of their inappropriate use of Roman numerals.

You are a funny, funny man, MM, a funny, funny man.

Also on my dislike list -- the NASCAR heading above the agate for some of the other auto series.

 

[ondeadline]

How about the fact that the slugs on the IndyCar Series still say "IRL" despite the fact that the name of the series has changed? At least AP is getting it right in the actual stories, which obviously is more important.

 

[Your Huckleberry]

What's the problem here? If the lede said Benoit's rampage could not have been caused by steroids and used this to back it up, that would be a problem. But this is not the primary source for the story. Far from it. This story says steroids were found in Benoit's home and authorities are investigating a link between steroids and the incident. It also has quotes about his prior steroid use from his doctor and mentions an investigation about the place that might have supplied him. All this quote does is set up WWE's position on the matter. Now if they find steroids played a part, WWE can be called on the carpet with a direct quote. Plus, there's a decent little nugget in there -- WWE says Benoit tested negative on April 10.

I have no issue with the use of this quote. As a primary source, it would be terrible journalism. That's not the case here.

Thank you da_man. When I read the Benoit story, I thought it was fair as well. I also thought the quote from the WWE lawyer was simply a quote to state WWE's position and that was fair, too. There were numerous other sources and I'm betting the police/investigators did not want to be quoted publicly since their investigation was ongoing. The writer definitely did not use the lawyer as the main source of the story. I sure didn't read it like he did. He pretty much buried it at the end.

I don't think anyone was trying to slant a story in any such way. The writer was somewhat handcuffed by exactly how much information he could get and from what perspectives. The only thing I see here is some people over-reacting and criticizing something that shouldn't be criticized.

I'm glad you saw it, too, becuase I was beginning to question myself until I read your post. So, again, thank you da_man.

 

[Starman]

What's the problem here? If the lede said Benoit's rampage could not have been caused by steroids and used this to back it up, that would be a problem. But this is not the primary source for the story. Far from it. This story says steroids were found in Benoit's home and authorities are investigating a link between steroids and the incident. It also has quotes about his prior steroid use from his doctor and mentions an investigation about the place that might have supplied him. All this quote does is set up WWE's position on the matter. Now if they find steroids played a part, WWE can be called on the carpet with a direct quote. Plus, there's a decent little nugget in there -- WWE says Benoit tested negative on April 10.

I have no issue with the use of this quote. As a primary source, it would be terrible journalism. That's not the case here.

Thank you da_man. When I read the Benoit story, I thought it was fair as well. I also thought the quote from the WWE lawyer was simply a quote to state WWE's position and that was fair, too. There were numerous other sources and I'm betting the police/investigators did not want to be quoted publicly since their investigation was ongoing. The writer definitely did not use the lawyer as the main source of the story. I sure didn't read it like he did. He pretty much buried it at the end.

I don't think anyone was trying to slant a story in any such way. The writer was somewhat handcuffed by exactly how much information he could get and from what perspectives. The only thing I see here is some people over-reacting and criticizing something that shouldn't be criticized.

I'm glad you saw it, too, becuase I was beginning to question myself until I read your post. So, again, thank you da_man.

The lead quote of the story was out of the WWE mouthpiece.

Credibility = zero.

You don't need to "represent all positions" in a news story, especially when one of the "positions" is being disseminated by an organization virtually synonymous with factual fabrication, and also with an obvious motive to preemptively spin the story to absolve itself of any possible responsibility.

 

[Your Huckleberry]

I stand by what I said. Story is fine to me. Nobody is slanting anything here in an effort to put their own perspective into the story. You're just being critical.