Tennessee bans Knoxville reporter

[Pringle]

If a paper's marketing department wants to convey to the fan base that the product covers the team well, run a big photo of a fan holding a sign that says "Go Vols!" Run a big photo of a fan wearing face paint or body paint and holding a sign that says something similar. Run any photo your staffers have taken that illustrates the fervor of the fan base and the passion associated with the program.

That's an extension of your mission. You're running a photo that tells a story. You're running it to promote your coverage, not the team. It accomplishes the same goal, but you're not crossing a line.

Printing "Go Vols" in big letters on the side of a van or on newspaper rack placards is boosterism, plain and simple.

Right. But what I mean is that the marketing department is to be blamed for that kind of stuff - they really don't understand what it means to cover sports, but you can't blame the SE for that. You'd be amazed at the ideas some of these marketing people come up with - if it was up to them, we would all pose every week in promotional photos where we were painted in team colors screaming. Seriously. They typically have no clue that boosterism isn't the way sports operates, and it's tough to convince them that it isn't a tremendous idea.

 

[Johnny Dangerously]

I understood what you're saying. I'm not arguing that.

I think an SE needs to get involved and say the kinds of things I said, the kinds of things you and others here have said. We all agree there is no concept on the marketing side of what we do and how it differs from boosterism. A good SE and ME and maybe even EE should have a meeting and explain it, because in the end, the message being sent to the public comes from The Daily Bugle. Fans don't know "Oh, nice job by the marketing department." If it's on The Daily Bugle's trucks, it comes from the paper.

 

[Pringle]

I understood what you're saying. I'm not arguing that.

I think an SE needs to get involved and say the kinds of things I said, the kinds of things you and others here have said. We all agree there is no concept on the marketing side of what we do and how it differs from boosterism. A good SE and ME and maybe even EE should have a meeting and explain it, because in the end, the message being sent to the public comes from The Daily Bugle. Fans don't know "Oh, nice job by the marketing department." If it's on The Daily Bugle's trucks, it comes from the paper.

I think you're right - at best, the public is getting mixed messages. At worst, they believe that when a reporter services them by working hard to get the real story, he's defying the objectives of his own paper, because that's the message they have been delivered.

 

[Johnny Dangerously]

That's why I say you can tickle the same fan with the notion of comprehensive and even passionate coverage of the team by utilizing your journalistic resources -- a photo from one of your shooters -- instead of just painting a team slogan or cheer on the truck. It's a subtle distinction, but an important one that should be drawn.

 

[outofplace]

As someone who's been around this beat a few years, it should be noted Hooker had been warned before on these matters. And just days before the story appeared, Inky reportedly declined a 15-minute press conference request from the sports info people. Additionally, Inky was supposedly flagged around the area near the football complex, with the phone interview coming later. I didn't have a problem with Hooker's get; as Baron noted, I don't think it was overly informative, but he got the first interview. Kudos to him. I didn't complain. Among those who complained the loudest is the guy from midstate.
But, Inky says he didn't even know the guy was media whenever the phone call took place. It's hard to know who to believe. Maybe the kid's just panicking now.
And the UT SID guys are some of the best I've dealt with anywhere. Period. Especially when I know for a fact they've gone to bat for Hooker to get him interviews with players. There are coaches on the beat who have instructed the SID staff to not allow Hooker any one-on-one interviews, no matter how innocuous. I've seen defensive coaches chide SID staffers when they've spotted Hooker one-on-one with their players.
As for whether or not McElroy backed Hooker, I'm not sure what else everyone expected. A Sunday suicide with no coverage or from-the-bleachers coverage from every writer? Hooker's getting paid in his absence, and he's not the main beat writer. That's Drew Edwards, a heck of a guy who's now being thrown to the wolves just a few weeks into the beat. Hooker covers mainly recruiting and writes a single sidebar out of games. Not a crippling blow here.
Again, Hooker did some admirable reporting to get the story it would seem, but he also knew he was sticking his ass in a sling because of previous warnings. I'd have wanted to know one way or the other if Inky's career is done and if he'll ever gain full use of the arm -- questions I'm sure we'll eventually get to ask -- if I was going to risk suspension. Actually, I'm much more concerned about "independent" media outlets who cash university checks and fly on the team plane, all while passing as "peers" through the week at practice and press conferences in the name of recruiting coverage.

Dude, that is some weak ass shirt.

Hooker "had been warned" (not to do his job)? You're "not sure what everyone else expected from McElroy" (how about standing up for his reporter in some way, shape or form, and then going above some pissant SID at the University level, like demanding an immediate meeting with the school president?) The not-so-subtle shots at a guy who scooped you (which he did, regardless of whether this was Pulitzer-level stuff).

Worst of all, by far, is your on-the-knees support of the Tennessee SID staff. They're acting like unprofessional censors here against someone in your business, sending the message that unless you dance to their tune, you'll be next.

Wake up and realize what side of the journalism business you're on.

I'm not sure I have a problem with everything alwayswrite said, but the truly unforgivable thing here is the editor publicly throwing Hooker under the bus. Even if you disagree with what your writer did, you NEVER do it that way.

 

[Beer_Baron]

Griffith was taken off the football beat prior to the 2005 season for several reasons. He's been doing basketball since then.

 

[Lugnuts]

One thing the News Sentinel and UT would agree on, though, is that we both want the best for Inky Johnson and regret any hassle this has created for him.

So Hack McElroy wants "the best" for a guy who LIED about an "ambush," putting the reputation of McElroy's own reporter at risk.

WTF is all I can say.

I don't blame UT for being assholes. That's what they do. I blame the paper.

Somebody mentioned contacting the UT president and the ASPE. In addition, how about a simple call to the NCAA? Or a simple call to the Scripps lawyers? Those calls might not do any good, but GEEZ! -- At least go through the motions!

 

[Pringle]

Well the FWAA certainly needs to know, though surely they already do. But a formal call to Dennis Dodd won't hurt.

 

[Lugnuts]

One of my favorite things to do is get media lawyers involved.

These media lawyers are either paid hefty sums by the corporations... or they are on hefty retainers... and they do VERY LITTLE WORK. In fact, I've found some of them are bored and like having an issue to deal with.

Maybe it never goes to court... But how nice would it be for the UT president to get a semi-scary legal letter from Scripps?

Okay, so maybe Hooker doesn't get his suspension revoked, but it does make an SIDs office think twice before pulling this bullshirt.

But NO. Hack McElroy is too busy getting fitted for orange knee pads.

 

[Ace]

But NO. Hack McElroy is too busy getting fitted for orange knee pads.

Luggie bringing the smackdown!

 

[buckweaver]

Reading this story just makes you appreciate the SEC schools like Georgia and Auburn where the SIDs actually get it.

Bless you, Claude Felton ... a good man.

 

[HoopsMcCann]

from the editor's blog

Protesting Hooker's suspension
Here's a copy of the letter the News Sentinel sent today to UT athletic director Mike Hamilton protesting the university's suspension of Dave Hooker's credentials:

Dear Mike:

We are deeply disappointed in the action taken against a News Sentinel representative by the university this week, and we strongly protest the suspension of the credentials of our reporter, Dave Hooker.

UT fans and News Sentinel readers were concerned and highly interested in Inky Johnson's recovery from an injury sustained in the Air Force game. Dave Hooker's story was newsworthy and met that reader need. Dave's interview with Inky at the worst was merely a technical infringement of the University of Tennessee's media rules that demand that arrangements for player contacts be made through the UT Sports Information Office. Therefore, we consider UT's subsequent actions to be unfair and discriminatory for the following reasons:

* UT contends that the interview was the result of a campus "ambush" of the player, Inky Johnson. In fact, the interview took place with Johnson's full cooperation and was arranged by an intermediary employed by the UT Athletics Department. This is corroborated by reporter Drew Edwards, who was present at the time of the supposed "ambush," and by Hooker's tape-recording of the interview, which makes clear its circumstances and which has been provided to the university for review. To describe Hooker's behavior in this regard as "underhanded and dishonest" is disingenuous of the university, to say the least.

* Hooker has been singled out for punishment when, in truth, it has been common practice for reporters to interview players without first making arrangements through the Sports Information Office. A recent example is the Aug. 18, 2006, story in the Tennessean by Chris Low in which he quotes player Jim Bob Cooter at length following a court appearance. Low was not in attendance at court, so it is clear he obtained the quotes in some other manner, and we do not believe it was from an interview approved and arranged by the Sports Information Office.

* Moreover, Brent Hubbs, editor and correspondent for two media outlets that attempt to compete with the News Sentinel -- VolQuest.com and the Tennessean -- routinely is afforded special privileges by the athletic department. These privileges have, in the past, included transportation with the team and exceptional access to players and coaches.

In John Painter's letter you state that UT will "refuse to allow anyone to unfairly gain an advantage that breeches the trust necessary for all of us to work together on a daily basis..." Yet, through the examples cited above and by singling out Hooker for punishment and rebuke, we believe that is exactly what you have done.

Dave Hooker was doing what every good reporter was doing, and that is pursuing the story. We stand by Dave 100 percent and will encourage him to use the same good judgment and zeal in pursuing future stories about UT athletics.

Obviously, we are appalled and truly regret that the university has taken this step. We expect in the future a more fair-minded approach.

In addition, we also question whether UT's media policy is relevant today. The goal of limiting media access to players seems to be motivated more by athletic administration control of the news than attempting to protect players. We think the policy should be completely re-evaluated.

Sincerely,

Bruce R. Hartmann Jack McElroy
Publisher Editor