He Said, She Said... Or Did They?

It’s so common now, and there’s no turning back the clock.

The issue? Unidentified sources.

This is certainly not a new phenomenon. The notion of a journalist, a reporter of some description, writing a story with compelling information from “sources” is as old as journalism. (Woodward and Bernstein will likely go to their graves without revealing the name of “deep throat”, the individual largely responsible for providing the then soon-to-be-famous investigative reporters the anonymous information that led to the disintegration of the Nixon administration in the mid 1970’s. Theirs may be one of the more prominent historical cases of the media utilizing so-called “unidentified sources” to chase down a story)

That these media “sources” are often undeclared remains through the years a question of some ethical debate. Reporters have, through the years, been willing to risk jail time in order to protect – that is, not publicly identify – their sources.

One view puts the information shared privately between the “source” and the investigating reporter in the realm of a sacred trust, not to be disclosed at any cost.

Others view this approach as a dangerous game.

If a person can report as fact something that may have occurred based on information obtained from anonymous sources, what guarantee is there that such events absolutely took place?

If a reporter quotes an individual speaking about someone else, without naming the first person, how does the public know that the quote was not simply “made up” in the interests of weaving a more ‘sale’-able story?

Might the reporter have an agenda, a personal bias?

These are but a few of the simplest questions that can be asked when discussing the reality of how such sources are utilized.

I recall a time (in the late 1970’s-early 80’s, if I’m not mistaken) when Scott Young, the highly-respected columnist for the Globe& Mail resigned his position at the prestigious Canadian national newspaper. Why? Because a younger fellow writer had written a rather poisonous piece about the then General Manager of the Toronto Maple Leafs, Punch Imlach.

Perspective and fairness requires that it be said that Young and Imlach had been close through the years, and had collaborated on a couple of popular books together. But Young’s resignation stemmed from his concern that the story which vilified Imlach was filled with quotes from unidentified sources – apparently not a longstanding or fully accepted practice at the time, at least not in Young’s mind, it would seem.

Young saw this as journalistically unsound, and lacking the high ethical standards required of a reporter.

So, he resigned in protest.

Much more recently, that same newspaper ran a major story on the alleged dysfunction within the basketball operation side of the Maple Leaf Sports & Entertainment empire.

The story was sprinkled liberally with anonymous quotes about then General Manager Glen Grunwald (since fired) and his supposed internal battles with the apparently soon-to-be-fired Kevin O’Neill.

Not surprisingly, the story – quoting current and former Raptor players without attribution, as well as people supposedly ‘close’ to Raptors forward Vince Carter and others within the management group of MLSE – caused a firestorm. It also undoubtedly hastened the timetable that will see the continued dismantling of the struggling organization.

For appearances’ sake, on the record, at least, the players stood behind their coach. But the public is left to wonder: Who were these anonymous players who spoke out against O’Neill? Who were the management types who allegedly said the things they said? Did anyone have an agenda here?

Were all of these quotes accurate? Was the story really credible when everyone quoted was unnamed? Could any of this have been made up?

Was the newspaper outlet and its reporters simply reflecting what was really going on inside the organization?

In recent years, one of the best – and most outspoken – players in baseball has been pitcher Curt Schilling. Schilling of course was a mainstay with the Phillies and then the Diamondbacks, when Arizona beat the Yankees in the World Series a few seasons back.

Schilling went on a nationally syndicated radio program recently, and spoke about the media attention the Red Sox receive in Boston.

His contention was that the Boston press simply make up quotes to create stories, and sell newspapers.

So we can count Schilling as one athlete who does not support the use of anonymous quotes.

If you are a young athlete, you need to be aware that the media is always looking for a story – good, bad or anywhere in between. Most ‘beat’ reporters covering the local major-league NFL, NHL or NBA team need a story a day.

When they sense trouble in paradise (i.e. within the clubhouse or dressing room, or within the front office) it is in their blood to seek out – some will say create – the story.

They will utilize whatever approach and sources they can to develop a story that is entertaining and potentially of great interest.

It may even be accurate.

My sense has long been: if you don’t want to see it in the newspaper, don’t say it. Don’t say it in the elevator, the hotel lobby or the dressing room. On the record or “off the record”.

Just don’t say it.

If you go “off the record”, if you speak on the condition of anonymity, you may feel ‘protected’. And that particular reporter may like you as a “source”, especially if your comments gave that reporter a supposed ‘scoop’. But at the end of the day, he or she will wonder about your personal integrity, all the while using your quotes to make his or her story.

Since integrity is still important to most people, that’s something worth thinking about before playing the ‘unidentified source’ game.

John Rocker, One Year Later. Where Were Rocker's "People"?

It would be difficult to find a thoughtful individual who was not in some way troubled by the comments attributed to former Atlanta Braves pitcher John Rocker over the winter prior to the 2001 major league baseball season.

At the time, Rocker was a young man, in his mid-20's, an emerging star with the Atlanta Braves, a perennial contender.

Reports indicate a writer from Sports Illustrated approached him over the winter to, more or less, 'spend a day' with the young left-hander.

A couple of weeks later a story appeared in the national sports magazine that quoted Rocker extensively. Sadly, many of Rocker's comments were harsh, hurtful-at best insensitive, to many observers much more than that.

Clearly, Rocker's comments, regardless of whether he was expressing what he really felt, or was 'playing up to the reporter', were disappointing - and hurt - many people.
That what the young athlete evidently said was thoughtless and harmful is not in question.

But the entire scenario raises some questions when it comes to the relationship between athletes and reporters.

The question is not necessarily, "Did Rocker mean what he said?" Or, whether he should have said what he reportedly said. Of course, he was wrong to do so.

The issue is not whether he thought he was 'off the record'. That should not make any difference. If a high profile business leader, entertainer or athlete talks to a reporter, he or she should expect to be quoted-regardless of whether they believe there is some spoken or unspoken agreement that their comments will not be attributed to them.

The question is not even "Was he taken out of context?" His comments were so specific, so thoughtless, that that excuse seems implausible.

The question we must ask is: "Where was Rocker's support system?"

The point is not to absolve Rocker of blame. He has been 'punished' for stating his harmful views publicly. The reactions included extensive negative media reaction, teammates reportedly avoiding him, a suspension, two trades and a recent demotion to the minors that leave his career and future under a cloud.

Again, the question is: "Who helped him prepare for this interview? Where was his agent? The team's public relations advisors? Was no one aware of the plan to have this young athlete spend an entire day with a reporter? If not, why not?"

Who took the time to sit down with a young athlete, perhaps naive regarding the ways of the media, and explain to him the "do's and don'ts" of speaking with the media?

Again, no one should seek to absolve Rocker of responsibility for his comments. We as individuals - including professional athletes - are accountable for our actions.

But it only makes sense that young athletes should have someone to help guide them in the best ways to handle themselves 'off the field'.

Hopefully someone to remind them that, like it or not, they are a role model for many youngsters. They have an image. Their public thoughts do matter, and can cause harm.
Those thoughts, expressed publicly, can harm an individual's future, too.

That someone feels the things that John Rocker evidently felt when he spoke to that reporter is sad. That he uttered them for public consumption leaves an empty feeling as well.

That no one was there in advance to lend a hand reminds us that virtually all young athletes - sometimes even million-dollar athletes - need support sometimes, too, from very early on in their career.

Loose Lips: Off the Record still a slippery slope

For more than a week, there have been widespread media reports that the CFL may well have a new commissioner soon.

If this were to occur, it would appear there would have been a number of reasons for this decision, but our interest in this issue is straightforward.

We work with clients to ensure that they - to the best of their ability - understand the world they must operate within off the playing field (or ice, court, etc.)

In no small measure, that includes a willingness to develop an understanding of how the media operates, and the importance of building positive relationships with those whose business it is to "cover" professional sports.

While some observers long for the days when the relationship between reporters and athletes - or coaches - was generally (though not always) far more laid back, it has been clear for many, many years that things have changed.

Where once upon a time the indiscretions of an athlete may have been known to a reporter - but not reported. That is far less likely to happen now in a world of 24 hour-a-day news and sports channels on both television and radio, not to mention the presence of the Internet.

In the "olden" days, players or coaches may have said something in anger to a reporter, or just to blow off steam, but indicated their comments were "off the record". (Sometimes the words "off the record" did not even have to be mentioned. It was just an assumed part of the sometimes-cozy interdependent relationship between media member and sports personality.) In some quarters it would have been considered untrustworthy to break that informal, unstated "agreement". While sometimes garnering a great story, or an angle no one else had, the reporter may have been seen as having broken a trust with the athlete or coach in question.

In any event, that was then and, of course, this is now.

The still, as of now, current CFL commissioner reportedly made comments to a Toronto Star reporter that brought a quick and evidently angry response from a CFL owner.

Reports since that time in various news outlets indicate the commissioner thought his comments to the reporter were to be "off the record". That is, that they would not be reported publicly.

While such circumstances often lead to a "he said-she said" type of scenario, this much is clear: While candor and being "up front" and not simply mouthing boring clichés to the press can certainly be a positive attribute - and quite refreshing, to be sure - even experienced individuals in the corporate - and sports sector - need always to be aware that anything they say to a reporter is something they should be able to live comfortably with when they pick up the newspaper the next day.