Cowards With Keyboards

It's tempting to write about Kobe Bryant this week. Another .500 season, another first round exit, the plea for aid now that he finally realizes he can't win on his own, but that's to easy. Besides, the fun will be later this summer when the Lakers try to foist Luke Walton and Kwame Brown off to the Timberwolves or the Pacers and get soundly rejected.

Instead, this week I 'll be writing about, well, writers. Specifically sports writers. They are an interesting breed, their livelihood wholly dependent on a team or teams that over half the time they are criticizing. If fact sports media spends most of its time being negative. It gets ratings on TV and radio and sells copy for print media. Nothing sells like controversy, and earlier this week Toronto Sun columnist Steve Simmons generated enough for a whole summer.

Simmons wrote an article for the Tuesday edition claiming that Toronto Maple Leafs Captain Mats Sundin may require major hip surgery that would effectively end his career. The article was predicated on information Simmons claims to have received from two people within the medical community who are "in the know", whatever the hell that means. He never spoke to Sundin, his agent, Leafs General Manager John Ferguson or apparently anyone else within the team that he will admit to.

Following the publication, GM John Ferguson strongly denied that Sundin required the surgery Simmons alluded to while Sundins agent J.P. Barry also denied that Sundin would be going under the knife for any major operation. In an interview on Hockey Central at Noon on Sportsnet, Barry admitted that Sundin would be seeing a specialist, but the only surgery would be elective and minor. Not good enough for Simmons it seems.

Two days later Simmons had another article on the subject, but this time he made it personal. Instead of backing up his allegations, Simmons instead called both Ferguson and Barry liars. Claiming to know more than a players agent and the General Manager of a professional sports team concerning the health of its top star, Simmons took aim and opened fire on both men. Ferguson made it clear that any reports on surgery were premature, something Simmons sees as being akin to admitting that Sundin will be on the table this summer. Interestingly enough, Ferguson wasn't even in the country at the time of the second article, he is currently in Russia doing some pro and amateur scouting during the IIHF World Championship. Way to show your brass there Stevie boy.

During the interview on Sportsnet, Barry details how he spoke to Sundin(currently vacationing in Europe) about the article and the surgery allegations and how upset Mats was regarding it. Simmons also calls this into question. Simmons claims that two of Sundins closest friends could not reach the star by phone while Barry claims to have spoken to him, he calls a highly respected agent and former member of the NHLPA Associate Counsel a liar, yet Simmons never mentions who these two friends are, or when these calls took place. Nothing personal Steve, but Micheal Moore thinks your fact checking may be suspect.

Of course, Steve claims that there is a story here and that the leak itself is proof. Oh really? Is this the same kind of irrefutable insider information that lead Simmons and the entire Toronto media to believe Bryan McCabe was leaving the team for the New York Islanders last summer(he re-signed with the team, explaining the delay in progress was due to his wife being gravely ill following the birth of the couples first child earlier that year).

Thing is, this sort of nonsense is commonplace, especially amongst reporters who almost never have to meet the targets of their keystrokes face to face. Am I calling Simmons a liar, or accusing him of making the whole thing up? No, but it is painfully obvious he is over-blowing the story like so many other writers before him.

In the spring of 2004 not one single Chowder head in Boston could have imagined what their beloved Red Sox were going to accomplish that year, especially after reports surfaced early in the year that star player Manny Ramirez was demanding a trade, fireballer Pedro Martinez was fueding with everyone in sight and Manager Terry Francona had lost the locker room even before the season had started. Thing was, none of it was true.

During an interview on the Jim Rome show, Curt Schilling, Bostons major off-season acquisition, was asked about the stories flying around regarding the Sox. Point blank Rome asked if Curt felt that the media ever just made things up. Jim hadn't even finished asking when Curt jumped in with an emphatic "Yes! Absolutely!" He went on to deny that any of the stories were true. That fall the Red Sox won their first World Series since 1918 in one of the most impressive team efforts ever seen in baseball. Martinez would leave the team, but over money, nothing more.

How many times have you seen a headline in a New York sports section with some sort of controversy surrounding the Yankees? As early as last weekend "insiders" were telling the media that if the Red Sox swept the Yankees at home that weekend, Manager Joe Torre would be fired. Only a few years ago stories popped up claiming Alex Rodriguez frequented swingers clubs. There was nothing to the stories, and no evidence to back them up, but they were printed anyway.

Worst part of this problem is that the reporters themselves rarely, if ever get called into question, and they damn well know it. They should be ashamed of the disservice they are doing to their profession, but I've never seen one of these guys ever apologize or admit to wild speculation. It almost seems like they take their own word as gospel, a crime against journalism in my small opinion.

Look, I understand that media is a cut throat business but that does not excuse a person from creating a story when one does not exist. The worst part is they make it so easy. A journalists sources do not give out information for free you know, they are expecting compensation, namely money or other considerations. So what if they feed a guy five bogus stories, if he gives the journalist one legit scoop the reporter will keep coming back for fear of losing another major story. Reporters are both victim and villain in these cases, making wild accusations based on uncorroborated information. The really sad part of this is it sells, a lot.


By the way, if anyone is going to try and point out any irony in this article, jut remember I never claim to be a journalist, just an idiot with a blog.