It’s typical when a publication like a magazine or newspaper prints something and its facts were wrong, they issue a retraction and “regret the error.” This does not seem to be true for certain sports columnists, however.
A week ago, a “certain sports columnist” that works for The Oregonian newspaper penned a column saying the Trail Blazers were not going to keep Brandon Roy but give him up using the new “amnesty clause” being offered by the soon-to-be-signed collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between NBA owners and players. Not only was this reported to occur, Blazers’ management and owner Paul Allen were extensively disparaged for this action. How could they do this to the face of the organization, a three-time all star, and the guy who helped clean up the nest soiled by the infamous “Jail Blazers”? Are Allen and his misinformed Vulcan cohorts in Seattle taking over management and making bad decisions in absentia again?
Well, whaddaya know. It wasn’t true after all; in fact, a headline in Tuesday’s December 6 Oregonian read joyfully, “Blazers not dropping Roy.” In the article, Team President Larry Miller was quoted as saying, “We feel he has been there for us, and we want him to know we are supporting him. Paul (Allen) is on board with this and feels the same way.”
It was hard to blame Miller and Coach Nate McMillan for seizing the opportunity in an afternoon press conference and scolding the media (i.e., a “certain sports columnist”) in the article for being premature in their zeal to break a big local story.
First Miller said, “It would be crazy for us to make a decision on Brandon Roy before we had talked to him.” Then, McMillan added, “There were a lot of media playing owner and general manager, but there was never a decision to amnesty Brandon.”
You know what? I believe them because the timeline was all wrong to rush to judgment with Brandon. The Blazers needed time after the lockout to re-assess everything and everyone, not just Brandon.
Clearly, this “certain sports columnist’s” source was wrong, and the columnist must realize this when relying on this source in the future. I’m sure it’s normal for the columnist to cross-check the leak with other sources unless this source has been reliable in the past. A conversation between the two after the fact may have gone something like this:
“Man, you blew it with that BS story about Brandon, and I’m the one who got busted for it. Made me look like a fool, too. It’ll be a cold day in hell when I call on you again.”
“You were the one who grabbed it and ran. I didn’t tell you to go public with it. That was your decision.”
Yes, the “certain sports columnist” felt he was sitting on a gold mine, and he wanted to be the first to break the story. Perhaps he felt he had a reputation to uphold – the guy first with the truth!
Turns out he didn’t know the truth. And based on that un-truth, he said some bad things about people he should now take back and apologize for. He doesn’t have to headline a story with it, but at the end of a future column it wouldn’t hurt to say I was misinformed, and I’m sorry. If straight reporting demands such a standard, I say it should with sports columnists, too.
Add The Sports Daily to your Google News Feed!
