Do You Believe The Journalist or the Athlete?

KANSAS CITY CHIEFS' WIDE receiver Dwayne Bowe is quoted in ESPN the magazine as saying:

"You hear stories about groupies hanging out in hotel lobbies, but some of my teammates had it set up so there was a girl in every room. The older guys get on MySpace and Facebook a week before we go to a city; when a pretty one writes back, they arrange to fly her in three or four days in advance. They call it importing."

The quote caused a stir - so much that Bowe apologized publicly. But he denied making the statement. He says he was misquoted.

ESPN says they have Bowe on tape but they won't make the tape public.

Should they? Or should the public just trust that the journalists are responsible?

If the Prez Travels, Should the Media Follow?

THE MEDIA USED TO TRAVEL with the president of the United States wherever the president went. To maintain objectivity, they paid for their flights - whether it was on Air Force One or a chartered flight.

Now, in the era of media outlets trimming their expenses, fewer journalists are accompanying the president.

Is that something to worry about? Are we unlikely to see and hear more perspectives, angles and ideas? Is having fewer people to challenge the authority figures a danger to democracy?

Or is cutting back on these trips a wise move? Rather than travel on every little venture, the media companies choose which will be the most important?

Does anyone care what the president says on the airplane?

Should the Business Folks and Journalists Talk?

APPARENTLY, THE BUSINESS-SIDE folks at Variety made a deal with the producers of the film Iron Cross to somehow make the film an award winner. Promotional material was promised and money changed hands.

Then, a few weeks later, a freelance writer for Variety panned the film, essentially sinking it from becoming a nominee for anything (the review has been removed from the website).

The producers sued Variety, though the case was dismissed by a federal court judge who ruled that Variety had the rights of the First Amendment on its side.

Did the writer do a bad thing by panning the film? Did the business-side folks do something wrong by making deals to promote the film? Is this just a lack of communication between the business side and the editorial staff? Is there a greater lesson to be learned here?

Do You Make the Jackass Famous?

A JACKASS RAN ON TO THE field during a Phillies game recently and police tasered the dude.

To discourage other jackasses running onto the field, the media generally ignore the clown when this happens. TV won't show the person. Still photographers don't submit images for publication. Writers don't report the incidents - which are actually crimes.

But the tasered dude is in the news, with his picture and all - apparently, he is one of the first trespassing fans to be subdued by a taser.

NBC10 used video from YouTube (they blurred the jackasses' face in the video but ran a full image online). Fox29 did too. Philly.com ran a slideshow. PhillyBurbs.com published images and video.

What would you do? Would you run images, video and/ or a story about the jackass?

By the way, another dumbass ran on to the field the very next night.

What's Your Information Worth?

SOMEONE CLAIMED TO find a prototype of the new Apple iPhone at a bar in California, and they took the phone to the tech website Gizmodo. After examining the phone and determining its authenticity, Gizmodo purchased the phone from the finder for $5,000.

Is there anything wrong with that?

After photographing and filming the phone, Gizmodo contacted Apple and returned the phone (with no fees involved).

Police raided the home of Gizmodo's editor, investigating whether Gizmodo illegally obtained the phone (i.e. stole it).

Would this have become a problem if Gizmodo had not purchased the iPhone from the person who found it at a bar? Did paying for the information make it seem sketchy?

Should journalists pay for information? And how do you know how much to charge?

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)