Within the last week or so, a couple of baseball/sports journalists have had their names associated with articles that have received an exceptionally high level of criticism. T.J. Simers of the Los Angeles Times had penned a piece on Marcus Thames that painted the outfielder in a negative light. What created the stir was not how Thames reacted to Simers and his line of questioning. Not by far. It was the manner in which Simers went about his trade. Call it schtick, style, gimmick, whatever.
Another example involved Murray Chass (and don’t dare call him a blogger) on his personal website and his painting of Stan Musial as a racist. What threw the blogosphere into a firestorm was the source of the article, a mere third-hand recollection from a man in his 80’s. I’m not saying people in their 80’s have no sense of memory by any means. But the fact that this recollection was from a half century earlier. Things get confusing to even the sharpest of memories over time.
And the reactions amongst my blogging brethren was quick and sharp. John Parent of Motor City Bengals authored his take on the Simers/Thames situation. A retort to Chass can be found over on Viva El Birdos.
Among all the reactions these pieces produced, I’m still a bit lost for one reason.
First of all, why the character assassinations on Thames and Musial? Have they done something in the past that would have given these two writers the means to place them in their sights? With Simers, I highly doubt it as Thames is only in his first season as a Dodger. Sure, there’s the chance Thames could have done something “wrong” as an opponent, but if that were the case, don’t we think that would have been aired in some way?
Some take the instance of Chass (as does the Viva El Birdos piece) and chalk it up to just bad journalism. I view it as just going after someone, Marvin Miller as the source or not. And It’s not beyond Chass to do such. Just ask Bobby Valentine (for one). Bad blood? Possibly, but not definitive here either. What gives? We may never know that aspect.
There is one aspect of which I am sure. I’m sure that bloggers will never receive their total due. Many bloggers are still viewed as merely “hacks” that just want their names out on the web. There are many that take this work seriously. One aspect of blogs and bloggers that gets lost among the journalists and writers (and even readers) is that our passion in not unlike theirs. We have a bit of an advantage if you really think about it. We get to offer opinions a little more freely and that’s where the rub comes into play.
Over the past couple of years, the sports blogging world has come under severe scrutiny. I call it the “Jerrod Morris Effect”. Morris and his post regarding Raul Ibanez and his statistics were called into play over an email from a fellow owner in a fantasy league. The result was that Morris was accused of branding Ibanez as a roider. The snowball grew so large, so fast that Morris and the sports blogging world had little time to react to what was about to hit them. Morris was placed on ESPN and lambasted by the main. Morris has survived those spoils and continues to post to this day I’m glad to say.
Think of it this way…
We provide a form of entertainment, but we also provide information and opinion. We can offer our take more on a certain situation. That’s not to say we’ll always meet eye-to-eye. That’s also not to say we don’t do digging around on the subject either. When we offer info and/or opinion, we’re putting our name and reputation on the line as well. When we’re wrong, rest assured we will be called out on that. Every blogger has been called out at least once. Every blogger has had his/her opinion called into question. To be honest, that’s one on the aspects of this sports blogging gig that I have learned to appreciate. Feedback, good or bad, is vital. Yes, we face constant criticism from the masses for our perceived lack of fact-checking, scatter-brained opinions and the name calling by a commenter or two. Idiot is the most common. Others aren’t as flattering.
But think about this for a moment. If any blogger were to make such brash statements, bold characterizations and denote facts that cannot be substantiated properly, that person would receive comments out the arse. That blogger would be vilified as was the situation with Morris. That’s exactly what happened to him.
Should sports bloggers as a collective group then look upon Simers and Chass as villains? As group, most likely not. Each of us, like as in our work, will form their own opinion. I won’t attempt to taint you with mine. You can form your own. But I will say this…
Simers and Chass created their fire due to their views and statements. I’m not calling the character of either into play here. They’ve performed that on their own.