9:46AM
RealClearSports: ESPN Rarely Exercises Caution, Why Now?
By Art Spander
So the world leader in avoiding stories it alone determines not to be true has had a change of opinion. Covering the civil case involving Ben Roethlisberger is, according to the announcement by ESPN, "the right thing to do.''
After, in tactics that would have impressed the old Soviet Union bosses, ESPN attempted to avoid all mention of the situation.
Which might have worked if the issue hadn't been covered in every daily television sports roundup and radio talk show.
The issue here is responsibility. It's one thing when a coach says his quarterback forgot the play. That's sports. It's something else when an individual is accused of rape. As was Kobe Bryant six years ago. As was Ben Roethlisberger a few days ago. That's life. Dirty, nasty, how-did-it-happen life.
There are two sides every time a well-paid athlete is accused of bedding a young woman who later claims it was against her will.
She knew exactly what she was doing, and now months later is attempting to hit the guy in the wallet big time, taking advantage of a reputation or a bankbook.
Or the jock, raised on entitlement, figured as in everything else from the time he was about age 15 the rules of society didn't apply to him and because he was rich and famous would never be prosecuted.
That another non-sports sports story involving ESPN, or at least announcer Erin Andrews, illegally photographed in her hotel room, was crashing some of the front pages at the same moments could only be described as fateful. One tale had nothing to do with the other, but they became linked.
July is a quiet month for sports journalism, meaning a bad month for sports journalism. Baseball is grinding away, relatively unchanged from the way it had been in May and June. NFL camps are yet to begin. The British Open, as compelling as the most recent might have been, is merely a blip on any screen.
So the smallest of incidents are overplayed, not to imply that what happened to Andrews was in any way minor -- it was disgraceful. And surely when a man who has won two Super Bowls, including the most recent, is involved, we're going to pay attention.
ESPN did just that. What it didn't do, until Wednesday, was treat the story the way it normally does when a sporting celebrity, say its special favorite, Terrell Owens, is involved. ESPN brings out the big artillery and big names, lawyers, former coaches, and studio analysts to attack our senses. There's nothing wrong with that. It's just around midnight, there's nothing left.
Conversely, with Roethlisberger, there was plenty left. ESPN, when the civil suit alleging sexual assault against Roethlisberger was filed in a Nevada court, issued a memo to all its outlets and reporters, "do not report.''
One feels sorry for Roethlisberger if the suit by one Andrea McNulty, claiming a year ago he lured her to his room at the Harrah's hotel at Lake Tahoe during the annual celeb golf tournament, is only an attempt at gold-digging.
One feels sorry for McNulty, a penthouse concierge, if her story that Roethlisberger demanded she fix a broken TV in his room and then attacked her is true.
One feels no less sorry for ESPN which, if it backed away from its responsibility as a news outlet only to protect its acknowledged relationship with Roethlisberger, lost more than a minimum of credibility.
It was July 2003 when Kobe Bryant was accused of persuading a concierge at hotel outside Vail, Colo., to come to his room. Now it is July 2009 when Ben Roethlisberger is accused of persuading a concierge at Nevada hotel to come to his room.
ESPN was all over the Kobe story, sending reporters and attorneys from Los Angeles and Washington as the trial unfolded. Maybe Roethlisberger never comes to trial. Maybe he doesn't deserve to come to trial -- although then again, possibly he does. But why the shift in ESPN's approach?
"Based on the sensitive nature of the story and other factors we mentioned,'' ESPN's Bill Hoffheimer told Pro Football Talk, "we initially exercised caution and did not report it.''
That philosophy is admirable, except it runs counter to the very existence of ESPN which, while most of the time does a fine job, rarely can be described as exercising caution.
The network delights in letting us know everything its workers accomplish, even when little more than "confirming'' a story that first appeared somewhere else, such as Fox Network or Associated Press.
You wish it would confirm why it treated the Ben Roethlisberger story in a most unusual manner, like not treating it at all.
So the world leader in avoiding stories it alone determines not to be true has had a change of opinion. Covering the civil case involving Ben Roethlisberger is, according to the announcement by ESPN, "the right thing to do.''
After, in tactics that would have impressed the old Soviet Union bosses, ESPN attempted to avoid all mention of the situation.
Which might have worked if the issue hadn't been covered in every daily television sports roundup and radio talk show.
The issue here is responsibility. It's one thing when a coach says his quarterback forgot the play. That's sports. It's something else when an individual is accused of rape. As was Kobe Bryant six years ago. As was Ben Roethlisberger a few days ago. That's life. Dirty, nasty, how-did-it-happen life.
There are two sides every time a well-paid athlete is accused of bedding a young woman who later claims it was against her will.
She knew exactly what she was doing, and now months later is attempting to hit the guy in the wallet big time, taking advantage of a reputation or a bankbook.
Or the jock, raised on entitlement, figured as in everything else from the time he was about age 15 the rules of society didn't apply to him and because he was rich and famous would never be prosecuted.
That another non-sports sports story involving ESPN, or at least announcer Erin Andrews, illegally photographed in her hotel room, was crashing some of the front pages at the same moments could only be described as fateful. One tale had nothing to do with the other, but they became linked.
July is a quiet month for sports journalism, meaning a bad month for sports journalism. Baseball is grinding away, relatively unchanged from the way it had been in May and June. NFL camps are yet to begin. The British Open, as compelling as the most recent might have been, is merely a blip on any screen.
So the smallest of incidents are overplayed, not to imply that what happened to Andrews was in any way minor -- it was disgraceful. And surely when a man who has won two Super Bowls, including the most recent, is involved, we're going to pay attention.
ESPN did just that. What it didn't do, until Wednesday, was treat the story the way it normally does when a sporting celebrity, say its special favorite, Terrell Owens, is involved. ESPN brings out the big artillery and big names, lawyers, former coaches, and studio analysts to attack our senses. There's nothing wrong with that. It's just around midnight, there's nothing left.
Conversely, with Roethlisberger, there was plenty left. ESPN, when the civil suit alleging sexual assault against Roethlisberger was filed in a Nevada court, issued a memo to all its outlets and reporters, "do not report.''
One feels sorry for Roethlisberger if the suit by one Andrea McNulty, claiming a year ago he lured her to his room at the Harrah's hotel at Lake Tahoe during the annual celeb golf tournament, is only an attempt at gold-digging.
One feels sorry for McNulty, a penthouse concierge, if her story that Roethlisberger demanded she fix a broken TV in his room and then attacked her is true.
One feels no less sorry for ESPN which, if it backed away from its responsibility as a news outlet only to protect its acknowledged relationship with Roethlisberger, lost more than a minimum of credibility.
It was July 2003 when Kobe Bryant was accused of persuading a concierge at hotel outside Vail, Colo., to come to his room. Now it is July 2009 when Ben Roethlisberger is accused of persuading a concierge at Nevada hotel to come to his room.
ESPN was all over the Kobe story, sending reporters and attorneys from Los Angeles and Washington as the trial unfolded. Maybe Roethlisberger never comes to trial. Maybe he doesn't deserve to come to trial -- although then again, possibly he does. But why the shift in ESPN's approach?
"Based on the sensitive nature of the story and other factors we mentioned,'' ESPN's Bill Hoffheimer told Pro Football Talk, "we initially exercised caution and did not report it.''
That philosophy is admirable, except it runs counter to the very existence of ESPN which, while most of the time does a fine job, rarely can be described as exercising caution.
The network delights in letting us know everything its workers accomplish, even when little more than "confirming'' a story that first appeared somewhere else, such as Fox Network or Associated Press.
You wish it would confirm why it treated the Ben Roethlisberger story in a most unusual manner, like not treating it at all.
As a reporter since 1960, Art Spander is a living treasure of sports history. A recipient of the Dick McCann Memorial Award -- given for his long and distinguished career covering professional football -- he has earned himself a spot in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. And he has recently been honored with the Lifetime Achievement Award by the PGA of America for 2009.
- - - - - -
http://www1.realclearsports.com/articles/2009/07/23/espn_rarely_exercises_caution_why_now.html
© RealClearSports 2009
- - - - - -
http://www1.realclearsports.com/articles/2009/07/23/espn_rarely_exercises_caution_why_now.html
© RealClearSports 2009
Categories: 
articles, football, sports and society
articles, football, sports and society
Reader Comments (6)
Glad somebody had the cojones to tell it like it is on this story. good for art spander, who has some perspective, a quality lacking in the so-called journalism practiced toady. maybe roethlisberger is innocent, maybe he is not. Either way, the charges have been filed and are a matter of public record. so why has no one else taken espn to task for sitting on this?
well said Arthur. Athletic "competition" isn't what it used to be, and neither is "journalism." Essentially, both seem happy to negotiate their integrity for a buck; good old soul selling. But not all, thank goodness Art.
It’s hard to find knowledgeable people on this topic, but you sound like you know what you’re talking about! Thanks
I think this is one of the most important info for me. And i am glad reading your article. But wanna remark on few general things, The web site style is ideal, the articles is really great : D. Good job, cheers
Great Bloggers...
[...]always a big fan of linking to blog writers that I love but don’t get a lot of attention from[...]…...
Hey just wanted to point out something. The text of your article seem to be running off the screen in Chrome. I’m not sure if this is something to do with internet browser compatibility but I thought I’d post to let you know. Hope you get it fixed soon.