NYT Acknowledges Furor, Immediately Makes it Worse

This sidebar report lifted from the DMN's Texas blog is being published today in the sports section of the New York Times. It essentially says that Mack Brown denies any recruiting improprieties in the wake of losing JMac to OU. Um, ok. Unbelievably, there is absolutely no mention of the Thayer Evans article that engendered the need for this article. So here's the logic within this sidebar report: "Texas did not get a recruit and as a result, Mack Brown says his program's recruiting practices are clean." That makes no internal sense. No one reading this article without knowledge of the previous Evans article would have any conceivable idea of why Mack Brown was defending the legality of his practices when Texas lost the recruit.

The NYT just decided that they didn't want to be a part of the story so they left out the part where their reporting (which was done without ever calling for corroboration of any of the interested parties) is what's being debated here, not Texas' recruiting practices. Well....tough s--- guys, you made yourselves part of the story by shoddily reporting it in the first place. The accusations made in the article that ran in THIS VERY PAPER make up the entire damn story! How can you not mention that? How can you not mention that fact when the NYT article is the entire focus of the DMN post that you're quoting? This is the same crap that Evans did in the original article that made it awful journalism to begin with!

If this is you attempting to give the "other side of the story," you're doing it wrong. The other side of the story isn't that Texas runs a pretty damn clean program (that's well documented, unlike a few programs I can think of) but rather that Thayer Evans and the NYT sports editor were allowed to print this garbage to begin with.

6 months ago billyzane Comment 39 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Stoopid is as stoopid does.

NYT takes obliviousness to new levels, and I didn’t think that was possible.

They’ll be talking in third person tomorrow.

by whills on Dec 30, 2008 1:29 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

And I'm not even a NYT-hater.

I love the NYT. Been reading it every day for 10 years. But that sports section is just awful. I called for its demise on this very website going on 2 years ago: http://www.burntorangenation.com/2007/3/17/101619/301#5091441 And instead of killing the sports section, they killed Play magazine instead. Smart move, imbeciles.

They do seem to have a problem dealing with criticism though. It’s as though they think they’re the voice of god like they once were, but they’re just not anymore. There’s too much information out there for people to just accept whatever any newspaper prints as fact. Besides, the job of “voice of god” in journalism is already occupied by The Economist.

by billyzane on Dec 30, 2008 1:46 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

When the sports section is a "component" of the business section...

…It can’t be that good.

I had a subscription for a few years and it truly provided me with a huge graduation in the form of content and vocabulary from the rag I was reading in Knoxville. However, it’s the last place I’d go to for qualitative sports reporting.

" Washington focuses its bailouts on people who take showers before going to work rather than on those people who need a shower after they work. "

by LOUtheMETandNATSfan on Dec 30, 2008 1:59 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Signs of their inferiority are popping out everywhere.

From political sites, I was there through a lot of the Blair and Judy Miller saga and their reluctance to come clean on so many of their errors became a joke unto itself. And you’re right about the Economist. Respect.

I used to get a printed copy for Science Tuesdays but now I can find that all over the net just as easily.

by whills on Dec 30, 2008 2:01 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

shhhhh!!!!

Keep that

… "I can find that all over the net just as easily… "

stuff to yourself. I love my hardcopy man!

" Washington focuses its bailouts on people who take showers before going to work rather than on those people who need a shower after they work. "

by LOUtheMETandNATSfan on Dec 30, 2008 2:05 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Sometimes I do, too. I loved the agate on a good sports page.

You can’t get the ink on your fingers on the net. The toobs are too clean.

by whills on Dec 30, 2008 2:06 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

ohhhh, haven't you heard

there are scientist that are trying to manipulate the very essence of the screens people are touching. apparently, the human condition was meant to take advantage of sensory perception. today’s monitors, keyboards and other peripherals are too cold (to the touch) and scientist believe that humans should have more of a sensory connection to these devices.

…I $hit you not.

" Washington focuses its bailouts on people who take showers before going to work rather than on those people who need a shower after they work. "

by LOUtheMETandNATSfan on Dec 30, 2008 2:09 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Just because our whole nervous system and consciousness is plugged in

doesn’t mean they’re cold to the touch.

Obviously those guys are not McLuhanesque; they don’t know their extensions and have obviously amputated their rationality. Make good editors at the NYT, though.

by whills on Dec 30, 2008 2:19 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

+1

" Washington focuses its bailouts on people who take showers before going to work rather than on those people who need a shower after they work. "

by LOUtheMETandNATSfan on Dec 30, 2008 2:34 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The Economist goofed on this one though.

See #5.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4569&page=0

Still a good read though.

" Washington focuses its bailouts on people who take showers before going to work rather than on those people who need a shower after they work. "

by LOUtheMETandNATSfan on Dec 30, 2008 2:04 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

LOL. Those are good. Add in Bubbles Greenspan's little flaw

and we have some of the great fuck-ups for our time. No one said the NYT was alone, and obviously the Economist suffers the flaws of human mistakes just to keep it humble. snarfle

by whills on Dec 30, 2008 2:26 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

the most overused and bandied about word in the english dictionary to date is...

…“Expert”

and / or

…“Condemn”

" Washington focuses its bailouts on people who take showers before going to work rather than on those people who need a shower after they work. "

by LOUtheMETandNATSfan on Dec 30, 2008 2:42 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The Economist

Is straight money. Pun intended.

Perhaps the most recognizable mascot in sports, and certainly the toughest looking, Bevo is a fixture

by run Bevo run on Dec 30, 2008 9:09 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

having seen their ‘correspondents’ in action on the ground i can well and fully assure you… the economist plays fast and loose as much as the next guy.

by kleph on Dec 30, 2008 4:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

..."Fast and Loose"...

Sounds like some ladies I saw in the Philippines back in ’92

" Washington focuses its bailouts on people who take showers before going to work rather than on those people who need a shower after they work. "

by LOUtheMETandNATSfan on Dec 30, 2008 5:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

With all of the sincerity that I can muster...

…If there’s one viable reason for the invention of the blog, THIS IS IT! To counter “official” journalism. My suggestion to PB@BON & awiggo is to organize every member of this blog who has a beef with the NYT & Thayer Evans and completely swamp them with emails, phone calls, text messages (if applicable) and yes, hand written letters.

This is the perfect opportunity for the blogging industry as a whole to truly gain some credit. Numerous reporters (mostly the aged) give no credence to blogs because so many of them are poorly written, non-factual, profanity laced tirades.

I see this as an opportunity to set the record straight.

Against the NYT? You couldn’t ask for a better adversary. …Or victim. ;-)

Good luck.

" Washington focuses its bailouts on people who take showers before going to work rather than on those people who need a shower after they work. "

by LOUtheMETandNATSfan on Dec 30, 2008 1:40 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

It may not be completely evident yet

but I think BON is shaping the narrative in many ways.

But you are correct about one manner of attack.

Getting to the Sun-Times today was a lot of fun.

by whills on Dec 30, 2008 2:05 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

do tell

" Washington focuses its bailouts on people who take showers before going to work rather than on those people who need a shower after they work. "

by LOUtheMETandNATSfan on Dec 30, 2008 2:06 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The Sun-Times thing was referenced in PB's Last Word on Thayer post.

He’s the Sun-Times blog.

The first is about asserting, pushing and herding the narrative in the right places.

Freeping the NYT would just be a new direction for them, but I don’t know if the sports unit has been hit like the political side has.

by whills on Dec 30, 2008 2:16 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

ah

" Washington focuses its bailouts on people who take showers before going to work rather than on those people who need a shower after they work. "

by LOUtheMETandNATSfan on Dec 30, 2008 2:35 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Unfortunately

This Kevin Allen character is still trying his best to support the article, and his replies to the comments are just laughable. He’s pretty much trying to accuse Texas fans of merely being angry because it doesn’t paint the school in a positive light, altogether failing to address real questions on who was (and wasn’t) interviewed and the obvious credibility hit the WHOLE article took after J-Mac sheepishly admitted that it was a spiced up English paper.

He even says this even after people from other schools, like Notre Dame, similarly call it an awful piece of journalism. Amazing.

He’s just a guy trying to cover his own tracks as well, and then he exposed his own agenda by calling the recruiting process “despicable” anyway. Ah, so I see that he WANTS stories that show the shady side of recruiting, huh? Makes sense.

At the least, it clearly caused him a great deal of embarrassment so that he’s scrambling to cover his rear end.

by TheElusiveShadow on Dec 30, 2008 1:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Lauren's Comment

“This is not a game. That article is mockery of the journalism profession – YOUR profession. And every time it gets linked or praised or talked about by journalists like you, it puts another dent in the image of the profession. Congratulations.”

Kevin’s response:
“This is not a game, Lauren? Are you serious? Last I checked football is, in fact, still a game. That everyone is so disproportionately passionate and fired up about said game in a time of war — well that’s a dent on the image of college football fans.”

Nothing quite like fighting hyperbole with more hyperbole

by 40AS on Dec 30, 2008 5:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Sorry, what does this achieve?

I can see the headline now, in the AAS or the DMN – “Texas sports blog blows the cover off of NYT’s terrible sports coverage”. Truly a compelling story which will move plenty of copies.

If BON should counter official journalism, then BON should be doing the work to uncover the real story – interview Outlaw, other Lufkin players, Brown, LSU and USC media reps, and even try to get to Jamarkus and his mother.

Now whether or not those last two are possible given some of the more vitriolic treatment they’ve received here from both editors and commenters remains to be seen.

But carpet bombing Evans and the NYT staff just makes us look scorned and isn’t likely to make anyone go at the paper go back and take a closer look. That opportunity is wide open, and I hope by whills’ post we can assume that it is well under way.

by TXinDC on Dec 30, 2008 2:31 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Interesting take

However, I don’t think it’s in the purview of BON to do beat reporting. I’m assuming that bloggers here and elsewhere @ SB Nation use the internet as their sole investigative instrument. If bloggers remain objective and use a multitude of credible sources, be it electronic or print media, I don’t see how that’s much different than doing an investigation out on the street.

The premise of my earlier post was to demonstrate the power that blogs and bloggers have versus antiquated / mainstream journalism that may be flimsy.

" Washington focuses its bailouts on people who take showers before going to work rather than on those people who need a shower after they work. "

by LOUtheMETandNATSfan on Dec 30, 2008 2:40 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Also, PB, just noticed the new BON tag line. Sweet.

by billyzane on Dec 30, 2008 1:57 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Ohhhh, me too. And sorta close to the old one. hahahah nt

by whills on Dec 30, 2008 2:03 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

If nothing else

We’re funnier than everyone else.

Perhaps the most recognizable mascot in sports, and certainly the toughest looking, Bevo is a fixture

by run Bevo run on Dec 30, 2008 9:24 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

We live in a target rich environment.

And obviously we use everything.

by whills on Dec 30, 2008 10:28 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

"Target rich environment"

Perhaps the most recognizable mascot in sports, and certainly the toughest looking, Bevo is a fixture

by run Bevo run on Dec 30, 2008 11:27 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

+.9

" Washington focuses its bailouts on people who take showers before going to work rather than on those people who need a shower after they work. "

by LOUtheMETandNATSfan on Dec 30, 2008 2:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

hahah- classic

by longhornricky on Dec 30, 2008 2:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Given the generic byline...

Nothing here makes me think that Evans didn’t write that little sidebar himself, anyway. Given the content of his posts, I assume that even if he’s not in charge of covering all of college football he’s at least assigned to the Big 12. I’ll put five on it that he wrote and pushed that article to be published.

by TXinDC on Dec 30, 2008 2:34 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

why...

isnt anyone questioning oklahoma…didnt someone point out that the mother was a big time Texas fan and then in the span of a week she became the biggest sooner fan and bam her lil big baby commits to the bad guys….

by AJ12 on Dec 30, 2008 3:23 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

I smell a conspiracy!

" Washington focuses its bailouts on people who take showers before going to work rather than on those people who need a shower after they work. "

by LOUtheMETandNATSfan on Dec 30, 2008 5:16 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

NYT

One thing they will never admit is their own writer’s part in the story. They much prefer to ‘cover’ a controversy that has seemingly appeared out of nowhere. This approach has dominated their coverage of Iraq, among other things. They print leaked information from unnamed government sources, then after other papers have picked up the story and questions have begun to arise, they step back and recycle the piece as coverage of the controversy, never addressing the issue of the accuracy of the original claims or the motives of the source.

Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. If they get mad, you're a mile away AND you have their shoes.

by Caradoc on Dec 30, 2008 8:59 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Enquiring Minds

BZ, I’ve read the NYT for years. Without question, I’ve been outraged at this situation. However, based on the bias I see in the NYT (and arrogance in the extreme), I believe asking the NYT to comply with fair journalistic standards is akin to asking the National Enquirer to just report the facts.

by HalfmileHorn on Dec 30, 2008 9:31 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

the worst thing about the NYT story...

from a purely journalistic standpoint … they completely buried the lede. In fact, the “writer” seems to have completely missed the big story under his nose.

Put aside the whole bias thing for a minute – if you’re the New York Freakin’ Times, and you see a story about a recruit from little Lufkin, Texas, do you want to make it a human interest story about how he chose a particular football program, or would you like a story about how one of the biggest and most highly-regarded programs in the country is alleged to have committed serious recruiting violations? How a coach who is reputed to be one of the nicest, and cleanest guys around is heading up an “outlaw” program – and this in a battle against one of the (if not THE) historically dirtiest programs around? Just the irony inherent in that would make the story even sweeter.

Instead, you just have the accusation of interest-free loan offers just thrown in, almost as an aside??? Woodward and Bernstein just rolled over in their metaphorical graves!

Either way – whether they just plain missed the big story, or whether there’s nothing really there and they just printed the accusations without even a scintilla of investigation into it – this story is symptomatic of the demise of a once-great medium… or at least a once great organization. Whether it was laziness, incompetence, or just a non-journalistic agenda, this does not reflect well at all on the Times, and at a time when their reputation continues to take hard shots, it can not be doing them any good.

by Pflash on Dec 30, 2008 1:07 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

The answer, obviously, as you suspect

Is that there was no “big” story, so he did the best he could but throwing in unsubstantiated side notes to smear Texas.

by TheElusiveShadow on Dec 30, 2008 1:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

suggestions...

if you are interested in getting the word out about this problematic approach to journalism i suggest contacting the folks at editor and publisher, colombia journalism review and romenesko’s blog on poynter. com. all of these are known for monitoring such incidents in the media and are as respected as they are widely read.

by kleph on Dec 30, 2008 4:30 PM CST reply actions 0 recs