For all of you sneering and nodding along with Will Muschamp’s evaluation of journalism in the context of reporting on his good buddy DJ Durkin’s woes at Maryland, there is this one thing to consider:
There’s a reason why ESPN used a lot of anonymous sources in its story. Those players were afraid of retribution and/or the loss of their scholarships. And yeah, those anonymous sources were good enough for Maryland to put Durkin and several staffers on leave, basically fire their strength coach and open an investigation.
The reporting was accurate. Surely that counts.
***************************************************************************
UPDATE: There are always some who will never be convinced, though.
A kid died, and “It’s about learning life skills“? Might want to think about a better choice of words, pal.
Get The Picture 
I get your point. I won’t go as far as Muschamp, but journalists are still subject to the same weaknesses and biases as the rest of humanity, they see themselves as some special anointed class, they operate with a profit and drama motive for their work, and they’re still largely immune from paying for their mistakes. Best solution I can think of? Overrule Sullivan vs. New York Times and make ’em but liability insurance like the rest of us.
LikeLike
but=buy liability insurance. Sry.
LikeLike
So a coach runs a kid to death, and the media is the problem?
LikeLike
No. That’s not what I said.
LikeLike
That’s what you’re choosing to focus on. here.
LikeLike
You do realize that the first uninsurables would the right wing media don’t you?
How well would have Mango Mussolini’s birth certificate BS have held up in court without that precedent?
I’m always fascinated by the insistence that the MSM be perfect while tolerating both the Bullshit Mountain that is right wing media and the 7 plus lies a day uttered by Il Douche.
The right (and others in authority like Will) doesn’t want accuracy. They want their power to go unchecked. Therein lies the real tension.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Zzzzzzzzzzz
LikeLiked by 1 person
Couldn’t agree more.
LikeLike
I appreciate the usual substantive response. Nothing like calling a group of people hypocrital dolts and seeing them helpless to respond. It’s self-proving. Res ipsa.
LikeLiked by 1 person
We are not helpless at all. It’s because we are not in the least bit interested in yours or anyone’s particular political viewpoint on EVERY SINGLE post on here which is a UGA football blog. You are just not that interesting or as important as you may think you are. So, at least speaking for me, and perhaps a few others on here, spare me. That goes for the name calling, too. Res Ipsa Loquitur, indeed.
LikeLike
You’re “not the least bit interested” and yet you read every one of his or my or others’ comments, and respond to them. So, apparently you are interested.
LikeLike
I’m interested in any football related comments. Not yours or his politics every single day. Besides, who cut you in on this conversation? You and Derek should go get a room together.. And don’t get all full of yourself. I don’t read every one of your or his posts. Are you kidding me? But, if it makes you happy I’ll never read another one. Then, you and I will both be better off for it.
LikeLike
In fairness, when you read a post focused on anonymous reporting in journalism you shouldn’t expect the conversation to be all about UGa football. There are plenty of posts where you can find your safe space.
At least Derek’s posts have entertainment value. Mango Mussolini is funny even though I don’t know what the hell his post is about. Good on calling out ChiliDawg. He is the lefts version of a fox news watcher and he is too dumb to know it.
LikeLike
Why are you still here?
LikeLike
Just having fun. I am a fan of your writing. This is one of the best articles I have read in a while:
https://totalfratmove.com/the-time-i-hooked-up-with-my-roommates-sister-because-my-mom-made-me/
It is obviously your writing. Who else could be so shamelessly stupid?
LikeLike
No response? Up late drinking bourbon with your mom? At least deny, some people will believe you. Harvey Weinstein at least gave the women a job.
LikeLike
Here’s hoping Derek goes over to one of your favorite Gamecock message boards to spread his humor.
LikeLike
Yup. None of these clowns give a tinker’s damn about accountability or accuracy. They’ll guzzle down the kool-aid from the likes of Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh, and if anyone ever held them accountable for the birther conspiracy, or the lies they told about Seth Rich that caused his family a tremendous amount of anguish, they’d flip their shit. Don’t believe it? Look at the right’s response to certain privately operated media platforms removing Alex Jones, who literally forced the parents of Sandy Hook victims into HIDING because they were being harassed because of the bullshit he was spinning.
It’s not about truth. Not for them. Never has been.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pot/kettle (empty, as usual for him/she/it.)
LikeLike
Yup. Rush is out of a job the very next day. Not gonna happen.
LikeLike
My thoughts exactly. The right-wing media just can’t be trusted.
LikeLike
Great point, Dan.
LikeLike
There’s a sacred trust, dammit.
LikeLike
I can’t stand the media covering up wrong doing by the powerful.
LikeLike
That was funny and educational….well done.
LikeLike
I offer the following clarification. I should have said “make ’em liable like the rest of us.” If they can get insurance fine. If not, they can self insure or go uninsured. Drivers, doctors, lawyers, restaurant owners, etc., etc., etc., are held to a negligence standard for liability, sometimes strict liability. As far as I can tell all other walks of life have the same Bill of Rights as journalists. Journalists should be just as responsible as everybody else for the damage they do. A little extra due diligence might improve things and quiet down the screaming chamber we now have.
LikeLike
What you are suggesting is directly prohibited by the 1st Amendment.
LikeLike
Incorrect. I commend you to read the first amendment.
LikeLike
I have never seen the word “commend” used that way.
LikeLike
Neither have I, but then again I’ve also never read an interpretation of “shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press” that led me to conclude that making a law restricting freedom of speech to those who purchase insurance would NOT be unconstitutional.
LikeLike
There is a liability Hogbody … they can be sued for libel and/or slander.
LikeLike
I’m talking about the actual malice vs. negligence level of conduct.
LikeLike
Don’t you realize that is the same thing?
The method for journalistic negligence IS libel:
Libel: a published false statement that is damaging to a person’s reputation; a written defamation.
Negligence: failure to use reasonable care, resulting in damage or injury to another.
Malice is just the degree to which someone enters into any crime, libel/negligence in this instance, with forethought and intent.
The actions are already a crime, and you seem to be fixated on whether journalists are buying insurance. Do you really think the New York Times doesn’t carry professional liability insurance, or that liability insurance for journalists isn’t a real thing? (LMGTFY: https://www.authorsguild.org/member-services/media-liability-insurance/)
LikeLike
It’s not quite the same thing though. A false story can destroy your reputation before you can set the record straight, if you can, and lawsuits are expensive. Not that there’s a perfect solution. It’s why journalistic ethics are so important.
LikeLike
I’m not a libel expert, but haven’t we all but immunized journalists from libel when the person is a public figure ? (and “public figure” isn’t just limited to government employed, right? I really can’t remember) I don’t know what the answer is, but it would be nice if we could get back to using the First Amendment as a shield rather than a sword. The real icing is when an attack dog journalist cries that the First Amendment is under assault when an individual uses the same avenue to say that said journalist sucks.
LikeLike
This is a really terrible comparison. You’re speaking of the 1st Amendment like the 1A is actually speech itself. It’s not. It’s a constitutional protection against federal legislation of speech. The President is the head of the executive branch of federal government. The President attacking the press and saying they shouldn’t be allowed to print stories is literally a federal attack on the 1st amendment. I don’t see what you think is ironic about that.
LikeLike
I gladly offer concession that the media did a good thing in this case. But I stand by my “however, I’m still skeptical of them” commentary.
LikeLike
The dead body also helps verify that something out of the ordinary occurred. That it took 2 months for Damon et al to get off the pot is a scandal.
LikeLike
I heard yesterday that Damon has only been on the job since July 1. Probably why he accompanied the Maryland officials and will likely escape blame here. The culture issue, and hiring of Durkin, preceded Damon but he will be stuck with the fallout and impact.
At first I thought the practice was just in front of the S&C staff because it was off season, turns out the entire football coaching staff was watching this struggle, including Durkin…assuming that report was true. While I have a hard time finding any excuse for 3-4 staffers missing the signs if there were a hundred or so players but 15+ observers missing the issue? There is certainly no excuse, given what we have heard, and it is beyond surprising that not one adult coach or player didn’t break ranks and intercede. The Md. prez was right at the press conference., they should take full responsibility.
LikeLike
He’s been at the university for several years as an Associate AD before being promoted to interim AD in October ’17. He had the interim tag removed in late June / early July of this year.
LikeLike
My bad, saw that in the buffet section. I believe they said been the AD for one month, had not kept track of him so I didn’t know. My bad.
LikeLike
Don’t beat yourself up about it. I was just sharing the info, not trying to jump down your throat about it.
LikeLike
What does it say about player/sources when they are mistreated, abused and put in danger and still want to stay on scholarship with said school?
I believe I would find another place to play football.
LikeLike
Or maybe they have lives outside of football too? Other students they are in love with? Relationships with professors and other academic mentors?
And if they just leave, then they are leaving the same staff to abuse the next round of kids they lie to in recruiting.
They did the right thing for themselves and their university.
LikeLike
You’re assuming Maryland would release them on a free transfer and they’d get waivers from the NCAA to play right away.
LikeLike
“…those anonymous sources plus a soon-to-dead body arriving at the hospital registering an internal temperature of 106 degrees were good enough for Maryland to put Durkin and several staffers on leave….”
“Anonymous sources” can be an opportunity for someone with an agenda to use the press to move that agenda (hello, Scooter). They can also be used to sleazy ends by sleazy people to move gullible audiences (hello, pizza parlor child sex rings and other conspiracy theory nonsense).
But Maryland is neither of these. Kid dies after questionable supervision by football staff and we’re supposed to believe that (a) Maryland was going to be fully transparent and diligent and (b) no one in the organization in a position to hide something would do so and (c) everyone with relevant information would be fully forthcoming and cool with public attribution?
Media organizations do lose lawsuits. The News and Observer in Raleigh recently lost a large defamation suit to a woman in the state criminal ballistics lab when some people with agendas fed the paper some one-sided tips.
I get frustrated as hell with the media at times, but most of the people in it are as hard working and ethical as the rest of us. And if we all did a better job of being critical responders to information rather than emotional reactors, then we would disempower the idiots.
LikeLike
well said.
LikeLike
You can’t handle the truth! Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who’s gonna do it? You? You, Lieutenant Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know, that Santiago’s death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives! You don’t want the truth, because deep down in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall. We use words like “honor”, “code”, “loyalty”. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it! I would rather you just said “thank you”, and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don’t give a damn what you think you are entitled to!
Col Jessup would be proud.
LikeLike
So the big money overseers want the free labor to shut up and get back to work. Where have read this story before?
LikeLike
Maybe someone needs to see if there are any anonymous sources on Muschamp’s team who are willing to speak out.
LikeLike
It will muschamp wasn’t coaching, he’d be the guy at the Hardee’s screaming about fake news and recounting the latest story on Breitbart.
LikeLike
You know my uncle?
LikeLike
I think my favorite part of that is “so-called athletes”.
LikeLike
Something I’m sure he’d say to their faces.
LikeLike
No doubt, and I’m sure the 240 lb walk-on end would be totally intimidated.
LikeLike
I have no problem with the use of anonymous sources to report information of what happened in general. But not to malign someones character. To be able to take shots at someone behind the veil of anonymity is not something I would do or would want done to me. There is a reason the 6th amendment guarantees the right to face your accuser. It should apply to media as well.
LikeLike
Let me get this straight. A player dies during workouts indicating there is a problem within the program. Anonymous players (who have reason to be anonymous out of a fear of retribution) confirm there were problems. Maryland accepts responsibility and suspends coaches, indicating they agree there is a problem. And yet, it’s the media at fault here?
It would be easier to accept that criticism if these critics weren’t the same people lapping up everything their favorite partisan hack feeds them on their favorite partisan news network.
Yes, there is some bias in the media. No, that doesn’t mean we get to discredit every story we don’t like as fake news while uncritically accepting favorable stories. The media can get caught up in sensationalism, narratives, and click bait, but a large reason for that is because we the people reward them for it with our attention. If we want the media to have more integrity, we have to start by disciplining our news consumption first.
LikeLike
It should be noted that Muschamp specifically called out an unnamed former staffer. This is an adult that has no reason to fear retribution if what they say is accurate. It is cowardly to not put your name on it and it could be made up by the ‘journalist’ to sensationalize the story. Muschamp wasn’t talking about a kid who is still under scholarship at the UofM who would/could face retribution. It is not hard to find someone disgruntled to speak anonymously (perhaps plied by money and other things) so it should be taken with a grain of salt. I am not sure everything written in the story has been proven accurate but it sure got a lot of clicks.
LikeLike
Given how secretive coaches are, you don’t think a former staffer speaking out about something could harm his career?
LikeLike
or if he is honest about a terrible situation could it help his career?
LikeLike
No. It would likely close far more doors than it would open.
LikeLike
I respect people who are honest and have principles. Staying anonymous so you can get a job with same shit people doesn’t show much character.
LikeLike
I respect people who are honest and have principles, but is it better to speak up, get fired, have to sell you house and find a new job in a very competitive field or to get your message out as an anonymous source?
I’ve worked for two guys who were huge bullshitters. We’d be in meetings and they would tell clients things I knew we couldn’t deliver. Did I correct them in the meetings? Hell no. I wanted to keep my job. As the project would proceed, I’d end up managing the client’s expectations back toward reality.
LikeLike
He was a ‘former staffer’….as in no longer employed. He wasn’t at risk of losing his job, house, or family and he isn’t testifying against the mob or Hillary Clinton. My guess is the ‘journalist’ reported on rumors as fact.
LikeLike
My bad, but aren’t we also referring to players who don’t want to lose their scholarship which is basically a job. Of course, they wouldn’t have to sell a house, but moving to a new school isn’t trivial.
LikeLike
Muschamp is dunzo. Dawgs by 50
LikeLike
Skipping the political BS… Muschamp is an ass clown and just a peg higher than Meyer in my book. I hope we whip them so bad he knocks him down to the Sun Belt for 10 years. The fact that anyone takes his criticism over journalist after this garbage that jerk has said is mind-boggling.
LikeLike
The love of the “anonymous” sources who fear for their playing time….. It’s so easy even a Liberal can use it.
LikeLike
Kind of like “I have people looking into this in Hawaii right now, and you won’t believe what they’re finding.”
LikeLike
You love Donald Trump. We get it.
LikeLike
Who doesn’t? He’s ahead of Lincoln in on-line polling data.
LikeLike
If you guys are going to make it THAT easy to point out your hypocrisy, don’t get mad at me for taking the layup.
LikeLike
Maybe you could commission a dossier on Trump’s failings? Has anyone tried that? Just curious.
LikeLike
Jesus, how long would that take? Think of all the hookers you’d have to interview.
LikeLike
I’d have to go back to the day his father didn’t pull out. Who has time for that?
LikeLike
Were the Russians hacking conception back then?!?
LikeLike
One “so called athlete” got a marble participation trophy, what life lesson did he learn?
LikeLike
This thread is what is wrong with civil discourse today. There has been a death and said death was a result of paid adults charged with the health and well being of their charges, failing to do the right thing. End of story. Now in order to defend or deflect the accursed parties choose to create a side issue to the facts and it works to the extent we let it work. We are auguring about anonymous sources instead of the system that caused the deaths. If or when this case gets to court there will be no anonymous sources allowed and the defendants will get to face their accusers. The fact that everything now has to be tried in the court of public opinion is what is so crazy. Everybody would condemn a lynching but most everyone now seems to be okay with the social media equivalent.
LikeLike
Agree, wholeheartedly
LikeLike
You seem to neglect that anonymous sources are the sole reason in many instances why there ever ends up being a trial. Without anonymous sources, some people would just get away with murder. The police solicit anonymous sources for tips on crimes all the time.
LikeLike
Cousin Eddie hit the nail on the head. There is a lot to pay for coming down the road for some of the 15 plus viewers. And not just monetary.
And yes the retribution thing would be real, and players know it.
LikeLike
There are some sources, both anonymous and on the record, who are defending Durkin and saying that this perception of a toxic culture doesn’t match what they’ve seen or heard from their kids on the team. It’s hard to tell who to believe in this type of situation. Hopefully these two investigations are able to expose the facts.
LikeLike
I notice that most of the sources supporting Durkin were anonymous. I’m waiting for Muschamp to weigh in on the fact.
LikeLike