Read on Twitter
This shouldn’t have to be said, but it apparently does:
As a journalist, you should talk to both sides in negotiations/dispute if it centers in business, and for many, the business of sports. If there is a flood of stories clearly sourced from one side, it has to be combated 1/x
As a journalist, you should talk to both sides in negotiations/dispute if it centers in business, and for many, the business of sports. If there is a flood of stories clearly sourced from one side, it has to be combated 1/x
I don’t care if it’s a bunch of stories sourced through just the union or if it’s sourced by just the league, it’s a disservice to the readers. It’s a disservice to your profession. And if you see it, it’s your job to get the other side out. 2/x
This game has been played for decades, largely with writers becoming conduits for one side or the other, largely toward ownership. What you write is history. And if you’re telling it weighted, that reporting somehow turns into “fact.” Think about your legacy, not connections /end
Now all that said, I can tell you that in working with Commish Office we have an understanding and they accept it: they may not like what I write if I see flaws. But they can respect that if I’m willing to give them a chance to tell their side. That, to me, shows fairness by them
