Herald issues apology - Page 2 - New England Patriots Forums

***Rob0729*** · 05-13-2008, 11:21 PM

I still maintain that Walsh was never Tomase's source and Tomase never really had a source. I think he heard the rumors of Walsh videotaping the walkthrough and after the NYT and ESPN piece outing Walsh that he decided to run with the rumor citing an unnamed source.

I think this is going to be very damaging to the Herald and Tomase. They basically admitted that they didn't research the story well enough before they ran with it. They are going to be slammed both locally and nationally and open themselves up for a lawsuit. granted I don't think the Pats will sue now that the Herald has admitted the story is false.

tobias funke · 05-13-2008, 11:23 PM

I'm glad they did this instead of waiting for the lawsuit.

I would rather see this end.

Is there any way the Herald could apologize that would make you guys happy? I don't really understand the picture, though. "SORRY BTW LOL REMEMBER THIS THING U DONT HAVE"

Char2na · 05-13-2008, 11:26 PM

What happened to the days when boston media sources were biased TOWARDS the home team?

Gator Mike · 05-13-2008, 11:27 PM

So, let me get this straight.

You don't have a tape, and you haven't seen the tape. The basis for the entire story is the fact that you talked to someone who doesn't have the tape and hasn't seen the tape. Well, if he doesn't have it, and hasn't seen it, how does he know about it? Someone told him?

So my Super Bowl Week was p*ssed on by a newspaper reporter who knows a guy who knows a guy?

Unforgiveable.

N.Eman · 05-13-2008, 11:27 PM

Cut their tongues off....basterds!!

SVN · 05-13-2008, 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigMike

Apology
Wednesday, May 14, 2008

E-mail Printable (0) Comments Text size Share (0) Rate
On Feb. 2, 2008, the Boston Herald reported that a member of the New England Patriots [team stats]’ video staff taped the St. Louis Rams’ walkthrough on the day before Super Bowl XXXVI. While the Boston Herald based its Feb. 2, 2008, report on sources that it believed to be credible, we now know that this report was false, and that no tape of the walkthrough ever existed.

Prior to the publication of its Feb. 2, 2008, article, the Boston Herald neither possessed nor viewed a tape of the Rams’ walkthrough before Super Bowl XXXVI, nor did we speak to anyone who had. We should not have published the allegation in the absence of firmer verification.

The Boston Herald regrets the damage done to the team by publication of the allegation, and sincerely apologizes to its readers and to the New England Patriots [team stats]’ owners, players, employees and fans for our error.

so they waited until walsh met with goodell to come out with this ? hoping he might have what they guessed he had ?

***Rob0729*** · 05-13-2008, 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Char2na

What happened to the days when boston media sources were biased TOWARDS the home team?

In Boston? Have you ever read past articles from Dan Shaughnessy, Bob Ryan, Michael Felger, or Ron Borges?

SVN · 05-13-2008, 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Char2na

What happened to the days when boston media sources were biased TOWARDS the home team?

i have rarely seen those days in my days following boston sports.

juny · 05-13-2008, 11:40 PM

At least they are apologizing... maybe they can suspend tomase for a week ( i know he deserves more but he probably has a family to care for)

PatsFanInVa · 05-13-2008, 11:41 PM

That's the most I have ever seen from a wrong media source.

The typical way of handling this is to note there was an error, and to state the real fact.

For example if you published "Hitler was a registered Democrat," your retraction typically reads:

"On [Date] we erroneously reported Adolph Hitler's party affiliation. Hitler was a National Socialist."

The excuse/theory behind this custom is that by repeating the error you compound the error, opening the door for more gossip/conspiracy theory.

But the custom evidently is flexible when legal action is the alternative.

PFnV