Welcome to PatsFans.com

OT: Yahoo issues apology to Broncos after accusing them of cheating

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by BadMoFo, Mar 6, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. BadMoFo

    BadMoFo Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Messages:
    5,763
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    I know several people here have alleged that the Broncos videotaped before. Well, looks like it's not true.

  2. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    How the **** does this happen? Literally everyone in the NFL knows he did this. He knows he did this.

    <shaking head and staggering off mumbling profanities>
  3. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    29,765
    Likes Received:
    232
    Ratings:
    +509 / 5 / -1

    One thing to know someone did it and another to have evidence or get enough people to confirm it. Yahoo! Sports did something the Herald should do. Both wrote stories that do not reach the proper level of good journalism, but Yahoo! Sports retracted their story. Granted I will not give them any credit since the only reason they did was under threat of a lawsuit. A lawsuit they probably knew they couldn't win.
  4. upstater1

    upstater1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,027
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +43 / 4 / -3

    BadMoFo's conclusion that it didn't happen is premature. Just because Yahoo doesn't stick by their journalists doesn't mean it didn't happen.

    Aiello was careful to note that no one in the office knows anything about it. Of course, this was alleged to have occurred in the 90s. So how does he know?

    Quoting unnamed sources is good journalism, if your source is solid and the information has been verified by a second source. We don't know where Cole is getting his info from. The only thing Tomase did wrong is trust Walsh and then use info to spit in the eye of Pats fans the day before the Super Bowl. Journalistically the practice is not wrong.
  5. ctpatsfan77

    ctpatsfan77 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,441
    Likes Received:
    116
    Ratings:
    +209 / 4 / -5

    That depends on what you mean by "the practice." I will easily grant you that publishing negative information is not, in and of itself, wrong. That said, publishing poorly-sourced information without verification is wrong.
  6. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    29,765
    Likes Received:
    232
    Ratings:
    +509 / 5 / -1

    Well if Tomase trusted Walsh without independently verifying what he was saying is true or at least verfied from another source (assuming Walsh is the source), then Tomase committed bad journalism. What you say kinda contridicts yourself. You say using an unnamed source is valid as long as you verify it with a second source and then say it was ok for Tomase to trust Walsh without verifying his information. Maybe I am misunderstanding what you are saying.
  7. chrisfx811

    chrisfx811 Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2007
    Messages:
    829
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    He didn't know about the videotaping? Or the videotaping never occurred?

    Either way, he won a SB by circumventing the salary cap.
  8. chech1965

    chech1965 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    531
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0


    Didn't they win two that way? And were fined twice what the Pats were, yet kept the rings.

    Funny we don't hear people screaming for an asterisk on the Broncos*.

    :cool:
  9. oldskool138

    oldskool138 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,719
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    #75 Jersey

    Yeah, I was about to say that. What the Broncos did is a lot worse than what the Pats did.
  10. upstater1

    upstater1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,027
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +43 / 4 / -3

    Verification doesn't mean you have to prove it. A second source has to allege it. If verification demanded proof, nothing would ever get published.

    I teach journalism at a research 1 university by the way, and attended Boston U's Comm. school.

    A year ago, we had the Scooter Libby case which proceeded in a similar fashion. Two journalists ran with a story from Libby, and they refused to name their source. They went to jail for not naming him.

    Yahoo isn't sticking up for Cole, I bet the Herald will stick up for Tomase since they have at least the pretense to being a real news org.

    By the way, I'm talking categorically here about journalist ethics.

    In specific, I don't think Tomase did a good job because, one, there are huge holes in Walsh's story. As a fan I don't see why it was necessary to publish Walsh's claims the day before the Super Bowl. If a newspaper from Montana had scooped that article, no one would have cared. Essentially Tomase was flipping off Patriot fans. Journalists sit on stories from anonymous sources everyday. You don't HAVE TO publish anything.

    That being said, Tomase can't be called to account for libel, or even unethical behavior. Neither can Jason Cole, despite what Shanahan's lawyer thinks or even Peter King.
  11. upstater1

    upstater1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,027
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +43 / 4 / -3

    By the way, I wrote that Tomase was wrong to trust Walsh, not that it was OK to trust him. I said the 100% reverse of what you said I said. If your source has holes in his story, you have a few options which Tomase did not take. Present the story together with the contradictions, try to verify elsewhere, don't write the story.

    In addition, verification doesn't require a second source. Verification could simply consist of checking out the facts and verifying whether Matt Walsh was at the scene. A press pass for that day, for instance, coupled with an interview of a NFL official in charge of running events that day might establish the protocol, which could give Walsh's story enough plausibility to publish.
  12. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    29,765
    Likes Received:
    232
    Ratings:
    +509 / 5 / -1

    Ok, so we can agree that what Tomase did was bad journalism. I just wasn't sure because I guess how you worded it, it seemed contradictory to me. Not trying to accuse, just getting clarification.

    I do understand the rules of independent verification, but I think your burden of independent verification in this particular case is not enough. No one is disputing that Walsh was in the building the day. So credentials allowing him to be in the building wouldn't really provide much evidence.

    For the burden of independent verification in this particular case, I think Tomase would need to at least find a witness who remembers seeing Walsh at the Rams' walthrough or on the press bus after the walkthrough or someone else in the Pats' organization who can at least verify that they have heard through a trusted source that this did in fact take place. Maybe if there was a sign in and sign out sheet where Walsh signed out after the Rams' walkthrough.

    Establishing that Walsh was in the building on the day of the walkthroughs isn't enough in my opinion to independently verify Tomase's story. That does not independently verify that a taping of the walkthrough actually existed. It estiblishes that Walsh was in the building, but not neccessarily during the Rams' walkthrough. Tomase needs at least independent verification that Walsh was in the Super Dome during the Rams' walkthrough or he can't run with the story without violating the most basic rule of journalism. Anything less, is just really bad journalism.
  13. BadMoFo

    BadMoFo Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Messages:
    5,763
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    What I'm trying to show you is that several people here talk about the Broncos alleged videotaping as if it is a fact. And the one time it is ever really mentioned in a story, it gets retracted.
  14. upstater1

    upstater1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,027
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +43 / 4 / -3

    I was just trying to point out that, categorically, running with a story based on an anonymous source (as Jason Cole did) is not the wrong thing to do. Categorically, what Tomase did isn't wrong either. Only when you get to the specifics (which are assumed here, we're assuming that Walsh is the source of Tomase's story) does Tomase run into trouble. Other media outlets have reported contradictions in Walsh's story. If Tomase were a good reporter, he should have investigated those contradictions, and then made a decision as to whether to file the story.

    I disagree with you on what's required for verification. All that needs to be done is to check out whether Walsh could have plausibly been in the building doing what he claims to have done. Once that's established, you can run with it. After all, in the context of whistleblowing, many times it's just one person that has the goods. If you require that a second source be there to witness, whistleblowing rarely happens.

    Again, in terms of journalistic practice, I'd put more blame on Yahoo for squelching than on the Herald for running it. In terms of his skills as a reporter, Tomase's seem pretty poor, looking at this from the outside. As a fan, I can say, "I don't care to read a hometown paper that seems to have gone out of its way to rain on the Patriot's parade for no good reason."
  15. upstater1

    upstater1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,027
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +43 / 4 / -3

    Right, but that's an editorial decision. They don't want to get sued.

    Jason Cole presented it as a fact in his news article. News readers then can assume it's a fact based on an anonymous source in the NFL office. That's not proof. That's a claim. But nonetheless, it's presented as a fact in the news story.

    Cole went so far as to claim the NFL caught the Broncos multiple times, and had the videotapes.
  16. BPF

    BPF Rookie

    Joined:
    May 13, 2006
    Messages:
    2,469
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    Shannahan knows the NFL will not make the same mistake it did with the Pats twice and create the same firestorm. He also knows this is old news as far as this commissioner's office is concerned, it never happened under their watch.
  17. BPF

    BPF Rookie

    Joined:
    May 13, 2006
    Messages:
    2,469
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    Here is the latest update on this, it's officially over.

    http://beta.profootballtalk.com/2008/03/06/yahoo-shanahan-flap-officially-over/

  18. BadMoFo

    BadMoFo Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Messages:
    5,763
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    OK, news agencies get sued or are threatened to be sued all the time. They won't print a retraction, especially not one as public as this one, and remove a whole section of their story, unless they really feel they screwed up in the story. If the writer was so sure of their source, there would be no need for this retraction.

    Face it, these were allegations by a sports columnist and pretty much baseless, especially now with this retraction. As much as people here claim Gregg Easterbrook is wrong in the things he writes, Cole was wrong in what he wrote about the Broncos.
  19. upstater1

    upstater1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,027
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +43 / 4 / -3

    I disagree. Yahoo is not a credible news source. They've cratered on this on e because of the threat of a suit.

    How do you know they are baseless, by the way?

    Did Jason Cole retract them?

    And if you think a corporation won't print a retraction unless the story is wrong, that's a bit naive. They didn't want to get sued. CBS printed a retraction to the Dan Rather-Bush AWOL story, and now they are being sued by the reporters who put together that story. This means the story was retracted without the writer's consent.

    Go back and look at the whole Scooter Libby controversy. Why did some news sources retract his claims about Valerie Plame while others didn't? Why did some news sources go to the mat and support their reporters? Why did others toss their reporters over the side?
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2008
  20. ctpatsfan77

    ctpatsfan77 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,441
    Likes Received:
    116
    Ratings:
    +209 / 4 / -5

    Except that said unnamed source, coward that he apparently is (we're all assuming it's Walsh, but we can't even be certain of that), didn't even say that he taped the walkthrough, merely that it was taped.

    What it would take to validate a claim this nebulous, yet potentially damaging?

    I'd also add that it is theoretically possible to sue Tomase and/or the Herald for libel--after all, they just recently lost a libel suit.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>