Now that the games have come and gone, the big national story is Oklahoma State
coach Mike Gundy going off on local columnist Jenni Carlson for a
critical piece about quarterback Bobby Reid.
Gundy’s sin was losing his composure. By doing so, he becomes the story in a
clownish sort of way that’s up there with John L. Smith losing it last year
or Jim Mora’s famous "PLAYOFFS!?!?!" meltdown. That’s too bad because
he has a valid point, and it will likely never resonate because of his histrionics.
The issue isn’t a coach trying to stamp out dissent or criticism, though some
would have you believe that every time a coach questions a reporter he’s trying
to control the press. There’s nothing wrong with critical opinions, and I think
that there were more than a few critical pieces after Oklahoma State’s 1-2 start
and the loss at Troy.
The problem here is the journalism. Carlson, in
her response, states that her goal was to tackle the question "why
have the Cowboys, who so adamantly backed Reid, suddenly switched course, benched
the biggest recruit to ever sign with the program and jumped full speed ahead
with Zac Robinson?" That’s a clear and reasonable focus; Reid was considered
a key element of the Cowboy offense, and his benching raises some questions
(and eyebrows). So how should one approach getting the answer?
Let’s think this through. There are a handful of people with some very good
insight into the attitude of the quarterback. The first is the quarterback himself.
Who better to respond directly to questions about his state of mind? The head
coach might be a good person to talk to. The decision of the starting quarterback
ultimately rests with him, and he can also evaluate how Reid has played through
injuries before. Offensive coordinator Larry Fedora might also get a phone call.
He is the mastermind of this high-powered offense, so he might be able to provide
some technical analysis of Reid’s struggles as well as a comparison of Robinson
and Reid. Of course teammates and other coaches could help, but they are secondary
sources in this story.
Isn’t it a little strange that of those three only Reid is quoted in her original
piece? And those Reid quotes were taken from other reporters in different contexts.
Carlson doesn’t offer a single sourced quote in response to a question that
she asked. Unnamed sources and Carlson’s personal observations are of course
appropriate and can be sprinkled into the story, but are they really the substantial
stuff around which to build a column that reaches such a harsh, personal, and
definitive conclusion?
A few weeks ago, Atlanta Journal-Constitution columnist Jeff Schultz
penned a
controversial column suggesting that Mark Richt needed to show a little
more toughness and fire. Many, including
myself, disagreed strongly with Schultz’s position. Others found it spot
on. My biggest problem was a distortion of the historical record. But as much
as I disagreed with Schultz’s conclusions, he at least got Richt on the record
about the subject. He asked Richt on-point questions at the weekly press conference,
and he based his column in large part on his evaluation of Richt’s responses.
Even though I found fault with Schultz’s reasoning, Richt’s comments on the
topic were right there for evaluation.
Carlson claims that she stands
by her sources and observations. But she is about as forthcoming with additional
information as Gundy seems to be about specific disagreements. Is "trust
me" really what journalism is all about now? In both her original piece
and her response, Carlson never claims to have asked Gundy or Reid for comment
before the original piece ran. Her "show me what was wrong" sideshow
is the kind of journalistic legwork she should have done through Reid, Gundy,
and other primary sources before the fact.
After a column full of whispers and rumors, she opened the final paragraph
of her orignial column by asking "Who knows?" Ms. Carlson, you’re
the journalist with the press pass. You have access to these people. Throwing
rumors out there to see what will stick and extrapolating from watching the
guy eat chicken is amateurish message board territory. Columnists often rely
on speculation and opinion, but they are usually backed up by something much
less flimsy.
Now let’s look at a few responses from the community of sportswriters:
Football Writers Association of America president Mike Griffith issued
a statement about the incident on Monday. "I consider Coach Gundy’s
behavior completely inappropriate. It shows a lack of respect for the media
and doesn’t speak well for the university and the fans that he represents.
Coach Gundy’s actions have brought national attention and further scrutiny
to the situation that could have been handled in a more private and appropriate
matter."
Association for Women
in Sports Media: "The Association for Women in Sports Media (AWSM)
is alarmed at the unprofessional manner in which Oklahoma State football coach
Mike Gundy chose to take exception with a column written by AWSM member Jenni
Carlson of The Oklahoman. Gundy has the right to express his opinion, just
as Carlson has the right to express hers. But his decision to air his objections
in the form of a personal attack shows a lack of respect for all journalists."
It seems to me that the expectation of respect is one-way here. The two statements
didn’t have much to say about the appropriateness, professionalism, or respect
demonstrated by a piece that all but called Reid a mama’s boy.
The refrain that the response "could have been handled in a more private
and appropriate matter" has popped up in a couple of places since Gundy’s
outburst. Writers can splash their columns in front of tens or hundreds of thousands
of readers, but objections and responses should be handled out of the public
view through the back channels. This kind of column needed and deserved a public
response if only to illustrate the lack of professionalism and respect that
the FWAA and AWSM demand from the people they cover but not from their own.
Remember that Carlson states that her subject was the question "why have
the Cowboys, who so adamantly backed Reid, suddenly switched course, benched
the biggest recruit to ever sign with the program and jumped full speed ahead
with Zac Robinson?" Did her column do a good job of attempting to answer
that question?
Dawg Media
RSS 2.0
Why I generally avoid predictions
