Comments on: The Media’s Blurred Line Between Leading and Cheerleading

By: Kelly

Kelly — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 23:15:50 +0000

I know I would have been fired if I dated a player during my sports writing days, or I would have to at the very least change beats and vow to never report on the players’ team, league, etc. And I’m sure I would have a difficult time getting another job because my dating choice would be frowned upon by sports editors. Eyebrows were raised if I was spotted eating lunch with a player, although my male colleagues could always get away with that and no one would think they were trying to sleep with the source. It seems more acceptable in entertainment although it still is rare.

By: glennnelson

glennnelson — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 21:14:41 +0000

Eric, I guess my concern would be tolerating bias or lack of veracity on any level because people’s standards start adjusting. First sports, then what? The whole world begins to lose focus. Change, good or bad, has to start somewhere.

By: Eric T

Eric T — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:00:50 +0000

Very interesting piece, Glenn. I have to confess I’m not at all disturbed by Gangel’s association as I am by Salinas. I can’t quite put my finger on why, though. Perhaps it’s the nature of the subject matter (or my own naiveté). Sports seems largely visible while politics is not. Perhaps it’s the ramifications of bias. What’s the potential fallout from a biased sports reporter versus skewed political coverage? With sports, worst case scenario is I get a false impression of an athlete or organization. With politics, news reports can affect my position on an issue or my choice of candidates, which can materially impact on my life in a way that sports can’t.