Morris was awesome going toe-to-toe against not one, but two professional writers/speakers/debators. I would have expected a Joe Schmo blogger to go on the air stuttering and shaking from nerves -- I know I would!

Yeah, he was pretty good wasn't he Crashburn? Though I think Repoz is testing the attention span of the average primer by posting a 9 minute plus video...buy hey I watched it, so you never know!

Rosenthal comes off like a douche. He didn't even read the ####### post. What a blowhard.

His standards he puts out aren't followed by more than a small minority of Internet sports writers. If I weren't so damn lazy I'd find an example in which Rosenthal violated his own standards.

I hate sports journalists.

Though I think Repoz is testing the attention span of the average primer by posting a 9 minute plus video...buy hey I watched it, so you never know!

Not like there is anything to follow out here in Oz mate - I'm leagued out already - refuse to watch Union and we have qualified for the World Cup - what more is there!!??

If I was watching that for the first time and had to guess which one was the professional sports journalist and which one was the blogger defending himself I would have picked Jerod for the pro and Rosenthal for the amateur. Jerod did an excellent job defending himself and his work on a national forum. He was very composed and well reasoned. Like Crashburn said if that wouldve been me I wouldve stared at the camera blinking for about 15 seconds and then projectile vomited. Gonzalez was fine too, but Rosenthal seems to think he's on Around the Horn where the louder he yells and the more he shakes his head in disgust the more he's right. Blowhard.

The video was interesting. I wish they would have given Jerod a little makeup, he was distractingly shiny compared to the other 2 guys.

Anyway, look at what a revealing guideline Rosenthal had for what should and shouldn't be printed: "would you want it written about yourself". I assume he can't have meant that as it came out because nobody could be that stupid, but it still furthers the feeling that mainstream journalism, much of which relies on access to various powerful people and entities, is increasingly irrelevant and was probably always ethically compromised. Bloggers may be no better, because they don't necessarily have a code of ethics to which they even pretend to hew, but at least they don't have such a blatant incongruity at the heart of their profession.

Were I Jerrod, I would have to point out both the mainstream media's willingness to engage in rampant speculation and their negligence in the "steroids era". He probably wouldn't have come off looking so good if he came out swinging, though. Were I Rosenthal or Gonzalez, I would have RTFA. Apparently, bloggers are to be held accountable for blatantly biased characterizations and cherry picked quotations of their work presented in the mainstream media. Gonzalez and Rosenthal come off as blowhards more interested in protecting the print industry and defending their reputation among their sources than actually engaging in a reasoned debate.

What a blowhard.

Fix my roof!

what more is there!!??

Contemplate the 20-20 exit, and kvetch about the Ashes ? :-)

Robothal needs the industry guys to think he has their back. What we have here is an angry Ibanez reacting to third hand rumors so Robothal is defending him.

Oh and Aussie rules is better than League or Union.

In the freezeframe before you click play, Ibanez is approaching Julian Tavarez territory in Freddy Krueger lookalikeism.

Also what hair does Ibanez have to give? Keep hitting and don't get a 50 game suspension my fantasy team needs you!

Contemplate the 20-20 exit, and kvetch about the Ashes ? :-)

It is the English who are likely to be kvetching and whingeing about the Ashes in a bit. :)

I'm leagued out already - refuse to watch Union

pansy!

I can't help but wonder where Rosenthals outrage was when his brethren were tossing Sammy Sosa under the bus.

effing hypocrite.

Wait, this turned out to be a debacle? I thought it was just a minor kerfuffle.

This is the natural extension of the whole ridealong charade guessing-game. It is at heart, of course, the "fault" of MLB and MLBPA for either (take your pick of characterization) letting the issue fester too long or for being in the wrong place at the wrong time to get their unlucky number called when Congress and the nation decided seemingly at random that Canseco's book was some sort of bombshell Deep Throat account that demanded inquiry. Regardless, this is where we are: a guy says quite correctly that Ibanez's numbers, however unfortunately, arouse suspicion in the current context (and then goes on to examine said numbers), an "actual journalist" basically fundamentally mischaracterizes his statements while reporting the meta-story and not the actual underlying story (which, however unnewsworthy it may be, is more newsworthy than the meta), and then the two of them are hauled on TV along with a network guy who is unfamiliar with the whole thing but still has strong opinions. It's a ####### circle jerk, and the most reasonable guy in the bunch, the one who came closest to doing his job, is the one on trial.

I admit I kept waiting for the blogger to respond "You two have journalistic standards. I don't. Like it, lump it. And Ken, if you think what I wrote doesn't pass a 'basic decency' test, I would like to ride back with you to Mayberry where you are obviously from." I like Robo, but he did not come off well here.

Wow, Robo does come across as a blowhard as mentioned above. I think #10 is a huge part of it - defend the player publicly to put yourself in a better light with players. It also is a chance for Robo to defend the main stream media turf - bash bloggers a bit so hopefully no one will take them seriously.

What sanctimonious ##########. I can't say I can quibble with much of what Gonzalez and Rosenthal said per se, I'm just unclear why they are preaching this sort of thing to a blogger, who is just online expressing his opinions and, in this case, did so in a pretty responsible way, instead of to Gonzalez himself. Yes, modern media, Internet moves fast, blogs post to blogs, etc. That just means that irresponsible work by bloggers can get shouted down by all of the other activity out there and can blip off the radar screen pretty quickly. A guy like Gonzalez (and I have generally liked his work since he was given a large editorial voice at the Inquirer the last few months) knows that by using a blogger's article and spinning it for his purposes, he's going to dominate the 24-hour sports news cycle, and probably will continute to for another day or two when Ibanez is inevitably asked to respond by beat writers. He gets to "say what everybody is thinking" without (directly) compromising with his journalistic ethics, whatever they may be. This reminds me of CNN's wall to wall coverage on Paris Hilton going to jail ... no, no, wait, this is CNN, this is wall to wall coverage on "Why is America so obsessed with Paris Hilton going to jail?" (wink, wink).

Why is the blogger to blame for not having high enough standards? What is Gonzalez's responsibility? What for that matter is Rosenthal's, who seemed to write a very similar column to Morris's post a few weeks ago, and just used, "All these sports talk radio guys are saying Big Papi may have used PEDs because he's fallen off a cliff now" as a jumping off point rather than "All the fans I talk to are saying Ibanez may have used PEDs because he's having such a huge breakout at age 37"?

Based on what I've seen on BTF in the past, I'd have to say that if Gonzalez had written the exact same piece that Morris did, the conversation on this thread would be considerably different.

I can totally see why Ken Rosenthal would be angry about this speculative blog entry. It totally goes against he highest standards of sourcing and evidence he uses in column about trade rumors.

I think Bob Hazle used PEDs in 1957.

I think Bob Hazle used PEDs in 1957.
You know, "Hurricane" sounds like a nickname for a drug, doesn't it?

I'd like to know where the mainstreamers' solemn concern was around the time of "teh backne."

Gambling Rent Czar Posted: June 11, 2009 at 05:10 AM (#3214351)

I can't help but wonder where Rosenthals outrage was when his brethren were tossing Sammy Sosa under the bus.

effing hypocrite.

agreed, I was going to bring up the same point. I think the blogger was an ass in his original post, but as mentioned bloggers don't have the ethical guidelines that journalist like to pretend that they ascribe to.

"All the fans I talk to are saying Ibanez may have used PEDs because he's having such a huge breakout at age 37"?

Except that Gonzalez has also said,

I set out trying to disprove that there was reason to speculate, but the past 15 or so years has made it hard to do so. I always defended Manny Ramirez and he made me and a lot of other people look like a fool; and honestly, that re-opened the floodgates to me erring on the side guilty until proven innocent, as opposed to the other way around — as it should be

Emphasis mine. NOT "may have used".

Yes Ibanez said Mother's basement. I love it!!!

Except that Gonzalez has also said,

Careful rfloh. It was Morris doing the wild speculation. It was Gonzalez performing the role we usually fill.

me erring on the side guilty until proven innocent

and pray tell, how is this supposed to be accomplished? the only thing is a testing program and Ibanez has been tested probably at least once this year, if you don't accept that, then how do you prove innocence? have each ball player have a film crew following them around 24/7?

Careful rfloh. It was Morris doing the wild speculation. It was Gonzalez performing the role we usually fill.

Ah sorry. I got the names mixed up. Thought Gonzalez was the blogger.

Based on what I've seen on BTF in the past, I'd have to say that if Gonzalez had written the exact same piece that Morris did, the conversation on this thread would be considerably different.

I do not see your point. I don't recall Morris having any defenders in the thread about his original column. Most people called him out the same way they call out Roboturd, etc.

But it turns out that the MSM's BS sanctimony wrt Morris's column is even worse than the column itself. Everybody loses.

and pray tell, how is this supposed to be accomplished? the only thing is a testing program and Ibanez has been tested probably at least once this year, if you don't accept that, then how do you prove innocence? have each ball player have a film crew following them around 24/7?

I know your questions are rhetorical but currently Steroids and their masking agents are tested. We know HGH isn't tested; I'm not up on my cutting edge PED research but there are probably undetected "steroids", i.e., PEDs, that are being used undetected. How's a fan to know?

I do not see your point. I don't recall Morris having any defenders in the thread about his original column. Most people called him out the same way they call out Roboturd, etc.

But it turns out that the MSM's BS hypocritical sanctimony wrt Morris's column is even worse than the column itself. Everybody loses.

Has Gonzalez, the MSMer at the center of this, engaged in similar actions as Morris. If so, he's being hypocritical. If he hasn't, he's not.

And the thread title is "Raul Ibanez: blame the Philly Inquirer, not blogger Jerrod Morris."

I haven't seen a whole lot of vitriol directed at Morris by this community in any of the threads. Certainly not as much as fellow blogger Chass received for the backne item, and nowhere near what I think would have happened if Gonzalez did that kind of speculatin' in the Inquirer.

Based on what I've seen on BTF in the past, I'd have to say that if Gonzalez had written the exact same piece that Morris did, the conversation on this thread would be considerably different.

When Rosenthal wrote what I have been arguing is tantamout to the Morris blog post, he got initial criticism, yes, but mostly defenders in the back part of the thread. Sorry Papi thread

Did BTF have an initial thread for the Morris blog post? I couldn't find one in a quick look in the archives, but I knew I had heard of the post before Gonzalez wrote about it, and that would have had to have happened on BTF.

Did BTF have an initial thread for the Morris blog post?

There wasn't one on the initial blog post, but there was the recent one on Ibanez' reaction to the initial blog post:

I'm Clean, angry Ibanez says

Has Gonzalez, the MSMer at the center of this, engaged in similar actions as Morris. If so, he's being hypocritical. If he hasn't, he's not.

This is incorrect.

Hypocrisy has nothing to do with what the person's actions were. It just has to do with sincerity. Phony outrage, which is all this is. I don't remember John Gonzalez defending Sosa, or Theriot, or Ortiz when MSMers wrote similar things. Though looking through his archives quickly it does seem that he has an odd fixation on Ibanez, having written about 30 columns about him since he signed with the Phils, so maybe that's all it is.

But reading Morris's column it's obvious to anyone with reading comprehension that he isn't "accusing" Ibanez of anything, just saying that it will "raise suspicion," which is basically the same as Rosenthal was saying wrt Oriz.

Morris:

Thirdly, it’s time for me to begrudgingly acknowledge the elephant in the room: any aging hitter who puts up numbers this much better than his career averages is going to immediately generate suspicion that the numbers are not natural, that perhaps he is under the influence of some sort of performance enhancer. And since I was not able to draw any absolute parallels between his prodigously improved HR rate and his new ballpark’s hitter-friendliness, it would be foolish to dismiss the possibility that “other” performance enhancers could be part of the equation.

Sorry Raul Ibanez and Major League Baseball, that’s just the era that we are in — testing or no testing.

Rosenthal:

Well, I have no idea if David Ortiz used PEDs; probably no journalist does. I could not even make an educated guess, and it would be unprofessional of me to do so.

Here's one thing I do know: Before steroids, players actually declined as they got older. Ortiz is 33. Maybe he is losing his skills. Maybe he just stinks.

But who wants to talk about that? I understand — this is the world we live in.

When Rosenthal wrote what I have been arguing is tantamout to the Morris blog post, he got initial criticism, yes, but mostly defenders in the back part of the thread

I think most of the people in the beginning were only reading the headline which, as seems to be par for the course these days, had no relation to the article. Once people R'd TFA they changed their tune.

When Rosenthal wrote what I have been arguing is tantamout to the Morris blog post,

No it wasn't. Rosenthal's column not only criticized the speculation of the type Morris is doing here, but singles out a fellow mainstream writer for doing the same. His column was similar to Gonzalez's reply, not Morris' blog post.

Hypocrisy has nothing to do with what the person's actions were. It just has to do with sincerity. Phony outrage, which is all this is. I don't remember John Gonzalez defending Sosa, or Theriot, or Ortiz when MSMers wrote similar things.

None of those guys are Phillies, the guys he covers. Show me him defending some MSMer's baseless speculation, then you've got something. Otherwise, it sounds like you're merely projecting what you think he thinks, and criticizing him for it.

And I've reread the threads Shock. Morris has received virtually no criticism here.

EDIT:

Thirdly, it’s time for me to begrudgingly acknowledge the elephant in the room: any aging hitter who puts up numbers this much better than his career averages is going to immediately generate suspicion that the numbers are not natural, that perhaps he is under the influence of some sort of performance enhancer. And since I was not able to draw any absolute parallels between his prodigously improved HR rate and his new ballpark’s hitter-friendliness, it would be foolish to dismiss the possibility that “other” performance enhancers could be part of the equation.

There is nothing in Rosenthal's column remotely like this paragraph. It's the difference, and a significant one, between the two.

I know your questions are rhetorical but currently Steroids and their masking agents are tested. We know HGH isn't tested; I'm not up on my cutting edge PED research but there are probably undetected "steroids", i.e., PEDs, that are being used undetected. How's a fan to know?

you are right, but my point was just asking how can you prove innocence? In a situation like this it's an impossibility because there are substances that aren't tested for. So therefore everyone is guilty. Not just Ibanez, but everyone. That means Howard, Eckstein, Pedroia, Ludwick, Jamey Carroll, Hamels, Santana, etc.

Though looking through his archives quickly it does seem that he has an odd fixation on Ibanez, having written about 30 columns about him since he signed with the Phils, so maybe that's all it is.

Is 30 columns in 7 months fixated when:

Who was the only player acquisition of note for the Phils in the off-season?
Who replaced a fan favorite who had a huge hit in the WS clincher?
Who has played the first third of the year like an MVP, unexpectedly?
Who has looked really good in the OF, in spite of warnings that we might be longing for Burrell's defense before too long?

Plus you have the whole 3 LH hitters in a row thing, which is good for a couple of articles.

I wouldn't put too much stock in the fixation theory.

Edmundo, I was joking.

But you're right SoSh. I actually tried to edit my post but ran out of time. Robo's column isn't how I remembered it at all, and in fact his position has remained very consistent. Good for him.

It just sure is frustrating to watch as Sosa, etc. all get thrown under a bus for no reason, and (as Robo himself says,) speculation is rampant all over the MSM. But when a lowly "blogger" even hints at it (and his comment was pretty damn innocuous,) suddenly there's Robo and Gonzo coming out of the woodwork to jump on him.

There is nothing in Rosenthal's column remotely like this paragraph. It's the difference, and a significant one, between the two.

You're right, SoSH, there's definitely a difference b/w Rosenthal's piece and Morris's. My memory of Rosenthal's was probably tainted by that stupid misleading headline on it. My bad.

I still stand by my criticism of Gonzalez, however. Morris is a blogger ... he's not attempting to break news or follow journalistic standards, he's just writing about his opinions, and in this case he did so in a manner that wasn't as inflammatory as what passes for casual on sports talk radio. The meme about bloggers in basements pulling stories out of their asses has been so beaten to death, everybody understands it. The blogger doesn't have credence until either he proves he deserves credence, or until a newspaper gives him some by essentially reporting his post as if it were a news story, thereby boosting their circulation by writing about a PED scandal that doesn't exist, that they don't have to follow newsgathering standards to report, and that they can't be charged with libel for ("Hey, I'm not reporting that Ibanez may use PEDs, I'm just reporting that there's a report out there that Ibanez may use PEDs!"). The "those damn bloggers" angle probably doesn't hurt either.

several things -

seems to me i remember that journalists can print any darn thing they want without proof without any fear whatsoever - say, selena roberts and the duke lacrosse players. say, every single sportswriter who has declared sammy sosa guilty of using steroids because he took a translator with him to speak in front of the US CONGRESS (something they wouldn't never ever have done if they had been hauled in front of a foreign government's ruling body). or even BLOGGER murray chass' accusation against piazza. i sure as heck didn't see mr. rosenthal going after chass for out and out accusing piazza of using roids based strictly on his having acne on his back like 20% of the entire male population.

how many mainstream journalists INSIST that no positive tests is not evidence of innocence? how many mainstream journalists have declared in print that they refuse to consider anyone for the hall of fame who played in the steroid era even though they ADMIT they have no evidence that some eligible players used?

journalistic integrity???? please. that is even a little bit more integrity-ous from what mr blogger in his underpants in his momma basement said, like HOW????

seems to me i don't recall mr.rosenthal and his integrity-full journalist buds going after jay mariotti for the - sammy sosa is a fraud who poops his pants - article.

don't get me started on skip bayless and his little friends on TV

ibanez can feel free to threaten some blogger in mama basement but he wouldn't have said diddly squat if some "journalist" wrote the exact same column

- but gonzalez is darn right when he says that the "real" journalists read us bloggers. i know for a fact that the local writers read my stuff even though i am, to put it very mildly, nobody in the blogging world. and i wouldn't be real too surprised if this is the very first step in both athletes and sportswriters doing something to try to stop us from posting our opinions.

I can't help but wonder where Rosenthals outrage was when his brethren were tossing Sammy Sosa under the bus.

From Wednesday's OtL:

"Suspicion in general is not at all unfair … but when you get specific, start naming names, that’s where I have a problem.”

“We’re all skeptical. … That doesn’t mean you simply go write which players you think might be using whether he’s hot or not. It’s ridiculous.”

From May 14, 2009 article on foxsports.com, Hall of Fame: Some tough calls must be made:

If the plaques simply said, "Played in the Steroid Era," how would the Hall decide when that era began? How would it justify tarnishing seemingly innocent players? How would it distinguish between suspected users such as say, Sammy Sosa, and confirmed users such as say, A-Rod?

From May 7, 2009 appearance on Fox Sports program, following Manny's suspension breaking:
Link

"I no longer am surprised anytime that I hear a ML player has used a banned substance. How can we be surprised at this point? Barry Bonds. Rafael Palmeiro. Sammy Sosa. Mark McGwire. Gary Sheffield. Roger Clemens. The list of players who are either confirmed users or suspected users includes virtually all of the big names from the 90s and early 2000s."

Based on their past columns and comments in the video, the Gonzalez/Rosenthal position seems to boil down to this:

If a blogger does something I wouldn't or couldn't do, it's unethical and he should stop.

No one would ask Ibanez about this or write about it in the MSM because sports journalists rely on access. Ask uncomfortable questions and players don't like you and you don't get information in the clubhouse. It's a tension fundamental to many beats, in sports and out (e.g., White House reporters): How much do you piss off potential sources to deliver a story?

Over time this compromise--shielding players to retain some access--becomes such a norm that sportswriters mistake it for an ethical boundary. But just because a sportswriter who needs access to athletes has to watch his step doesn't mean that other writers should, too. Morris did nothing wrong here. He looked at the data and concluded that one couldn't rule out steroids based on park effects, opponents faced, etc. Like any person with a relationship with reality, he also conceded that speculation about Ibanez was inevitable.

Writing an honest evaluation and speaking the truth isn't irresponsible; it's what we should expect from journalists. Unfortunately, we've become so used to being spoon-fed sports news as entertainment that, like sportswriters, we can't distinguish between what's real and what's entertainment.