Life & Style Needs to Reveal Its 'Experienced Freelancer'
by Ryan Ballengee on Dec 11, 2009 12:49 PM EST
Email
PrintYahoo! Sports and Dough Ferguson of the Associated Press did some inquiring into Life & Style's story yesterday that attributed some pretty harsh quotes about Tiger Woods and Elin Nordegren to two relatively unknown PGA Tour players in Ben Crane and Charles Warren.
Their stature on Tour and in the public consciousness aside, both have come out directly or through representation to say that neither player said what was attributed to them.
Through a spokesperson for Bauer Publishing Group - who publishes Life & Style, inTouch Magazine, and other teeny bopper magazines - they told Yahoo! and the AP:
"We sent an experienced freelance reporter to a golf tournament attended by several PGA pros. Our reporter spoke with two golfers who presented themselves as Ben Crane and Charles Warren. We are taking these claims very seriously and investigating further."
I contacted Life & Style editor-in-chief Dan Wakeford for comment directly from him. He referred me to the same spokesperson who provided me with the same statement that went to Yahoo! and the AP.
That's a cop out as far as I'm concerned.
It's one thing to make up rumors and attribute them to anonymous or nameless sources. At least most people with a cynical eye know to take them with a grain of salt until proven further. But for someone to attribute direct quotes to known PGA Tour players is another thing entirely. That is putting words in someone's mouth that they did not say to you. That is way more irresponsible than just making stuff up about someone else.
I want to know who the experienced freelancer is. Are they a golf reporter? Could they pick Ben Crane or Charles Warren out of a lineup? Did they do any kind of back checking to see that whoever said these things was actually the person they claimed to be? Or did they just make this whole thing up and hope that we would believe them at face value (some of us, myself included, did)?
This thing will not be swept under the rug.
34 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
That makes two of us
I couldn’t pick Warren or Crane out of a lineup but I knew the later’s PGA tour record.
This won’t be swept under the rug(This is t he 21st century, we use vacuum cleaners) but will be soon forgotten as the Woods saga continues its merry way.
Good Try
Ryan – hope they publish the results of their investigation. From what I have seen and heard about Ben Crane (apart from his slow play) I don’t believe he would make these comments. Don’t know Warren at all, but I find it highly suspect.
My guess is that some goofball that they hired went to the tournament, hung out in the parking lot, approached two guys and they had some fun with it. Then the goofball reported it as fact without any back checking.
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroomryan, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
by Ryan Ballengee on Dec 11, 2009 1:43 PM EST up reply actions
SB Nation is having technical difficulties at this moment
When those are over, I will be putting up a post that won’t paint Ryan or some golf bloggers in a very flattering light. Ryan didn’t get suckered on the crane story, he just continued what he has been practicing since the Woods story broke. Print first, verify later if ever.
Bill, it comes as no surprise that I completely disagree with your sentiment. Especially considering some conversations that I’ve had with professional journalists about this very story.
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroomryan, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
by Ryan Ballengee on Dec 11, 2009 2:49 PM EST up reply actions
Here's my post
click here. A few golf bloggers, TC, HD, myself, have stayed away from this nonsense. It isn’t golf news, its celebrity trash.
Two things:
1. All of you guys normally do not cover Tiger Woods or the PGA Tour, so this wouldn’t even be on your normal radar.
2. It actually is news. Not because of the specific women, but because of the other factors.
Was a crime committed? Perhaps so provided Windemere PD reports.
What kind of character is Tiger Woods? There’s a serious examination that needs to be done.
What will the business and financial impact be for both Tiger Woods and the PGA Tour? Sponsors, sponsors, sponsors.
There is a self-examination component to this story. Why is the general population so interested in every palpitation of this story? Why do we project heroism on superstar athletes?
What about the future of Tiger’s philanthropy? The guy is openly committed to causes helping children. Now he is quickly being perceived as kid-unfriendly.
Just because you say it isn’t news doesn’t make it so.
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroomryan, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
by Ryan Ballengee on Dec 11, 2009 3:09 PM EST up reply actions
“crime” ? not one with a victim
“character” ? just who is supposed to be the judge ? this is not “serious examination” – it is gossip mongering
“business and financial impact” ? who knows ? as it stands, anything right now is speculation at best
“self examination” ? don’t count on this happening except by the people who aren’t seriously concerned or involved in all the gossip – or by “journalists” looking for one last shot at Tiger and one last article.
“future philanthropy” ? depends on Tiger…(see busness and financial impact)…anything right now is pure speculation
It’s not “news” – it’s gossip
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
Thank you CG
I can’t believe me and you are on the same page. BTW would you like some ketchup with your french fries?
Crimes don't need a victim
There are a number of crimes where is no (or may not be a) victim. These crimes are considered to be crimes against society and are usually comprised of, but not limited to, what you might think of as “vice” crimes.
by Double Eagle on Dec 11, 2009 3:19 PM EST up reply actions
Crime – yup, driving under the influence of prescription drugs, which is a crime
Business and financial impact – we haven’t done much on that here because we don’t have many facts, but Tag Hauer is reported to have pulled Woods ads around the world. That’s an impact.
Self-examination – I actually have a post coming about this.
Future philanthropy – again, another angle of the story we haven’t touched on much yet.
I find it funny that anyone dismisses stories where experts in these fields are consulted as being “gossip” or not worth discussing. If someone has a background in the topic area, then it’s ok for them to speak on the subject.
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroomryan, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
by Ryan Ballengee on Dec 11, 2009 3:22 PM EST up reply actions
no conviction – haven’t seen any proof
It’s a friggin’ watch company – please
is the “first stone” coming from Maryland ? (hmmm) :-D
still speculation
“experts” – yeah – “experts” decided that Tiger is a “sex addict” when all THEY know is that he has had extra marital affairs. Not exactly a clinical examination.
Hey RB – look – a bunch of people jumping off a bridge ! (bwaaaahahahahahaa) :-)
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
We can still talk about the police report.
Tag Hauer is one of his major global sponsors. Sorry.
Yes, I’m including myself in the analysis.
We speculate about a lot of stuff here, so why are you making your stand now on this subject? We speculated when Bivens would get fired and no one had a problem with that. Why? Because we all disliked the job that she was doing.
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroomryan, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
by Ryan Ballengee on Dec 11, 2009 3:36 PM EST up reply actions
We speculate a lot
And not only that, but for those of us who are not journalists, pretty much all we do is speculate, give opinions, debate rumors, etc.
But regarding the Life & Style quotes, it seems to me that basically every news outlet under the sun will refer to other news outlets when reporting things that they haven’t independently verified. In other words, “As reported by such and such, so and so said…”
Maybe I just don’t understand journalism, but am I supposed to believe that when a person is interviewed by a journalist, that other journalists who excerpt quotes from that interview are supposed to call the person who was interviewed to see if he/she said all the things in the interview?
by Double Eagle on Dec 11, 2009 3:42 PM EST up reply actions
The answer is kind of unclear for that. When someone says they interviewed someone, most writers will take it at face value most of the time. Like no one dropped me a line to ask me if I really interviewed Tom Watson or Kenny Perry. But, a few did about Rachel Uchitel. You can probably guess why there was a difference.
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroomryan, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
by Ryan Ballengee on Dec 11, 2009 3:49 PM EST up reply actions
Understood
My point really is that there is some trust in journalism and that it’s an OK practice in the right circumstances. If a journalist prints direct quotes from someone, I don’t see where it’s unreasonable to run with them. When the truth came out, you corrected the story. But you can’t really account for a situation where a reporter was fooled or even fabricated something that was attributed to someone specific.
by Double Eagle on Dec 11, 2009 3:58 PM EST up reply actions
There is SUPPOSED to be some trust in journalism – but that has been in serious decline since Watergate when “journalists” decided it was their job to change the world and take political sides. That philosophy is taught in a lot of collegiate journalism classes – the job isn’t to report anymore – it is to shape public opinion.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
I’m not going to turn this thread into a history of journalism thing, but the whole idea of the “neutral” journalist was actually a 20th century concept. And then it died in the 20th century (or so it seems).
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroomryan, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
by Ryan Ballengee on Dec 11, 2009 4:02 PM EST up reply actions
I had a problem with the Bivens blather – you were betting on when someone would lose their job – and her actions were affecting the entire LPGA Tour. I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt after that ridiculous reporting of the English Language initiative.
Tiger’s actions affect him and his family – anything else is speculation right now.
I have a personal problem with the media having access to police reports before the case goes to court. It has an affect on how the case is seen – and public opinion is supposed to be left out of the legal system.
by “analysis” – are you talking about the reflection of our social more’s and morals ?
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
I think you and I both tried to give her some credit where it was due for what she did achieve. But when the rumor came out from Larry that Biv was out, I remember a FanPost saying something like, “Could it be true?!” with glee.
I would defend the media on the access to reports and such. As a journalist, you’re always trying to find info to tell a more complete and truthful story. Since police reports are public record (not just for the media), they’re going to go to an easy source.
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroomryan, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
by Ryan Ballengee on Dec 11, 2009 4:04 PM EST up reply actions
there was no “glee” fanpost from me on the Bivens issue.
sorry – the courts have to have precedence over some whacked out journalist trying to make a splash.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
Oh, I know you weren’t glad about it. Didn’t mean to imply that you did that post. I know you didn’t.
Again, this isn’t a whacked out journalist. This is public record. If you wanted the info on any accident, you could get it through a FOIA request.
Find me! Email: ryan@thegolfnewsnet.com, Twitter: http://twitter.com/waggleroomryan, or Facebook: http://facebook.com/waggleroom.
by Ryan Ballengee on Dec 11, 2009 4:28 PM EST up reply actions
I know it’s public record – I never said it wasn’t. I said it SHOULDN’T be public record because police reports are a part of a criminal investigation – meaning it is a court document. Until the court case is completed, the media shouldn’t be running evidence in a court case because it can affect how that case is viewed. That’s why they tell jurors not to read papers or watch TV during a trial.
Ok – xxx Golf Channel has already gotten on my nerves for 2010 with this 2k10 campaign.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
Convictions are irrelevant
I bet I could dig up 1000 news stories on television and in print from the last 30 days in the United States that report on “alleged” crimes where no conviction has occured. Tune into your local evening news and tell me how many of those reports involved “alleged” crimes.
by Double Eagle on Dec 11, 2009 3:36 PM EST up reply actions
Bill....I read your post and
I really can’t believe you can be critical of anyone else. What is up with that????
Seems fair to me – if they are going to employ people like this who embarrass their magazine – and they are going to participate in the public humiliation of Tiger Woods – then they need to fess up to their lack of journalistic integrity as well.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
Court.....you're right,
these “journalists” should be accountable for their bogus reporting. I don’t care who they are, because I won’t know them, but their stupidity casts doubts on all the other stories.
Court.....some of it
is gossip, some of it is news. You can decide what is and what isn’t, based on your own personal preferences….but the fact that so many people (tw.com 400,000 hits) are talking about it, and so many news outlets are reporting it, I believe makes it news. My preference.
What can be considered newsworthy is pretty subjective, but I’d say it’s probably safe to say that if people care about it, it’s news. That doesn’t excuse non-factual reporting and the like, of course.
But I think to say this story isn’t news is not accurate. We may not like that people care so much about it, but they do, so in my opinion, that makes it news.
by Double Eagle on Dec 11, 2009 3:32 PM EST up reply actions
true enough – but how do 400,000 hits on TigerWoods.com make anything “news” ?
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
400,000 is just a basis
for saying so many people are talking about it. I read somewhere that normal hits are just a few thousand……just making a point.
While I was watch golf.
It’s very cold where I am so watching golf from South Florida was at least a visual relief… This whole Ben Crane/Charles Warren thing has exploded into a bunch of tangential issues about journalism. The discussion about which could go on forever.
What’s most impressive, despite some strong opinions the discourse was polite. Progolf, you were right!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Have a golf story tip? Contact editor Charles Boyer and he will follow the story! Thanks!
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
