Comments on: Did ESPN Really Scoop the Iverson Story?

By: Berny

Berny — Sun, 24 Dec 2006 01:38:48 +0000

Veterans committee of the hall of fame WAKE UP , and induct RON SANTO into the baseball HALL OF FAME

By: Sparky

Sparky — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 19:38:23 +0000

Good point DBVader. We all know that Deadspin gets all the stories and the other blogs just ride on their coat tails. The other blogs just change a few words and call it thier own, but they give a small mention to deadspin. Like dwil of Sports on my Mind, who hated deadspin, but now is taking turns blowing them with critical sports blog. I wonder if they use two ply or bounty to wipe of the jizz.

By: b-dub

b-dub — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:43:52 +0000

This happens all the time with espn … like any sports web site, they get wire feeds from all over the place so if a story comes in (and let’s face it, the AI deal was already out there in some capacity) they have one of their guys churn something out, maybe grab a quote or two or put their analysis in it, slap an “AP contributed to this report” and they run with it as their own because that’s pretty much the fastest way people are going to get it. Rarely does one of their guys actually break anything. More often than not it’s some beat writer in that location that has the scoop and it’s either on that paper’s web site or whatever. And ESPN’s guys (reporters, editors, etc) know (like the rest of the world) that if a guy is going to get traded from a team, a paper from that city is likely going to have it first so they’ll keep an eye on that web site, keep in touch with that reporter, etc.

By: dbvader

dbvader — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 17:57:47 +0000

ESPNisajoke,
The question I think Justin had is the same I have. If it is a difference of ten minutes, how do we know that ESPN and Alridge did not independently learn of the trade and the time difference is a matter of a difference in the time to write it up and get it posted to the site?

By: Sparky

Sparky — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 16:58:58 +0000

Where’s the beef? Who has proof? Oh, I get it no one figured this out until the BigDick figured it out that this supposedley happened. Give us his email address. Right bigpicture, I expected you to figure this out after rating erin andrews, but I guess you had to wipe the computer off christmas slush. I better get credit for this because I found out I was going to write this before you did. Okay.

Oh yeah, I can not write properly.

By: ESPNisajoke

ESPNisajoke — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 14:14:34 +0000

“what does it matter?”

What “matters” is journalistic integrity. It’s really plagarism when you get right down to it – taking credit for someone else’s work. Particularly a “someone else” who once worked for you and who you dumped for reasons to this day I still don’t understand. Good for Aldridge to beat em on this one.

It’s a shame that ESPN does this ALL THE TIME and gets away with it.

By: ReKen

ReKen — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 04:44:25 +0000

What everyone should also know is that there’s also an internal pecking order at the WWL for scoops too. For example, Chad Ford will get a breaking story on a prospect for the draft first, but the credit will go to Andy Katz (who finds out through another channel later) because he’s the “college basketball guy” or he was slated to write about that prospect .

Thus, Stein/Sheridan may not have been the guys at ESPN who first heard about the story. They may have simply been assigned to write columns on AI if there was a trade (planned days ago), and thus were credited so their columns could also conveniently run so it looks like ESPN got a scoop AND its writers filed immediately. This creates more excitement around the news and in theory drives more traffic. That’s why they switched the front page to Skirmish mode (where the image of AI also took up the flash module).

Yup, the AP deal with ESPN allows .com to simply cut and paste the story. If you simply want to see what’s going to come up soon under ESPN Headlines, just click on the “Wire” link (at the bottom of the Headlines box); those are the same feeds the editors get (although the general audience gets them on a 20 min delay unless you know the “secret”).

By: Justin

Justin — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 03:20:30 +0000

You guys are idiots. what does it matter? 10 minutes… thats like splitting hairs. Maybe i don’t get it b/c i’m not a journalist, but it would bother me more if a reporter jumped the gun on a story just to say that they got the ’scoop.’ Sheesh, stop hating on ESPN, yeah they have their problems, but who else could do what they do? I mean, they have boosted the way sports are covered, shows/games are produced, and give exposure to games that otherwise the public would never see or hear about. I’m not saying get down on your knees for espn, but why so much hate?

By: TheBigLead

TheBigLead — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 03:08:13 +0000

Eric speaks the truth. His was the first email to hit our inbox, and it did link to the Philly paper. In case anyone is wondering – and you’re probably not – there have been no emails from ESPN brass today refuting Aldridge’s account.

By: eric

eric — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 00:17:23 +0000

considering the moment the story broke, i checked espn, both tv. and the internet and couldnt find the story, i find it odd as well. When i emailed you guys that it was breaking , I Was using DA’s story for the proof. ESPN is worthless..I pray someone comes up with a 24 hr sports network to unseed them..