Should Baseball Writers Be Allowed To Speculate About Steroids?
Baseball, Steroids May 29th. 2009, 1:00pm
Revelations about Manny Ramirez and Alex Rodriguez using steroids, have opened the door for baseless accusations, even among the mainstream media. Ken Rosenthal is not comfortable with that.
Baseless accusations are an affront not just to journalistic standards, which evolve with new technology, but also an affront to standards of decency.
For all I know, Ortiz might have been a user; the Steroid Era, sadly, has taught us to view all players skeptically. But there is a significant difference between holding such a view privately and accusing a player publicly without any factual basis for such an opinion.
Ten years ago, no reporter would have dared make such a leap, fearing, at minimum, a stern rebuke from an editor and, at worst, a lawsuit. In fact, the difficulty in “naming names” was one problem in reporting on steroids in baseball.
He also makes a point about this “anything goes†mentality emanating from the Internet.
It is an interesting question, and a double-sided one. Journalists need to be fair to their subjects. Players should not have their reputations tarnished without proof.
However, journalists are also responsible to their audience.
We know there are more than 100 unrevealed names on a list. That was when players knew they were going to be tested. It is reasonable to assume some players stopped using, fearful of even anonymous testing. It is reasonable to assume some players were already masking their drug use in that initial testing. This is a relevant issue.
If someone drops twenty pounds of muscle and stops hitting for power in this era, it is irresponsible to skewer them without evidence. But, it is also irresponsible not to acknowledge the possibility. That failure is why most baseball reporting on the issue has been reactive rather than proactive.
As far as this stemming from the mysterious Internet and blogs, it is not. Steroid speculation comes from baseball fans. It is what people are discussing. Blogs are merely a more passionate, more accessible reflection of it.
27 Responses to “Should Baseball Writers Be Allowed To Speculate About Steroids?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.

May 29th, 2009 at 1:05 PM
If someone drops twenty pounds of muscle and stops hitting for power in this era, it is irresponsible to skewer them without evidence. But, it is also irresponsible not to acknowledge the possibility
Facts can still make your story subjective. If you said that “(player x) dropped twenty pounds and stopped hitting home runs,” everybody would know what you’re saying, even though you didn’t say it.
May 29th, 2009 at 1:08 PM
But why the euphemisms? What is wrong with saying that there is speculation?
May 29th, 2009 at 1:10 PM
i understand what this post is saying and writers should be able to speculate but they should do it with some sense not just to make shock waves.
May 29th, 2009 at 1:15 PM
as much as this pains me to write, what’s the over/under on pujols being exposed?
May 29th, 2009 at 1:18 PM
Too often in journalism (thanks to the Internet, 24 hour news and ESPN), there is a sense of not only being first and forgetting accuracy but also sensationalism. A lot of journalists in this age seem to be out to make shock waves, as mrejr said. Jemelle Hill and Selena Roberts come to mind (and that’s not sexism).
It was journalists – who’s duties are too seek and report the truth – who turned their heads to the steroids in the 1980s and 90s and allowed for such rampant abuse. So for some of those guys who were around then to suddenly wave their iron pen now – when it’s popular and when use is illegal – it’s pretty hypocritical.
May 29th, 2009 at 1:19 PM
When will LeBron admit his body has been filled with HGH since his senior year?
/running as I type
May 29th, 2009 at 1:19 PM
havent seen the guy in person but he looks fucking huge..
/nl central opponent’d
May 29th, 2009 at 1:20 PM
i remember reading or seeing somewhere..maybe espn..that its a myth that the players knew the tests were coming
May 29th, 2009 at 1:21 PM
If someone has evidence, I’m all for them shouting from the highest mountain that so and so did steroids, here’s the proof.
if you don’t have any proof, shouting so and so used steroids can tarnish a players career/legacy if they are innocent.
But hey, even players that are accused of using steroids, but there’s no evidence, are forever thought of being dirty cheats just because enough people started talking about it.
May 29th, 2009 at 1:21 PM
When will LeBron admit his body has been filled with HGH since his senior year?
He was a wisp of a man when I saw him play on national television as a junior in high school. It’s just shocking. He must weigh 10-12 pounds more now.
May 29th, 2009 at 1:22 PM
we do it all the time. just saying.
May 29th, 2009 at 1:23 PM
spence will blow a gasket over that comment.
pooh-holes i think will be like sammy sosa when it is all said and done. we believe without a doubt he did it but there will be absolutely no proof of it.
May 29th, 2009 at 1:25 PM
But why the euphemisms? What is wrong with saying that there is speculation?
Because alluding to obvious things isn’t libeling someone. If you say he lost 20 pounds and quit hitting home runs (and he did), then nobody can sue you.
Speculating about steroids and printing unfounded allegations is what gets newspapers sued. That’s why even good, seasoned writers are supposed to have unpaid interns as fact checkers, as well as a good copy editor.
May 29th, 2009 at 1:26 PM
Exactly. The court of public opinion. As much as everyone hates Bonds, there’s never been proof that he tested positive for drugs. Some grand jury stuff leaked but nothing is concrete. Yet this and the fact that he’s a fucking asshole make him guilty in the court of public opinion.
And on Pujols – Read this SI piece about him and then tell us what you think about the ‘roids and HGH, etc.
May 29th, 2009 at 1:26 PM
I think you nailed it, Ty. A few weeks back, there was an espn.com article on Ortiz’s slump, and not a magic s word to be found anywhere in the article. I think it was owed to the reader to mention the possibility because no doubt that is what is on everyone’s mind regarding Ortiz.
May 29th, 2009 at 1:27 PM
Kobe and Garnett were twigs when they came out, LeBron has been the incredible hulk since he was 16.
May 29th, 2009 at 1:30 PM
By the way, I’m looking at some fabolous nude photos of Lucy Pinder right now. Good god.
NSFW!!!!
May 29th, 2009 at 1:32 PM
I look forward to the point in time in the near future, maybe 5, 10, or 15 years down the road when someone hits 60+ homeruns. The media will not hesitate to bring up steroids, everyone will get sick of hearing about the story/rumors, and we will all realize that in the “post-steroids” era baseball records are no longer sacred. Then society can finally transition to enjoying baseball without giving a shit whether the athletes are on steroids just like we do with football, basketball or any other sport.
May 29th, 2009 at 1:32 PM
Most sports writers are not journalists or do not want to be. The see themselves (strive to be even) as columnists (Ty I think you brought this up in the past). Its seems as though many use facts (quotes, stats, etc) haphazardly. They want to be on radio or TV. If there is a Mark Fainaru-Wada piece out there with what you describe above let me know.
May 29th, 2009 at 1:33 PM
NSFW!!!!
those of you with jobs should quit them, and look at those photos. Giddy Up!
May 29th, 2009 at 1:34 PM
Wishing I weren’t at work now.
May 29th, 2009 at 1:35 PM
I love lucy. have to wait till 4 to view pics
May 29th, 2009 at 1:36 PM
Lucy Pinder is juiced!
May 29th, 2009 at 1:36 PM
even if someone was proven to use steroids, the people who take it personally are the writers. Fans’ dont really give a shit anymore.
The writers, they are the ones you have to look out for because when someone tests positive, it ruins their ruby colored glasses view of childhood, listening to ball games on the radio, keeping score on the torn off peice of Wheaties box.
May 29th, 2009 at 2:21 PM
i think they all use until proven otherwise.
May 29th, 2009 at 2:30 PM
He and A-Rod have the same dealer. That’s how they know each other.
May 29th, 2009 at 3:35 PM
Does the notion of “Innocent until proven guilty” mean anything to anyone anymore? I’m perfectly ok with journalists using innuendo or quoting circumstantial evidence in a responsible way. But there is absolutely nothing legitimate about some journalist anywhere lobbing accusations without firm proof.