The Media Learning Curve: June 5-12

Another teaching moment, at least, at the expense of a lot of frayed nerves and shattered egos:

Among the more disturbing media stories to follow week this was launched from a blog post from Midwest Sports Fans (MSF) about the "curious case" of Raul Ibanez and his performance this year for the Philadelphia Phillies.

Steroids? You gotta consider at least the sniff of it in these days of players able to do things without getting caught, and the site continues to debate it (linked here) in the aftermath of how the mainstream media reacted to it.

It's become a test case again for how news travels way too fast and far too recklessly to compete with more traditional means of journalism. It also shows how statements are twisted, taken more out of context, not explained fully, and, in generally, sprayed about to all fields to make them work in other stories that really aren't what the original story said.

It led to this story the Philadelphia Inquirer's Jim Salisbury, quoting Ibanez:

"I'll come after people who defame or slander me. It's pathetic and disgusting. There should be some accountability for people who put that out there. ... Unfortunately, I understand the environment we're in and the events that have led us to this era of speculation. At the same time, you can't just walk down the street and accuse somebody of being a thief because they didn't have a nice car yesterday and they do today. You can't say that guy is a thief ... You can have my urine, my hair, my blood, my stool - anything you can test. I'll give you back every dime I've ever made (if the test is positive). I'll put that up against the jobs of anyone who writes this stuff. Make them accountable. There should be more credibility than some 42-year-old blogger typing in his mother's basement. It demeans everything you've done with one stroke of the pen."

That led to a repost on MSF that included:

"What happened ... is a perfect illustration of one reason why the mainstream media finds itself in the troubling times it is in. There is absolutely a way for blogs and the MSM to co-exist, but the delicate balance between the two gets shaken every time the hard work that I and other bloggers do is cast aside as "cowardly" and "pathetic" and "irresponsible." Well you know what else is cowardly, pathetic, and irresponsible? Making specific accusations, attacking, and calling people out publicly when you haven't even read what they wrote or investigated what the supposedly said, or at least have a funny way of showing it if you did. And I'm not addressing any one person in particular here, but rather the entire group of people who have jumped on the bandwagon while forgetting to read the post that started all of this."

Which is right here (linked here).

What did we learn here, again? How is the blog's posting so much different that what the credible Rick Telander wrote for the Chicago Sun Times a couple of weeks ago (linked here).

Instant reaction may be called for, but not necessary. Absorb the material, think it through, continue the discussion, stop making it personal. Good premise to the blog post -- probably something many were thinking. Poor execution on how it was grabbed and thrown through the news cycle.

Carry on, kids: