Download issue (PDF) - Nieman Foundation - Harvard University

Journalist’s Tradethe disclosure as “an unethical piece ofjournalism” and declared that “it shouldnot have happened.”Stevenson’s reaction appears a bitincredulous given her own forays intobreaking similar stories. Only onemonth earlier she had broken a story inThe New York Times about DamirDokic, the father of top tennis playerJelena Dokic. Stevenson reported thathe had been arrested for drunk anddisorderly behavior at a tennis tournamentin Birmingham, England.Did the Stevenson coverage represent“a good story with legitimate newsvalue” or does it provide another exampleof the sort of voyeurism that hasbecome all too prevalent today?Given how some tennis parents seemincapable of remaining in the background,it’s an easy judgment call tosuggest both stories were inside theline of legitimate news. Both DamirDokic and Samantha Stevenson haveused their children’s athletic prowessto draw public notoriety to themselves.To claim a privacy right after you participatein news conferences toutingyour daughter’s abilities or subject othersto boorish public behavior is almostlaughable.Some athletes, such as NBA bad boysDennis Rodman and Allen Iverson, invitescrutiny of their personal lives becauseof their behavior off the playingfield. Rodman, one of the bestrebounders in the game of basketball,has always willingly put himself in thepublic spotlight, whether it has beenon the basketball court or holding anews conference dressed in a weddinggown. Similarly, Iverson, now one ofthe top point guards in the NBA, hasnever refused to shake off his “gangsta”image that began when he playedcollegiately at Georgetown. Admittedly,other athletes are pulled into the notso-pleasantlimelight by events that takeplace in their personal lives, such as anathlete who “fathers” several childrenout of wedlock, another who is arrestedfor drunken driving, or a coachwho abuses his wife or girlfriend.There are other circumstances wherethe question about whether coverageis deserved is not so clear. An athlete’ssexual orientation is one of those areas.Sports Illustrated, in one of itsmany stories on the world championU.S. women’s national soccer team,couldn’t resist raising the questionabout lesbians on the team by quotingdefender Kate Sobrero’s wonderfullyoblique retort to a male follower whoasked if she was a lesbian. “No,” shereplied. “But my girlfriend is.”While a great quote and insightfulabout Sobrero’s poise and grace, thequestion about her sexual orientationseemed gratuitous.Another is private behavior thatnever becomes part of the publicrecord. Julius Erving didn’t deservehaving his relationship with SamanthaStevenson disclosed because he fulfilledhis responsibilities to support hisdaughter. Unfortunately for him,Samatha Stevenson made herself partof her daughter’s story. Her willingnessto throw stones while living in aglass house is what made her daughter’sstory fair game for other reporters topursue.Then there are the “rumor stories.”Several years ago, Wisconsin footballcoach Barry Alvarez had to deal withpublication on the Internet of scurrilousrumors about his personal life.These rumors resulted in a situation inwhich nearly every news outlet in thestate set out to determine if they weretrue. No reporter was able to confirmthem, but for weeks journalists delvedinto every part of the coach’s privatelife searching for anything to substantiatethe rumors.Alvarez won’t talk about this episode,but these kind of situations arebecoming more and more common asInternet sports bulletin boards are becomingmore infested with gossip andinnuendo. There isn’t a sports editoror reporter who doesn’t read thosebulletin boards, fearful that somethingvicious and personal will be postedand force them to investigate, eventhough the “news” has more likelihoodof being a snipe hunt than it doesof producing a legitimate story.How should sports reporters andeditors deal with these kinds of decisions?What follows is a series of questionsthat I think would be useful to ask.1. Would failure to report the storyindicate a bias on the part of thenewspaper or outlet?For years, writers and editors seemedmore interested in recounting the legendsabout sports figures than reportingthe more complicated stories aboutthe real people who played thesegames. Often they would look the otherway when athletes misbehaved. Clearlythat attitude has changed, even thoughthere remains criticism from readersand listeners who don’t like their “heroes”to be portrayed with their humanfoibles. Yet it is my firm belief that nosports reporter should place himselfor herself in the position of having toexplain why he or she did not write apotentially embarrassing story aboutan athlete if the news was judged to berelevant, important and legitimate.Simply put, athletes, coaches, sportsfigures and owners who play at topcompetitive levels are public figures.As a result, in today’s media marketplacewhat they do on and off the fieldseems likely to find its way into thestream of news. And this will probablyhappen whether or not the “news” hasany direct bearing on how these peopleperform in their jobs. This circumstanceis bemoaned by those who worry aboutwhat happens when more and morepeople’s privacy seems senselessly jeopardized.But in such a highly competitivenews environment, expect more,not fewer, such revelations.2. Is this a good thing?This question seems no longer relevant.With myriad media outlets, thereare always going to be reporters andeditors who believe strongly that disclosureis important either because itwill enhance ratings or circulation orbecause it merits journalistic scrutiny.Some newspapers and electronic mediaaren’t ever going to shy away fromthese kinds of stories. The rest maywait a day or two, but eventually thepressure to match what has been dis-40 Nieman Reports / Fall 1999