Did Botchford have the right to report it? Yes. These comments were for 20 microphones/cameras, they are ON THE RECORD. The claims from Sharks PR staff that these are off the record are just false. If he didn't want them out there, he shouldn't have said it to that many people or he should have told them not to run with it after. Joe has to know better. He's got some blame here.
I thought I read that someone did ask him if they could go on record with it and he said no?
Either way, stating that Joe should get some blame here is kind of irrelevant, as pretty much the whole hockey world is laughing and thinks Joe is awesome for this and pretty much all the outrage is focused on Jason Botchford breaking the hockey code and reporting something that no one else would have reported.
I thought I read that someone did ask him if they could go on record with it and he said no?
If Jason caught wind that he heard that Joe wanted that off the record and he continued to go with it, then he's absolutely in the wrong. I can't imagine Jason would go with it if he heard that.
If Jason caught wind that he heard that Joe wanted that off the record and he continued to go with it, then he's absolutely in the wrong. I can't imagine Jason would go with it if he heard that.
A comment like that and he doesn't think it would be off the record? Really? Everyone else seemed to know.
If Jason caught wind that he heard that Joe wanted that off the record and he continued to go with it, then he's absolutely in the wrong. I can't imagine Jason would go with it if he heard that.
Joe specifically stated that he would not repeat his statement when his media scrum began. What more do you need?
If Jason caught wind that he heard that Joe wanted that off the record and he continued to go with it, then he's absolutely in the wrong. I can't imagine Jason would go with it if he heard that.
Common sense man. Common sense.
He had to know it wasn't on the record because of what the content of the quote was.
It was a stupid move by the reporter that will probably have ramifications for his career.
I've been in locker rooms - you have to know what stuff is on the record and what stuff isn't. And if you aren't sure - assume it isn't. Particularly if your colleagues don't report it.
DUMB.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to JiriHrdina For This Useful Post:
Common sense man. Common sense.
He had to know it wasn't on the record because of what the content of the quote was.
It was a stupid move by the reporter that will probably have ramifications for his career.
I've been in locker rooms - you have to know what stuff is on the record and what stuff isn't. And if you aren't sure - assume it isn't. Particularly if your colleagues don't report it.
DUMB.
The very definition of ON THE RECORD is when there are cameras rolling and microphones recording. Joe yelled this at 20 guys. He didn't casually say this in the background to a player or to a couple reporters. I'm not buying this off the record stuff. When that locker room is open to the media, things that are said to a group of reporters are fair game.
What if Joe made a racist remark or a homophobic slur, would you want the reporter to not out the guy because you believe it was off the record? No. If Joe or the Sharks didn't want it out there, he shouldn't have said it or they should have made it abundantly clear that it was off the record. From what I know, they didn't and Jason ran with it.
Again, I don't think he should have, but he's got every right to if that's his prerogative.
Last edited by VANFLAMESFAN; 10-11-2013 at 04:57 PM.
If Jason caught wind that he heard that Joe wanted that off the record and he continued to go with it, then he's absolutely in the wrong. I can't imagine Jason would go with it if he heard that.
Seriously? He's talking about masterbating if he scored 4 goals, and you think there's some question about whether it was fair game to publish?
The Following User Says Thank You to jayswin For This Useful Post:
Seriously? He's talking about masterbating if he scored 4 goals, and you think there's some question about whether it was fair game to publish?
Why is not fair game? Because it makes the player look good/bad or however people wanna see it?
Reporters aren't in the business of protecting players, they're in the business of relaying information the average fan can't get. It's on them to decide what's relevant and what's not. Jason decided people would want to hear this and ran with it and had every right to do so.
The very definition of ON THE RECORD is when there are cameras rolling and microphones recording. Joe yelled this at 20 guys. He didn't casually say this in the background to a player or to a couple reporters. I'm not buying this off the record stuff. When that locker room is open to the media, things that are said to a group of reporters are fair game.
What if Joe made a racist remark or a homophobic slur, would you want the reporter to not out the guy because you believe it was off the record? No. If Joe or the Sharks didn't want it out there, he shouldn't have said it or they should have made it abundantly clear that it was off the record. From what I know, they didn't and Jason ran with it.
Again, I don't think he should have, but he's got every right to if that's his prerogative.
You work in radio - the mic picks up all sorts of stuff that isn't fit for air.
Did he technically have the right to go with it? Sure. I guess. But he had to do so knowing the long-term price he would pay in terms of losing the trust of the players.
Just a bad decision that 99% of the media wouldn't make.
Again the comment alone makes it pretty damn clear that it wasn't "on the record".
The Following User Says Thank You to JiriHrdina For This Useful Post:
Why is not fair game? Because it makes the player look good/bad or however people wanna see it?
Reporters aren't in the business of protecting players, they're in the business of relaying information the average fan can't get. It's on them to decide what's relevant and what's not. Jason decided people would want to hear this and ran with it and had every right to do so.
He had the right to go with it.
He had a responsibility not to.
That's what it comes down to.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to JiriHrdina For This Useful Post:
You work in radio - the mic picks up all sorts of stuff that isn't fit for air.
Did he technically have the right to go with it? Sure. I guess. But he had to do so knowing the long-term price he would pay in terms of losing the trust of the players.
Just a bad decision that 99% of the media wouldn't make.
Again the comment alone makes it pretty damn clear that it wasn't "on the record".
I agree with you on everything here outside of the last sentence.
Thornton assumed no one would run with it. But in this day and age of every word being dissected thru social media and other outlets, he shouldn't have.
It's his career and time will tell what the ramifications will come of it.
Like Jiri said, Sure he had the right to run it, as did every single one who heard it.
The telling thing about it all is 19/20 did the proper thing and not run it as they somehow knew it was an inside joke not intended for the public.
For me it is telling that everyone else used good manners not to run an obvious inside joke and one did.
Again, it's his career and we will see how it all shakes down. Aaron ward made a very valid point on his tweets today. He single handedly jeopardized the player/media relationship for personal gain.
I'd wager his Tsn air time is nullified but hos job with the newspaper is still good.
But if it was, I'm sure you'd want the reporter to roll with that.
That's a moot point though, because it wasn't. And exactly the reason everyone is calling it The Strawman. And it truly is the essence of the aforementioned argumentative fallacy. He's throwing up utterly disconnected scenarios and pointing at them as a means to deflect from the original discussion. Something a seasoned wordsmith knows better than to fall into.
That's a moot point though, because it wasn't. And exactly the reason everyone is calling it The Strawman. And it truly is the essence of the aforementioned argumentative fallacy. He's throwing up utterly disconnected scenarios and pointing at them as a means to deflect from the original discussion. Something a seasoned wordsmith knows better than to fall into.
