If you are going to read one column about the Selena Roberts book on Alex Rodriguez, it should be this one. Because Whitlock hits on some vital points, I am just going to quote generously from the article and let it speak for itself:
She claimed that the players’ unwillingness to confess to or snitch about a rape (that did not happen) was the equivalent of drug dealers and gang members promoting antisnitching campaigns.
When since-disgraced district attorney Mike Nifong whipped up a media posse to rain justice on the drunken, male college students, Roberts jumped on the fastest, most influential horse, using her New York Times column to convict the players and the culture of privilege that created them.
Proven inaccurate, Roberts never wrote a retraction for the columns that contributed to the public lynching of Reade Seligmann, Colin Finnerty and David Evans……..
Roberts’ speculative opinions are deemed as so credible by ESPN and others that the Worldwide Leader ran all-day updates stating that Selena Roberts believes that it’s “irrefutable” that Rodriguez used performance-enhancing drugs while a teenager.
At no point did ESPN’s TV anchors or radio broadcasters mention that Roberts was the same person who led the media charge against the Duke lacrosse players. I listened to Roberts’ interview on Dan Patrick’s radio show. Patrick never asked her about Duke lacrosse or why we should trust her reporting.
In its news story about her book, The New York Times failed to allude to her position on the Duke lacrosse case. I’ll give the Times credit for including one sentence of clarification in its news story:
“Some of the accusations in the book are based on anonymous sources, and others are simply presented as knowledge the author has without an explanation of how the information was obtained.”
Translation: the majority of the stuff written in her book is information the National Enquirer might reject.
The national media anti-snitching campaign is twice as pervasive and effective as anything put together by the Bloods, Crips and LAPD. For the most part, we refuse to squeal on each other.
Roberts’ book is a long-winded blog. Why it’s being treated as an unimpeachable piece of journalism can only be explained by the cushy position she’s been handed by The New York Times, ESPN and Sports Illustrated and the unchallenged institutional bias found within the elite sports media institutions.
Like the Duke lacrosse players, the elite media have decided that Alex Rodriguez is fair game for abuse. Rules of fairness do not apply.
In a rush to prove its racial even-handedness, the media initially chose to swallow the accusations of a black stripper over white college students. Roberts and others made fools of themselves. They were given the leeway to do so only because lacrosse players aren’t part of the NCAA money-making machine and unlikely to be future subjects of high-profile stories.
The players were convenient, vulnerable targets.
So is Rodriguez………
I am not asserting a nationwide racial conspiracy against minority baseball players. I’m in no way stating that Roberts’ pursuit of Rodriguez is motivated by race. I’m asserting that the media’s unwillingness to publicly and aggressively challenge itself breeds unequal and unfair coverage.
We all have biases that must be contested. We’re all capable of getting swept up in the biases of our peers and friends.
The allegations in Roberts’ book might very well be true. But I’m not going to trust her, not without some on-the-record reporting, not after what she wrote about the Duke lacrosse players.
Thoughts?
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
11 Responses to Whitlock On The Roberts Book
Leave a Reply
TIQ IQ
Finally, the pushback begins.
I think that we as fans and bloggers need to call out the witch hunters. First among them is Peter Abraham, who had a post the other day that basically said, ‘Selena Roberts has never published anything that wasn’t 100% true”. Journalists are fallible. They stretch the truth to make a buck some times.
Totally and unequivocally agree. It’s almost like some “journalists” band together and cover for each other like a Duke lacrosse team or something… oh wait, the Duke lacrosse team actually WAS forthright and wasn’t covering up information. They seem to take offense that anyone would DARE question a reporter. Heard an interview with her this morning on FAN and she basically said that she has sources, she won’t give ANY details about how they know what they know, but that SHE believes them, and she won’t cooperate with any investigation into the matter. So, basically we have to trust her word that she knows what the heck she’s talking about and not stretching anything at all, even though she has zero credibility after the Duke thing. Again, not saying he didn’t do it, but also not taking her word that she has “irrefutable” evidence since she’s been known to jump to conclusions before, and even when proven wrong has pretended she didn’t say what she did rather than apologize.
Her real issue, in my book, is the lack of a single on the record account regarding any of these allegations. Not one.
I totally agree. I like Pete A but that post was so wrong I couldn’t believe it. It seems that he especially has it out for A-Rod. It seems that 99% of the time it’s negative posts about him.
I live in KC and I get to read Whitlock all the time. Most of the time his stuff sucks but about once every 2 months or so he has a great column and this is it.
I think its always about jealously when it comes to the media I hate to agree with Curt shilling about anything but he did say that the media (men) ar just a group of guys who are jealosu they cant be atheletes. As far as female journalists I believe they see a guy like AROD who likes strip clubs and cheats on his wife and whatevere else and they are inately hurt because its probably happened to them and so of course they will try to demonize arod. In my mind its personal hatred and nothing more elegant than that
Also I’d like to recommend everyone read the Jim Caple story that’s currently on ESPN.com. I’m not a fan of his but he makes some good points regarding Arod being public enenmy #1.
I lost a lot of respect for Abraham in regards to how he covers Alex Rodriguez. Calling your readers dumb isn’t a good idea either. Also someone should tell him his jokes are getting old and if he could go through 1 game thread without mentioning:
1) Empty seats
2) Launching Pad
3)A-Rod
4) Berroa’s Age
I’d appreciate it.
He did the same crap during the Andy Pettitte thing last year. He criticizes the New York media for being self-righteous but then plays along when he wants to.
Abraham and Sherman have been hacks for a lot longer than the Arod story. Neither of them take any responsibility for reporting things that turn out to not be true, and both defend other journalists without any regard for whether they are honest or not. (I think Roberts’ dishonesty is pretty plain to see.)
ESPN is backtracking on it’s almost objective analysis of this book, and has started quoting parts of it as truth.
Let’s face it, the bulk of the sporting press are cut from the same cloth as Dick Young-vindictive, bitter, and self-righteous.
I actually think they are two of the best in NY. They have flaws, but at least they understand the game, unlike the Matthews and Kings of the world.
I can recall being incensed about Sherman articles in the mid-90s. He’s not Mike Lupica when it comes to being mean-spirited, but he’s up there.
The way Abraham reacts to people who disagree with him is arrogant The way he goes after people for things as innocuous posting line-ups from his site is absurd.
I hate to see him quoted here-it lowers what I consider to be a pretty high standard.