Steven Goff gets catty, has a point

Goff unleashes the claws here in a Tuesday blog post.

It’s going to be very interesting to see who now goes over there and if some folks affiliated with ESPN suddenly are asked to decline that trip to South Africa.

Goff is dead-on correct here, of course. I don’t have a huge problem with individual bloggers going if they’re up front with the readers about how they were able to go, but for ESPN’s bloggers from an ostensibly journalistic institution to take a freebie like this is absolutely over the line.

Early comment thread scuttlebutt on the GoffBlog lists Canales and Galarcep as possible targets.

About these ads

15 thoughts on “Steven Goff gets catty, has a point

  1. Steven Goff? Catty? Pushing his own agenda? Leaning on his Washington Post position in order to promote himself at the expense of independents?

    Seriously? Steven Goff?

    Not Steven Goff. You must have misspoke. I mean – wow. Just the very idea. Steven Goff. Running down people he doesn’t feel are on his level.

    I mean, I just can’t imagine it. I just called up a bunch of people and told them the news. They can’t believe it, either. It’s like, how out of the blue is this? Like, totally, totally out of nowhere. This is so amazingly, incredibly out of character. This is astounding.

    Gosh. Steven Goff, overreacting to what other people are doing and thinking it hurts him somehow? Steven Goff, protecting his non-existent turf? THE Steven Goff? Can this be? Can this really be?

    Boy. Talk about a game-changer. Talk about a role reversal. Years from now, we’ll say “Where were you when Steven Goff took out his frustrations on his newspaper’s decline on random bloggers?”

    …a free ticket to South Africa to promote tourism? What was second prize, two free tickets? Are Ives and Andrea going to rape infants to cure their HIV, or is that reserved for mainstream reporters?

  2. So what? Why not? What journalistic integrity is at stake? its the Confederations Cup not a UN Security meeting. Hell – there are far more agregious conflicts of interest with the TARP bailouts and that’s not stopping anyone.

    Hell – I’ll go if someone wants to pay my expenses. Who are you – the Pope?

  3. re: Dan

    My site’s sarcasm meter just blew up. That was so caustic I can’t even tell who you’re ripping…

  4. Damn, Dan… do we have some issues with Goff, perhaps?

    And the raping infants comment was really just unnecessary and in bad taste.

    @CornellBigRed- your lacrosse team lost to my Brown Bears last week! HA!
    Glad to know I’m not the only Ivy League and soccer fan!

  5. No, I mean seriously. I don’t think anyone laughed at that. It was just a juvenile and immature remark that kind of took away from the otherwise spectacular use of sarcasm in your post.

  6. ….well, okay, that’s valid. I probably should have saved the anti-South Africa tourism part for a separate post. I apologize for being a colostomy bag about it, but….

    ….geez, how else can someone react? The whole thing just seems so preposterous all around. “Our country’s image sure is taking a beating, what with people thinking rape cures lesbianism and AIDS….Eureka! We’ll hire soccer bloggers!” Goff’s reaction is just the meringue here. Yeah, that’s the issue – journalistic integrity among sports bloggers. Nice diagnosis, House.

  7. Well, the truth is, if they take junkets — if they’re compensated by the sources they’re purporting to cover — then they aren’t on his level.

    That doesn’t mean their work would be rendered utterly worthless. It would be whatever it would be. But it does mean they’ll have created a perceived conflict of interest. And thus they will have forfeited the right to deem themselves journalists; that sphere will be reserved for those without such conflicts.

    This isn’t hard to understand. It’s pretty basic stuff.

    People who accept trips and other frills from their sources aren’t journalists. They’re publicists. They may be entertaining, highly readable publicists, with really fun blogs. But they’re still just publicists. And they deserve to be called out if they’re trying to simultaneously reap the benefits of the term “journalist” — benefits like perceived trust and accountability.

    People like that are trying to enjoy the best of both worlds. They’re profiting behind the scenes from those paying them to be publicists, while profiting publicly from the term “journalist.”

    If Ives is indeed among those considering this junket, that’s disappointing. It was just last week, I think, that he was demeaning soccer news sites run by people without “news training,” as I think he put it. The guy certainly isn’t the best writer in the world, but he seems to be a decent reporter, and I figured he at least adhered to basic standards. Guess his own “training” didn’t quite teach him what he really needed to know, after all.

  8. Well, I’m not going to lie. If soccer journalism was my primary source of income, and if I was offered a trip without which I would not be able to do my job…I could easily rationalize that I’m covering games, not tourism, if I had to. Yeah, Goff is right – but, fringe sport, ITTET – I can’t throw that stone.

    And I don’t even think that’s the stone he’s throwing. Five will get you fifty he’s more upset about having to share access (if the Post is paying for him to go) or angry that others will have better access (if the Post tells him to watch ESPN like the rest of us).

  9. I’m pretty sure that the guy below was the last person to use the phrase, “five will get you fifty.”

  10. Hoping to prove you wrong, Aaron, I Googled the phrase.

    The top hits were the Jerusalem Post commenters complaining about Obama hosting a seder, Michelle Malkin, and something about water moccasins in Appalachia. I shoulda quit while I was behind.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s