Another Favre Thread?!
I seriously think there are more Favre threads going on than the amount of threads in the new "Good Ole Days" sub forum!
What's with the new sig Sabres? I don't follow hockey. Please fill me in...
Since I only joined the forum last week, I didn't see all the other Brett Favre threads from previous weeks or months. I sometimes like to post TV reviews of a major sports story. I didn't want to "hijack" the other thread(s).
As for Sandomir's article, his review of ESPN's coverage of the Favre story is analogous to how cable news sensationalizes major news stories. With the advent of text messaging, camera phones, voicemails, etc., are we in a media age in which info from those new technologies will be or should be used in sports stories?
If Brett Favre were to leave a voicemail message for Chris Mortensen, should Mort be permitted to use that on-air? Is everything or anything fair game?
These are the questions/comments I wanted to help generate with the start of this new thread. . . . . . an analysis I hope would go much beyond the scope and immediacy of just the Favre story.
Not sure of Mortensen's and Favre's relationship, but Favre should know that Mort is a journalist and what he says to him in a message will end up on ESPN. Unless he uses the "off-the-record" request, it should be assumed that a public figure talking to a journalist is subject to it being forwarded to media outlets.
Now if he wasn't a public figure, the rules are a bit different. I would expect the journalist to ask permission before using the material.
The way ESPN has covered this story has been totally overboard. But there is something about the way ESPN has covered the Favre story (along with the NFL Network) that seems different . . . even different than the Michael Vick dogfighting story from last year; even different than when T.O. had his summer spat with the Eagles in 2005.