Accepting online media

// August 8th, 2009 // Journalism

Maybe it’s because I’m young and this is what I’ve been accustomed to, so it’s hard for me to see the other side. But after reading some reports today about Josh Hamilton’s incident in January, I’m finding it hard to believe that many major news outlets are failing to give credit to Deadspin for breaking the story first and posting the accompanying pictures.

I won’t go into detail about Josh Hamilton. Mostly everyone knows about his story of drug abuse and how he came back to become one of the best players in the major leagues. If you don’t, just google his name.

If you’ve seen, or heard, any of the buzz about his latest incident, you know that it stems from a Deadspin post which featured Hamilton drinking and engaging in some acts with women at a bar in Phoenix. The story exploded so much that Hamilton had to hold a press conference of his own today, outside of his locker room, to address the issue. Again, you can find the full text of that at Deadspin, or other outlets now.

One thing, however, irks me about some of the coverage that I’ve read — this story in particular. The writer includes this statement:

Photos of the night were published on a Web site this weekend

Yeah, they were published on a Web site. A legitimate sports-news Web site that beat every other major media outlet to a story. Deadspin has been around for quite some time now and it’s not out of the question to see it garner more traffic than many newspaper Web sites across the U.S. The site has become a staple of sports-related information in an ever-growing online world. Let’s face it…it’s the biggest sports blog there is. Meaning, it’s not just some “Web site”.

Sorry, I had to get that off my chest. But the fact that this writer, a writer that writes solely for a Web site (MLB.com), can’t acknowledge another big-time Web site that broke a story is something I can’t comprehend.

Give credit where credit is due. Even if you don’t like it.

Share and Enjoy: