Even those that don’t live in Detroit and follow sports, probably know who Mitch Albom is. For those that don’t, he is an award winning sports columnist with the Detroit Free Press, has a radio talk show, appears on ESPN’s “The Sports Reporters” from time to time, and is a best selling author (both non-fiction and fiction). Two of his books have been turned into “made-for-TV” movies, broadcast nationally. I have mentioned him a few times on my site and have read and reviewed two of his books (“Tuesdays With Morrie” and “The Five People You Meet in Heaven”).
Recently Mitch has come under fire for his writing. It started with a column he wrote during the men’s college basketball Final Four. He had to write and submit his Sunday April 3rd column on Friday afternoon April 1st. In it, he mentioned in the past tense that two former Michigan State players were at the semi-final game on Saturday April 2nd when the Spartans played North Carolina. They told Mitch themselves that they would be there. They weren’t.
During the investigation that proceeded this event, hundreds of Mitch’s columns were read through. It was found that Mitch wasn’t always giving credit for those that received quotes from individuals or those that had prior reported facts that he wrote into his column. The Free Press has disciplined Albom and the editors and all have returned to work.
The reason I mention this is because I have always praised Mitch’s work. On the papers’ WEB SITE, they published an ARTICLE about the investigation today. There are a lot of interesting things said. The resentment that other’s feel towards Albom, and the fact that editors have a unwritten rule not to change Albom’s work kind of surprised me.
Truthfully I was surprised when this all surfaced because of my respect for Mitch and his work. We all know that in the news media game you have to get the facts correct. No if’s, and’s, or but’s. But I got to thinking about this, and I came to realize that though wrong, it was not a serious offense. Mitch didn’t accuse anyone of a violet/criminal/unethical act. Plus with today’s media hype, as well as tabloids and gossip columns, he wrote what he thought was going to be true. He took the word of two individuals who probably had every intention of being at the game. There have probably been hundreds (if not thousands) of reporters that have been burned by people not telling the truth and not investigating further. Yet this was not a situation where further investigation was really necessary. It was just being sloppy. Something that Mitch mentioned in his apology. He could have worded it differently, saying IF they attend, or they PLANNED on attending.
Since this article about the full investigation was just published today, the extent of the issues were new to me. The fact that Mitch has not always given credit for quotes, which could lead to readers being mislead that he was at those events or in front of the individual himself, has had me thinking as well. My conclusion though is much like Mitch’s and the editors. Columnists should be given some leeway.
The main reason I read Mitch’s column is because it is entertaining. He states his opinions. He uses his sense of humor. He gives another side of the stories behind individuals or events. It is not just straight reporting. A real news story isn’t allowed to have a sense of humor or opinions of the writer. And if a column is bogged down with all these credits in some situations, it takes away from the flow and part of the purpose of it: to entertain as well as inform. Also I don’t feel I am led to believe that Mitch is actually the one getting these quotes. I don’t care if he watched a game on TV or was actually there. I don’t care if he was standing in front of the individual giving the quote or not. I read his article for the writing and the story, not to know where he was. Though it is VERY IMPORTANT to get the facts correct. This I do heartily agree with.
I am not really sure what my true purpose is behind this post, other then to defend Mitch’s credibility. I respect him and his work, and barring any major code misconduct, I will continue to do so.
May 16th, 2005 at 7:40 pm
First - A note - I have not read ther article nor do I read Mitch.
NOW - The concept of not “sourcing” is grounds for a student to be expelled from school and amounts, by definition, to plagurism. If that is the case, I am of the opinion, that some form of repermant should be in place and his credibility is brought into quesiton. A student in that position, and in this case a repeated action, would probably face a large academic penalty and probably expultion.
I just get the feeling that because he moves papers he is untouchable.
OK - NOTE AGAIN - I have not read the ariticle nor do I read Mitch.
May 16th, 2005 at 9:04 pm
Yes, being untouchable does seem to be the case. That was a surprising revelation to me in reading the report. And in that case, then the editors should be to blame. They need to step up. So what if he is Mitch Albom. He needs to get it right. But it’s the editor’s job to make sure he does.
As for the sourcing, I totally see your point. But in the case of his columns (from my experience), he is repeating quotes that are public knowledge already. For instance, Pistons’ coach Larry Brown was interviewed by a reporter in the New York media. He made comments about coaching the Knicks being a “dream job”. When Albom wrote about it, he didn’t write the source in the article because it was already well known where it came from. Of course if someone that wasn’t familar with the story would read that, he could be mislead that it was Albom himself that interviewed Brown. That is where the trouble is with sourcing.
May 17th, 2005 at 4:45 am
I would have had no idea where it would have came from and I would have assumed he spoke with him, but that depends on the phrasing, etc.
The editors do need to step up, but that is not going to happen. He is “Mitch”. Even if they did fire him, he would be picked up by another paper - instantly.
So much for integrity, gotta sell-sell-sell