Sports REPORTERS who use their soapbox to preach politics (re: Chouinard)

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

I just explained why, sultan.

Counterpoint something I said, and we can have a discussion.

And to Jay, I respect you, but that comment is irrelevant... we all agree that it is what it is... we even all agree, again, that it's not a matter of anyone doing anything outside of their "rights." That you persist in trying to disregard the points made on the basis of playing Word Count Police is its own comment on how much substance you apparently realize is available to oppose what I've said... or better, how little.

I'm not word policing you, i just have neither the time nor inclination to read it all as I've ssaid my piece here as well as previously on the Squawk.
Aaaah...you know what....I'mma just stick to sports.
Funny how you want Chouinard to stick to sports, but you want to talk politics on a Sports board. Oh the irony, but to each his own.

It is funny, and even funnier because if you look back up at #3 in my response, I noted that irony that YOU don't think THIS discussion belongs on a sports board... and it's not even about politics, it's SPECIFICALLY about the appropriateness of sports... I said, SPORTS... reporters... I said, REPORTERS... both terms pretty important to the premise of the OP... tweeting to advocate for their political positions (or again, same can be said religious persuasions) on the same account that they use to REPORT professionally about their professional assignment.

If THIS bothers you, and it's not even about politics, how much more then should Chouinard tweeting blatantly political positions bother you.

Again, some of us know better, and we keep a professional account and a personal account. For the very reason that we try to be respectful of different audiences, and consider it ethically questionable to take advantage of the fact that our professional one may be stocked with a whole slew of other eyes.

Finally... slow down... I never said you were "word policing"... I said you were "word COUNT policing"... and you were, by virtue of your TL/DR remark.

This isn't the first time this has come up, if memory serves... encourage you to make it a personal rule... if you don't care enough to read, that's fine, but then don't post as-if what you're posting wasn't already addressed for all you know.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

Sports and politicals have between entertwined since the days at the greek collisiums, to Tommy at the Olympics, to Mohammad Ali, to now.

Saw where you told me in your initial post to the thread, more or less, "Shut up, I don't want to hear it."

Scanned past this one.

Just to ensure this is driven home very clearly and resists the attempts of some to confound it with baggage that I'm not actually talking about... this is ONLY about sports REPORTERS failing to act responsibly and use a professional tweet account separate from a personal one. None of the rest of it. And tweeting is a relatively new kind of journalistic medium that sports REPORTERS use as a matter of their professional responsibilities, and which some of us follow because we follow WHAT THEY'RE EMPLOYED TO COVER.

[azuresou1]

I mean, it has been legally determined that Trump's personal Twitter account is now also the official account of his Presidency, and vice versa. If that's true for the POTUS, I don't see why there should be a difference for sportswriters.

I think you just need to accept that in this day and age there's no real line between a public figure's professional Twitter account and their personal Twitter account (or any social media for that matter). They are one and the same.

[MaceCase]

I look at most sports reporters' personal accounts as just that, their personal accounts. Yes, they often operate as pseudo-professional accounts but that's mostly to steer attention towards their umbrella organizations and sites which, of course, house their actual paid content either through salary, subscriptions, or ads. If a reporter is being paid by an employer solely to operate a twitter account then sure, I'd expect a greater amount of professionalism but then again, that's between them and whatever terms they agreed to with their employer.

All I know is I'm not scrolling through attempts at humor, pictures of their family dog, thoughts on the last movie they saw or album they heard, and personal recommendations for the best steakhouse in Milwaukee only to draw the line at them also mentioning "oh yea, I'm also thinking this Obamacare/border wall thing...maybe not such a good idea".

[kg01]

sturt you're turning this place into the lord of the flies. Happy?

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

I mean, it has been legally determined that Trump's personal Twitter account is now also the official account of his Presidency, and vice versa. If that's true for the POTUS, I don't see why there should be a difference for sportswriters.

I think you just need to accept that in this day and age there's no real line between a public figure's professional Twitter account and their personal Twitter account (or any social media for that matter). They are one and the same.

No. It's been stated more than twice now.

This ISN'T about LEGALITY.

And it's not about presidents or even, MORE TO THE POINT... sports COLUMNISTS.

To find out what it IS about, I'll let you explore that in one of my previous posts.

[Jamaaliver]

FTR, RealGM has a sanctioned political roundtable thread over in the Wizards Forum.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

I look at most sports reporters' personal accounts as just that, their personal accounts. Yes, they often operate as pseudo-professional accounts but that's mostly to steer attention towards their umbrella organizations and sites which, of course, house their actual paid content either through salary, subscriptions, or ads. If a reporter is being paid by an employer solely to operate a twitter account then sure, I'd expect a greater amount of professionalism but then again, that's between them and whatever terms they agreed to with their employer.

I fully understand it is their RIGHT to tweet whatever they want in their personal account. No disagreement on that front. At all.

My contention is that, because THEIR PROFESSION EXPECTS of them that they tweet news, that they should use an account specifically established for that purpose.

Then, if they also want to tweet their sports intel to those in their personal audience, so be it.

Indeed, I think the employer ought to establish that as an expectation, BUT, also, I think that any conscientious, ethical grown-ass adult should have the scruples to begin with to do so on his own.

It's not like opening a Twitter account costs money.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

FTR, RealGM has a sanctioned political roundtable thread over in the Wizards Forum.

No no no.

Don't be confounding this.

It is ABOUT SPORTS REPORTERS... I could have just as easily said "who use their soapbox to preach RELIGION"

It's about the APPROPRIATENESS of taking advantage of one's follower list to ADVOCATE for WHATEVER, while being employed in a REPORTER'S position.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

sturt you're turning this place into the lord of the flies. Happy?

It's one thread. Hardly "turning this PLACE" into anything.

And I evidently still have a solid point because no one is actually counterpointing anything I said in support of the OP.



That, or no one is reading anything I wrote, which is always a possibility, if not a likelihood.



Oh, and I suppose one other possibility... some secretly admire Kevin Chouinard's politics to begin with... saying what they want to hear. I sense that from a couple, anyhow.

[azuresou1]

No need to get snippy. Again, to restate:

I think you just need to accept that in this day and age there's no real line between a public figure's professional Twitter account and their personal Twitter account (or any social media for that matter). They are one and the same.

All public figures today exist as both personal entities and as representatives for their respective employers. In this particular case, since Chouinard's employer is not stepping in and intervening, then clearly they believe that it is not a professional requirement to maintain a distinction, and that readers can choose for themselves whether to maintain readership or not.

Some public figures may decide to 'stick to business,' whether to maintain their professional brand, what remains of their anonymity, or yes, because they have some sort of ethical qualms. But I think that the number of people who have those qualms has steadily diminished, which is simply a function of how much our world has changed re: social media.

[Atlanta Hawk Fan]

If the Sports Reporter is given a social media account by his or her employer then by all means he should stick to reporting the news on there and putting nothing else on that account other than what his employer approves under its social media policy. If the reporter's employer wants to prevent news reports getting tied up in a personal social media account that is going to have non-reporting topics included, the employer can prevent the SR from putting reports on there and require that they be funneled to a curated and more restricted account. If his or her employer lets the SR report news in a personal social media account in addition to whatever media outlet that employs the SR then I have zero problem with the SR doing that along with whatever else he or she wants to post.

This is a conscious decision being made by the reporter and his or her employer. I see nothing unethical where they have agreed he is free to post these reports on his (or her just saying his now) own page as well as about the dinner he had last night, his views on politics or religion, his take on pop culture, his review on art, etc.

[azuresou1]

Long and short: I don't think there are any ethical considerations about talking about politics (or any other subjects for that matter) at the same time you're representing your work.

Any considerations that exist are solely with respect to A) your employer's wishes B) your own decision whether you wish politics (or other subjects) to be associated with your professional brand.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

No need to get snippy. Again, to restate:

I think you just need to accept that in this day and age there's no real line between a public figure's professional Twitter account and their personal Twitter account (or any social media for that matter). They are one and the same.

All public figures today exist as both personal entities and as representatives for their respective employers. In this particular case, since Chouinard's employer is not stepping in and intervening, then clearly they believe that it is not a professional requirement to maintain a distinction, and that readers can choose for themselves whether to maintain readership or not.

Some public figures may decide to 'stick to business,' whether to maintain their professional brand, what remains of their anonymity, or yes, because they have some sort of ethical qualms. But I think that the number of people who have those qualms has steadily diminished, which is simply a function of how much our world has changed re: social media.

If you think you've heard this before, you probably have...

I fully understand it is their RIGHT to tweet whatever they want in their personal account. No disagreement on that front. At all.

My contention is that, because THEIR PROFESSION EXPECTS of them that they tweet news, that they should use an account specifically established for that purpose.

Then, if they also want to tweet their sports intel to those in their personal audience, so be it.

Indeed, I think the employer ought to establish that as an expectation, BUT, also, I think that any conscientious, ethical grown-ass adult should have the scruples to begin with to do so on his own.

It's not like opening a Twitter account costs money.


I'll add... my employer doesn't require me to do what I do.

It just makes sense. Ethical sense. I, too, could take advantage of how much larger my following is on the professional side. But I don't. It's not why they're there, and out of respect to them, I don't consider it appropriate.

(And yes, admittedly, I'm pretty damn astounded that no one here sees it that way. But, too, what's right has never been a matter of what's popular.)

[azuresou1]

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

Look, I might cut some slack if we were talking about something that would cost the sports reporter some money.

It does not.

Doing the right thing that is respectful to others is free.

Costs nothing.

There is NO drawback.

Free.

[ATL Boy]

You guys can feel free to continue this discussion on the forum's "Non-Sports Talk" thread. That's what it's there for.

link here: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1628258