CBS Sports Writer Feels It's OK To Issue 'Stealth' Corrections Because It's Just 'The Internet'
from the and-look-where-it's-gotten-you,-Mr.-Heyman----all-over-the-internet dept
It appears that there are still some writers out there who moved from print to an online presence while never having learned to properly "internet." Jon Heyman of CBSSports.com is one of them. Writing up his baseball Hall of Fame ballot, Heyman botched a few facts about Jack Morris in his push for the pitcher's inclusion, as Craig Calcaterra at NBC Sports pointed out:Jon Heyman put up his Hall of Fame column this afternoon. For years he has pushed hard for Jack Morris for the Hall. He has long overstated Morris’ merits in my view, but it’s gotten to the point now where he’s simply making crap up:Poynter followed up on the aftermath of this error, noting that Heyman's reaction to being called out in his fiction was to fix the mistake in the article without calling attention to the correction anywhere on the offending page. When called out on this 'stealth' correction, Jon Heyman responded with his least factual statement yet.He was thought good enough to be the ace on teams that had Bert Blyleven and Dave Stewart, and to receive Cy Young votes in seven seasons. I can’t allow his vast accomplishments to be re-evaluated downward by a new emphasis on different numbers.Jack Morris and Bert Blyleven were never teammates. Jack Morris played one season with Dave Stewart. In that one season — 1993 — Morris was 7-12 with a 6.19 ERA. It’s possible that Heyman is calling Morris the “ace” of that 1993 Jays team because he got the Opening Day start, but he didn’t distinguish himself at all that year, he was out of the rotation by early September and was left off the postseason roster. Some ace.
I'm not sure which parts of the internet Heyman is familiar with, but examining this statement (and its off-hand dismissal of the internet as a place beneath common courtesy or respect), I would hazard a guess that Heyman hasn't ventured much further than the pages run by CBS Sports. Andrew Beaujon points out that CBS Sports has failed to issue timely corrections on its website before, most notably its premature announcement that Penn State Joe Paterno had died -- a "scoop" it borrowed without attribution from a Penn State student website.@thitchner not a simple mistake like that on the internet. I have never seen corrections listed below an internet story.
— Jon Heyman (@JonHeymanCBS) January 8, 2013
The "internet" that I'm familiar with is full of corrections. Updated posts happen all the time. Tom Hitchner helpfully pointed out a couple of recent corrections to Heyman -- one at the New York Times and one at Slate. Here at Techdirt, we update posts whenever clarification or correction is needed, as well as when new information flows in.
Everyone who realizes that the instantaneous give-and-take the internet provides requires this sort of transparency -- from the lowliest hobby blogger to the writer who's at least two or three sizes too small for the platform he's been given -- lists their corrections, or at the very least runs visible strikethrough. Apparently, Jon Heyman feels the internet is too insignificant to deserve honesty. If this is the attitude he's chosen to project, he doesn't deserve many readers.
![Hide This Hide this](https://ii.techdirt.com/s/t/i/topclose.png)
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: cbs sports, corrections, internet, jon heyman, journalism
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
It's CBS, the same network which outed Dan Rather.
I'm shocked people still call this a credible news source.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fact
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just sports.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Just sports.
"I think I would say "it's just sports reporting" before "it's just the Internet"....
Sports writers are only slightly different from most other media commentators...
Sports writers HAVE to get the scores correct, at the end of the event... (e.g. Boxer A won, Boxer B didn't, or Team A beat Team B by 25 points...)
There are no other criteria given, now, in journalism, for accuracy.
AND, in today's journalism of the main stream...
Accuracy is frowned on...
You CAN find truth on the internet, if you know how to look...
You can find truth in mainstream media, if you know never to trust anything they say, and find reliable sources.
There are many reliable sources on the internet.
You have to find them, and not just read your political supporters.
I have found much good/accurate information in liberal media, from England...
Never from New York.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That's the perception I get from reading Soccer news in my country.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Without some such facility, how does a person defend themselves from a libel charge because they correctly quoted from an article on the net, which was then changed to make what they said in relation to the article slanderous.
P.S. don't tell John Steele et al about this, it could give them ideas for even more extortion; especially as making a dated copy of anything they put up would be in breach of copyright.
I am applying for catch22 as the trademark for this business model.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Still
Thats an actual true fact.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's underhanded
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's underhanded
;^)
You didn't know that is how the internet works?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It's underhanded
Or in Mythbuster-speak, I reject your reality and substitute my own.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
douche bag says whaaaa???
What a dumb ass. You'd EXPECT that from FOX. Isn't this the guys JOB tho A. Either know the facts or B. At least know where to FIND the facts or C. Have an intern fact check for you? I know it's just baseball, but aren't baseball statistics technically supposed to be based on some type of FACT? I guess corrected articles and strike throughs are just a mass hallucination created by the Bildeburgers (sp).. I think someone needs to send JohnnyBoy some examples of real articles from REAL journalists who have made corrections.
C=reative
B=roadcast
S=torytelling
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I see what they're doing..
/sarc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Type That in Google
Type that in google: site:cbssports.com hall-mess-means-this-voter-wont-vote-for-tainted-players---this-time hayman
Use the advanced search tool and filter the search to say, last week. Nothing is found. Keep filtering and realize that the only results start appearing in the past year and doesn't include the article discussed in this TD article.
Altogether, the article was probably written a long long time ago and just put up as visible. I say Relax and understand the meaning of things. or just ask for clarification. Who cares what one person thinks? Hayman does not know what he's talking about technology wise, we should've all known it's not his forte.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lowly Hobby Blogger
But you'll never know! Mwahaha!
(Of course, that probably has more to do with the fact that only 20 people see my site on any given day.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Lowly Hobby Blogger
That's not necessarily comparable. If you're correcting a news photo without mentioning it, that's one thing. If your blog is look at this cool art I made, then who cares if you change it without saying. It's art.*
* I don't mean who cares about art, I mean there's no right and wrong in art, so no sense in issuing corrections.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It is the Internet
He was too off-handed to be a professional, but I hardly mind the act of post-editing -- although I assume honesty, which is apparently lacking in this case. What he did is not the norm, but I wouldn't mind if it was, providing a mechanism to state the time of the last edit. The more time passes, the more reliable the intent of content. If you want to promote what was false or not intended, make a copy of it and do what you will. It is the Internet: A critic can copy as easily as I can edit, which we do see in this case.
But obviously this article is more about that writer rather than Internet editing. So, as much as he offhandedly states "it's just the Internet", I would merely shrug and say "he's just an Internet writer." There are far too many these days... I just noticed one at Forbes this week.
The world sucks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It is the Internet
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And catching poor journalists. Another benefit of the internet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Easier than anyone imagined
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well, at least we now know what Dave Stewart did after The Eurythmics.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Otis Livinstain CBS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
re: CBS 'stealth' lying
That they would lie, about a lie, and do it in stealth mode, means little. They ONLY lie.
There are many kinds of lying they do, and most miss the fact they often do it in 'mis-direction' mode.
They tell one 'partial' truth, to mis-direct from another story they don't want to report, or, fudge over the 'facts' and still never tell the truth.
I have found, you find more real truth from Liberal British news, than from the entire US radical left news.
Why get up in arms about CBS 'BSing you' about something...
Feel much more at ease, realizing they BS about everything
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
crazy anchor
[ link to this | view in chronology ]