By: Jerry Burke
There I was, chain-smoking and chugging chocolate milk, dreaming of my Mets signing the best free agent available. On the other end of the computer connection, there was probably a guy not unlike myself, preparing to send the information I so desperately sought. Both of us are journalists. Both of us need each other, for without me to read what he writes, there is not point to his job.
Chances are good that like me, Mr. Internet Sports Dude isn't making a truckload of cash doing what he's doing. But both of us, and legions of sports enthusiasts, are discussing the number 119 million almost as an afterthought. It's where Beltran ends up that matters.
No journalist will ever see a nine-figure number on a paycheck, but as is the case in any line of work, we are always available to the highest bidder. Such is the nature of business, and in a free-market society, we are generally encouraged to make as much money as we can.
But unlike those talented enough to excel on the field, journalists are among those from whom the public generally demands a higher ethical standard. For those of you who feel that standard should apply to sports as well, I point you to Minnesota Vikings wide receiver Randy Moss and his Sunday-afternoon display of what talent can do to corrupt both self-discipline and one's hairstyle.
But such is life. Journalists, along with teachers and politicians, do have higher ethical expectations. But while politicians can usually change the rules as long as they're in the majority, when journalists are caught in a web of deceit, they are generally burned for it.
There is, of course, an "unless" coming.
That unless has to do with politics. If an offending journalist is working on something critical of the current political trend, then the system works, and quickly. Note the employees at CBS who were fired Monday for relying on forged documents for a story on George Dubya reportedly going AWOL during Vietnam.
But those at CBS broke no laws. There will be no arrests. Meanwhile, "journalists" like Robert "The Leaker" Novak and Judith "Stockpiles of WMD" Miller roam free (oddly enough, though, The New York Times's Miller is in legal trouble over not reporting what Novak did, the identity of a CIA agent. Weird karma, eh?).
Meanwhile, this week offers two more stories of journalistic evil. Nationally syndicated commentator Armstrong Williams allegedly received $240,000 from the White House to promote the No Child Left Behind act to the allegedly black audience of his allegedly popular conservative show. The Government Accountability Office has concluded that laws were "likely" broken in this case.
The GAO also concluded that spending taxpayer funds on a faux news report made last year to promote the Medicare drug reform as an easy-to-understand boon to the elderly broke the law. So too did the recent string of youth anti-drug news "segments" produced and distributed to local television news divisions. In both cases, no mention of the White House's involvement in making these "video clips" was made, but yet they were passed off as local news reports by hundreds of stations.
So while the world is, in fact, completely random and generally insane, there are standards in every facet of life. If Beltran falls flat on his face at Shea, I won't buy tickets. Will I trust CBS news anytime soon? Heck no. If a "news" report is telling me how great a product or policy is, will I think it's an evil propaganda conspiracy to mask the stealing of billions of dollars from our collective wallets? You know it.
Luckily, you're the final filter for any information you receive. Relish that just as much as I'm relishing the fact that number 15 will be my centerfielder for the next seven years.
