You never know when you’ll be called on to cover a big story whether you’re covering a team day to day, working in a television newsroom or even doing feature writing….What might start out simple enough can easily break wide open….Just ask Bob Hohler of the Boston Globe and George Smith of ESPN, who recently were part of a sports journalism seminar at Boston University…
Hohler was one of a number of baseball reporters, editors and managers at the Globe who met one day to dive more deeply into the Red Sox collapse of 2011…A veteran reporter with investigative skills, Hohler had heard rumors and began to dig….Unless you’ve been under a rock these last two months, the resulting column of October 12th was the bombshell of the year until the Penn State and Syracuse sexual abuse stories came to light…”Some of it was very eye opening said Hohler, very disturbing for me because I didn’t want to confront him (Terry Francona) with this stuff but that’s part of the job…We wouldn’t have gone with this stuff unless we had really solid reputable sources, more than one, more than two”
But doing investigative research on a story, over time, a reporter is bound to cover bits of information never heard before…
For Smith it was different…He found himself on the hot seat just days after going to work at the Worldwide Leader…”The first story I ever did at ESPN, well i had just moved to Chicago and I was in my apartment, they call me up, get to Wrigley, Sammy Sosa, corked bat…I had no idea what they were talking about…Thirty minutes after I get there I was interviewing Sammy Sosa live on the field…You formulate your questions you think you need to ask, try not to look stupid while you;re doing it and just think of all the questions anyone would ask if they were put in a similar situation.”
One thing both reporters have in common might be best characterized as the “after effect”…Smith, as someone who is dropped into a story, might not see his original interview subject again or months…Hohler, while now a reporter who does longer form pieces, covered the Red Sox on a daily basis a while back…But both know they are likely to hear about whatever it is they write or say, the next time they meet face to face…” I told everybody, I pretty much burned my bridges over there. Josh Beckett isn’t going to be talking to me, John Lester either”
But regardless, whether the story slaps you in the face or leaks slowly after days and weeks of hard work, these are the stories you earn your reputation on(for)… You never know when they will present themselves…Be hopeful it’s more often than not…
16 Comments
Craig Meyer posted on December 11, 2011 at 10:07 pm
The idea of breaking large stories and having to cover scandals in sports may seem strange to us as journalism students, but if we want to make it to the top of this profession, it’s something that we’ll hopefully get the privilege of doing one day.
Investigative journalism is a critical component of the modern media landscape, even if it isn’t as common as it once was. However, people like George Smith and Bob Hohler still do the important work of finding the truth in moments of scandal and uncertainty, and as the Yahoo! piece on the University of Miami football proved over the summer, the power of investigative journalism is still strong. For a more local example of this power, one need not look further than Hohler’s Red Sox collapse story.
Sports journalism goes far beyond the game recaps, notebooks, the local TV sports block and drive time radio shows that we all read, watch and listen to. Underneath it all, scandals and trouble arise in the world of sports and someone has to be there to report the facts and set the story straight. And as Hohler said, there is some sort of enjoyment in what he called “trying to solve the puzzle.”
It’s very appropriate that this seminar was about the biggest sports journalism stories of the year because so often, they are the very stories that people like Hohler and Smith cover. We all remember some of the year’s best games, moments and teams, but when it concerns sports journalism, so often the stories that we think of the most — Penn State, Syracuse, the Sox collapse, Miami football, Ohio State/tattoos — revolve around something greater than what happens on the field. And for that, we need people who can sift through all the noise to report what truly matters.
Lacey posted on December 11, 2011 at 10:23 pm
Wonderful final seminar. I thought that both George and Bob brought a sense of humor and insight that really gave our class the opportunity to absorb what they were saying without feeling overwhelmed or patronized.
The one part that connected the most with me was when Bob mentioned his hatred for the over saturation of anonymity in news—which is something that I am not fond of when almost every source in a story goes unidentified. Bob touched on how unfortunate this trend is currently where practically every reporter takes far too much liberty in how they tell a story through the overuse of “anonymous sources.” Where do we draw the line when it comes to how many sources there are in a story that remain unnamed and unknown? Should there be a limit?
I feel that having one or two throughout an in-depth investigative story is permissible, but take for example ESPN stories: they tend to favor the style of getting information out as quickly as possible with the every-popular headline “Sources say…” When should a reporter hold back on a story where there are nameless people and when should a journalist go with something despite having strictly anonymous contributors? Tricky business, but presently, many journalists seem to be taking advantage of using anonymous sources freely to disseminate information.
Adding to this was how George could not report what he had learned from sources about the Duke Lacrosse scandal due to the limited number of anonymous informants speaking out on what actually occurred. In his case, George was restricted by his employer, ironically ESPN, who essentially told him he needed more support before coming out with his report. What seems slightly absurd is that the story would have been revealed by George had he received another anonymous source…I guess that ESPN’s policy has changed on breaking news since 2006 when the Duke lacrosse incident broke.
Not to deviate too much from the speakers and the seminar, but to summarize, I felt that the entirety of our final meeting was deeply engaging and informative. Way to go out on a high note.
Heidi posted on December 12, 2011 at 10:32 am
This was a great way to end the semester. It is different to get insight from two names we have all heard about the stories that we have not stopped talking about all year. The thing that stuck out to me was when Professor Shorr asked Bob if he gets a rush from breaking a huge story like the Red Sox one. He shrugged and said something to the effect of “that feeling has rubbed off by now, I guess.” As someone just starting out, I can’t imagine not getting excited over writing a story like that. At first I thought that losing that feeling would stink but the more I think about it, I can only hope to be that accomplished that it becomes old hat.
Every seminar, media critics excluded, has made me a little more excited about working in this business. I have no idea what will happen from one day to the next. It is not some nine to five where you do the same thing day in and day out. In this job, every day is different. The biggest story of our lives could be right around the corner. We get to cover sports. I couldn’t ask for anything better.
Joe Parello posted on December 12, 2011 at 2:59 pm
The class went out with a bang, and not only did we get to speak to one of the best national and local reporters out there, we had the chance to hear their thoughts on recent high-profile stories they had covered.
I’m not going to lie, coming into this seminar, I did not have a very high opinion of Bob Hohler’s piece on the Red Sox collapse. After reading it, I thought he really reached and jumped to some wild conclusions without presenting specific evidence for some of his claims, like the one’s about Francona’s personal life. I also didn’t think he provided the proper context for things like beer in the clubhouse, since this is not something that is specific to the 2011 Red Sox. I still feel he could’ve done a better job of the latter, but after hearing him explain his rationale, I understand the former. The fact that he has a relationship with Francona and did not want to give specific examples to further hurt his reputation brings up some interesting questions.
If he was going to air some of Francona’s dirty laundry, how much more harm would specific examples have done? It’s quite a dilemma for a veteran reporter, but the fact that he didn’t mind burning some bridges to get a story that he thought was important really impressed me.
On the other side, I had always been a big fan of George Smith, and the timeliness of this seminar could not have been better since he had been covering the sexual abuse scandals at Penn State and Syracuse lately. I thought he provided great insight into what it is like to be a national reporter, namely, that it’s a ton of travel and takes great people skills to work with all the different cameramen and producers you will see in every corner of the country.
At the end of the day, they both seemed to have similar messages about reporting. Yes, you want to be first, but you NEED to be right. Both mentioned several instances where they had some information, but did not run with it because it could not be verified. Sometimes, like Smith with the Duke lacrosse case, they regretted it, but it showed that good reporters will always do their best to only report facts, not speculation.
David Lombardi posted on December 12, 2011 at 4:12 pm
What a great way to end the class. We got some big names to speak to us, and that’s exactly the way that I wanted to see it all wrap up.
I was always fascinated by the Duke lacrosse case, and the erroneous rush to judgment that left the media with a black eye afterwards. It was interesting – and frustrating – to hear that although George Smith himself knew that the case was bogus, he wasn’t able to run with it on ESPN. It seems that I learned that big-time media outlets are sometimes handcuffed and restrained from immediately reporting the truth, probably because of fear of lawsuit. This was a sad realization.
I still didn’t buy a lot of Bob Hohler’s rationale regarding his chicken and beer Red Sox story. If he felt uncomfortable writing potentially “embarrassing” details regarding Francona’s use of pain medication and how it affected the team, he shouldn’t have mentioned it in his story in the first place. Still, it was a treat to hear from the author of such a controversial story at the end of the class.
All in all, I learned a lot, and I’m now excited to one day return to this BU seminar. When I do, I’ll come back as a speaker.
David posted on December 12, 2011 at 4:38 pm
As many of my classmates have mentioned already in their posts, I felt that this past seminar was a great way to end the semester. The way that George Smith and Bob Hohler spoke about their experiences, it shows why they are able to break such big stories.
“I like the pursuit and the challenge of solving the puzzle,” Hohler said.
I found this to be a new and very interesting viewpoint on journalism, the idea that it is a game or a race. It makes being invested in a career like journalism hard work but fun at the same time. This is the reason I personally became so interested in this field.
As far as an ending seminar is concerned, l left this last meeting with some important pieces of advice that can be used for any career, not just journalism.
Smith spoke about his daily motivations with the class in one of his answers saying that he doesn’t bring his A-game to work everyday because he works at ESPN; he brings his A-game anyways. This includes Smith’s point on research.
“Whether you have a couple of hours or days, there is always time to do research,” Smith said.
It is that extra little time spent that makes the difference between having the correct information and having sleepless nights.
Finally, seeing Smith and Hohler together was interesting because both men had very different roads to where they are now and both worked very hard to get where they are, just as my classmates and I are and it doesn’t get any easier.
“All you can do is try,” Smith said. “Once in a while you may get lucky.”
I wish everyone in our seminar the best of luck in pursuit of a job in sports journalism or in any profession that makes you happy.
josh posted on December 12, 2011 at 4:38 pm
I agree with Lacy about the oversaturation of anonymous sources in a story, but I find it ironic that Bob was the one who brought it up considering that the majority of sources in his Red Sox piece were anonymous. Outside of Francona and Pedroia he doesn’t really name any one else that he got information from. The meat of the article is attributed to team sources or just sources which is the same thing as anonymous. Regardless, it does not take away from Hohler’s point that anonymous sources have become a crutch and people now use “sources say” when they actually mean, “I heard a rumor that…”.
The most interesting part of the seminar to me was a casual comment by Hohler. I think it was during the discussion about burning bridges and hurting your future career with a blockbuster story and he said you find a way to get the story out. In my brief one semester I have found this to be a hallmark of a great journalist. If the story needs to get out to the public, you find a way, no matter what.
I think it spoke volumes about Smith’s professionalism when he said that within four days he knew the Duke story was B.S. and that the girl wasn’t credible but he didn’t go forward with the story. He didn’t really have the facts or sources to back it up, instead he had a gut feeling and a bunch of conversations off the record so he knew he couldn’t go on air with it. Clearly his journalistic instinct proved to be correct, but it’s interesting to think about what would have happened had he reported that while still in the thick of the controversy.
Both men have been around the block once or twice and it was a good seminar to finish off with.
Rick Sobey posted on December 12, 2011 at 5:56 pm
For most of the semester, this seminar has focused on reporting and covering games. However, this last seminar was about the news side of sports journalism (the investigative and scandal aspect), and I enjoyed this final seminar more than the others. My journalism history is with covering local news and politics, which is definitely why I enjoyed hearing Hohler and Smith discuss the sports news stories of the year and how to approach them.
I’ve always wanted to do deeper reporting like these two professionals get to do. From the articles I’ve written so far in college and in internships, the articles that take awhile are much more rewarding than the articles which are written quickly. It is usually tedious to do long term projects (when nobody wants to talk with you and when you have to sort through infinite data), but in the end, it is well worth it. I hope to eventually find myself in Hohler’s shoes at some publication, going behind the scenes and putting the puzzle pieces together.
As Hohler said, one problematic area of investigative reporting is simply getting people to talk with you. I’ve dealt with this issue throughout numerous articles (which weren’t even investigative pieces), so I can only imagine how nobody will talk for an investigative article. He mentioned being persistent and making that extra call, and I found this to be very helpful during my summer internship. On several occasions, I was on the verge of losing my mind because nobody would speak to me; however, that final phone call right before deadline saved me countless times. Perseverance is one key point to take away and use in whatever career comes your way.
There is so much “feeding the beast” in today’s journalism, which is understandable due to consumers’ need for constant information in this technological world. However, there still needs to be room for long-term investigative pieces at papers and websites. Some investigative departments have shut down because of economic reasons, but hopefully many can stick around because what is a newspaper without investigative journalism? Without watchdog journalists, many individuals could get away with unethical actions; it is essential to have investigative teams, and I hope to join one someday. I’m sure it would be a life-altering experience.
Caroline posted on December 12, 2011 at 8:07 pm
I thought it was a very cool and appropriate way to end the semester with George Smith and Bob Holher.
I agree with David about the Duke lacrosse case and the way the media really took it overboard. I thought David said it the best in his post saying, “it was interesting – and frustrating – to hear that although George Smith himself knew that the case was bogus, he wasn’t able to run with it on ESPN. It seems that I learned that big-time media outlets are sometimes handcuffed and restrained from immediately reporting the truth, probably because of fear of lawsuit. This was a sad realization.” I wonder how much trust media outlets have in their reporters or do they think of these professionals and very well respected reporters as puppets for whatever they want to portray – I hope not because that would be so sad.
The speakers also showed me that at the end of the day it is a job that needs to get done and sometimes it is not as pretty or as easy as they make it look on TV. I really enjoyed George’s advice of “you always have time to research – whether it is a couple hours, minutes, or days you can always find out what’s going on.” And I will take that little piece of advice with me to my new life, a life out of college, a life in sports, a life in broadcast.
Lee posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:37 pm
There was a theme with the seminars I enjoyed, and that theme was validated for the final time in this last seminar: passionate people doing what they love every day make the best speakers.
It annoyed me when I listened to some of our speakers grumble about how the industry isn’t really as fun and glamorous as it seems. We’ve all done internships and worked in the industry. We know about the 18-hour-days, and I’ve worked more than I can count for little or no money. I’ve been in locker rooms and on fields, in press boxes and in production trucks, and I’m not best friends with Aaron Rodgers or having drinks with Melo.
For me living the dream is about being creatively challenged every day in an industry that I care about. So listening to two guys who have been doing this a long time, and still give off an air of appreciation about what they are able to do for a living makes me happy. Of course the chase is worth it.
This isn’t going to be easy, but almost nothing worth having is.
Catie Tilton posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:40 pm
I was unable to attend this seminar, which is unfortunate because it sounds like it was a great one.
I’ve always wondered how reporters feel when they are the ones who break huge news stories, stories that often times change an athletes life forever. For example, the Duke lacrosse story. The moment ESPN reported the Duke scandal, the lives of the boys involved, the University and everyone connected with them changed dramatically. To say that I am angry to find out George Smith knew the boys were innocent and said nothing, is an understatement. This situation will never make sense to me, as I do not understand why the media would not want to include information that can save the reputation of many people. Although, I do understand that in order to be able to break any news, you MUST know your information inside and out because you can’t be the moron who releases false information or news that is based on your gut feeling.
Investigative journalism is a very interesting field that definitely takes a certain type of person. Caroline is correct, “at the end of the day it is a job that needs to get done and sometimes it is not as pretty or as easy as they make it look on TV.”
Mallory posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:45 pm
I enjoyed the focus of this week’s seminar being on journalism rather than covering sporting events. I believe sports reporters are also journalists and uncovering stories adds to the importance of the profession. And if those stories mean burning bridges, so be it, journalists are doing their jobs and while you may be friends with some of your subjects, you can’t let that affect your judgment on what to report. I felt it was a great seminar overall, listening to Bob and George’s highlights and low lights of their careers gives us all something to look forward to in the future.
I was also shocked to hear that Bob was a cab driver for so many years before finding his calling. It goes to show there’s no huge rush to landing your dream career right off the bat. And listening to George recap his experience covering the Duke lacrosse scandal was interesting and a lesson in itself, as David pointed out. It shows how important multiple sources are to big media new outlets and the ability to be able to back up your sources. Both speakers had an obvious passion for their profession and I think that’s what makes them so skilled in breaking news stories and willing to go to whatever lengths to accomplish that.
Margot posted on December 13, 2011 at 5:41 pm
I felt like we really ended the semester on a high note with our last guests. I really enjoyed hearing both Bob and George’s stories, and I thought they had a lot of offer us.
I think George might have the best job in the world, I am definitely the most jealous of him than any of our other guests to date. He gets to travel all over the country and report on some of the most dynamic and exciting stories in sports. George also gets the opportunity to incorporate news reporting in stories such as the Duke lacrosse story that are less about sports and more about other issues. Another aspect of George’s career that is appealing to me is that because he is a traveling reporter and not a beat reporter, he is constantly reporting on different subjects. I think that would really make a difference in terms of keeping things fresh and not feeling like your in a routine, the way I imagine beat writers may begin to feel towards the end of a season.
It was interesting hearing Bob Hohler talk, especially about the Red Sox story. He fully admitted that he burned bridges in that clubhouse. When the 2012 season starts, he is going to have an interesting time trying to do his job. I thought that he did just about as well as he could have with the story, under the circumstances. Hohler obviously had to weigh his friendship with Francona as well as his overall relationship with the team against the urgency and newsworthiness of this story, which was no easy task.
As I mentioned, I really enjoyed our final two guests and I definitely got a lot out of their seminar.
Tyler Murray posted on December 13, 2011 at 7:46 pm
This seminar definitely reinforced one of the most exciting aspects of working in sports: you never know what to expect. We heard that from Mike Lynch and Larry Ridley from a local standpoint, and it was nice to hear it from a national reporter as well.
I agree that George’s job sounds incredible, mostly when you compare it to the grind of beat reporting. I got the sense that some of our writing guests (Peter Abraham, Kevin Dupont) were a bit worn down from covering the same team and the same sport, year after year. George definitely seemed like a jovial guy by nature, but I’m sure he enjoys the opportunity to follow new stories all the time.
Bob brought up a point that I’ve always worried about in sports journalism — if you have the chance to break a big story, are you willing to lose the camaraderie you’ve built up with certain players and sources? I think Bob made the right decision, but I’m sure it wasn’t easy. Then again, after that Red Sox collapse, I doubt the players are on good terms with many members of the media anyway.
Great way to end the course — last week we realized that we could get jobs in sports, and this week we realized just how cool those jobs could be.
Oh and congratulations to all the departing grad students — don’t forget about the little people!
Nick posted on December 15, 2011 at 2:05 pm
The timing of this seminar was perfect. This week has had several stories either involving breaking news or the process of breaking the news. In the past seven days: Albert Pujols and C.J. Wilson turned the fortune of the Angels around in the matter of a few hours, Chris Paul was traded, un-traded, rumored to be traded, and then finally traded for good, and Corey Trivino made national headlines for all the wrong reasons.
The article that was written on Awful Announcing was eye opening because after all the breaking news that came out this week, I paid more attention to the way ESPN covered news, and I could see what the article was talking about. The WWL didn’t want to get trumped at its own game, so instead of acknowledging the source that broke the story, it gave all breaking news the same phrase – “Sources:”
All over Twitter, users properly attributed the Albert Pujols signing to the Associated Press. ESPN preferred to cite “Report:” and “Baseball Tonight” When Wilson signed just a few hours later, it was Karl Ravech on the phone, live on the air, who confirmed the story interestingly enough. Was it all a ruse to show ESPN was still the leader? Who knows. It sure was entertaining though.
When it came to the Chris Paul to the Clippers deal, ESPN definitely wanted to make sure every one knew who broke the story. I didn’t know, or care for that matter, who broke the story, but when I looked it up a few minutes ago all I could find were ESPN articles praising Marc Stein for cracking the case. It’s certainly been an interesting week for breaking news, but at the very end of the week, it was our small campus news outlets that schooled the big guys.
News of Corey Trivino’s arrest and subsequent banishment from the men’s hockey team was a sad story of a troubled youth who made one too many mistakes. It also harkened to a simpler time when one source broke a story, another delved deeper into it, and then everyone else disseminated it. It was easy to see that BU Today were the first ones to report the story – they were the only ones who had all the information. Shortly thereafter, the Daily Free Press dove deep into the story, providing the lurid details, and getting Coach Parker’s insightful thoughts. From there, other news outlets, like Yahoo! picked up the story (properly attributing BU Today and the DFP) and brought it to a national audience. It was the right way to break a story, and all parties should be applauded.
As the 24 hour news cycle gets faster and faster, it seems like every year is THE year of breaking news, and this year is no different. As the cycle gets faster, however, the civility of journalism shouldn’t be forgotten, because in the end, readers won’t remember who was the first to break the story… they’ll remember who did the best job of covering the whole thing.
Patrick Hazel posted on December 15, 2011 at 9:09 pm
It was a treat to meet people like Bob Hohler, who was on the front lines of the whole Red Sox media debacle, and George, an experienced writer for the worldwide leader in sports coverage. Both guys were great with their stories, excitement and I felt like they gave us unparallelled stories and advice that I won’t forget. This seminar was a great way to end the semester with two guys who are experienced, class acts.
Bob was really interesting in telling us how all of the editors, beat writers and reporters came about getting all the facts (working from outside-in, questioning Francona, players) The entire story, to me, was the biggest sports story of the year. It was great to have Bob tell us the story from his perspective.
It was also interesting how he told us that he burned some bridges in the Red Sox club house. This shows the danger of reporting and breaking stories out as well, as they could be a double edged sword. To me, that is the beauty of the job. It is all worth it when you report and break a story with the impact and significance as the Red Sox beer & chicken story.
I also got to talk to Bob after the seminar. We discussed how the Penn State scandal among others have tainted college sports more, as if that were even possible. College sports has become a tornado of lies, cheating and now child abuse scandals. It is a sad sight.
As far as breaking news goes, it is important to make sure breaking news is treated accurately and appropriately. As Nick said, breaking news can come at any moment, just like this past week with Pujols, Chris Paul, and Travino from the hockey team being perfect examples. Covering breaking news is a tough task, especially these days with the consuming and ever popular forms of social media. Reporters, and most importantly, the people, are never sleeping or missing a beat, so breaking news is a delicate
animal that is hard to tame. You could think you have a breaking story, but you might get the carpet pulled from under your feet by someone who has the right source.
My favorite part of the seminar is when Bob told us that he used to be a cab driver for about 7 years. I was truly shocked, who would ever have thought someone who is an editor at the Boston Globe was a cab driver for 7 years? It made me also have a better appreciation and respect for the stories he told us.
Great way to end the semester, shows the fun in the job and the dangers as well. I have a much greater appreciation for guys like Bob and George now as well, much respect.