Jon Fay.... WOW!

[RedEye]

I think Fay's conduct on Twitter is inappropriate and I have politely told him as much. He is a professional journalist in a position of public trust, and this status requires a certain level of decorum that he lacks on Twitter. No journalist would answer a phone call to the newsroom with the attitude that Fay has on Twitter, so why should Twitter be any different?

This is more of a problem with Twitter than it is a problem with Fay, I think. Or, to put it differently, Fay is one of many with this problem.

[Brutus]

Meh, I disagree with you guys. Hal McCoy was excellent in his prime and he was often critical. The best writers can present the facts ... and share their opinions as well.

There used to be a complete separation from news stories (nothing but the facts) and editorials (opinion pieces). But we see more of a fusion today. And even if Fay wasn't critical in a game story, he has a blog where he can write anything he wants. The good writers use this avenue as a way of sharing their opinions -- readers like that (well, if the writer is good).

It's not that they can't do it. It's that they're not paid to do it and it's not what their job is supposed to be.

You're absolutely right that in the old days, you had news stories and you had separate columns that were distinctly labeled "editorial" or "opinion" so that writers could offbeat their own thoughts. But in a day and age where the internet and blogs have blurred the lines, it's even more important for the media to concentrate on what they're supposed to do. Not saying they can't have an opinion piece, but that's still not their job.

[Brutus]

Well, that and a little thing called "the internets."

The internet is certainly a factor, but at the end of the day the quality of journalism is related to the people that do it for a living. Whether it's by internet or by newspaper or by television, the standards of journalism should still be followed. The quality started dipping when journalists stopped following the standards. The internet's existence created the blurred lines (blogs/social media), but it didn't twist arms of journalists to ignore everything they were taught.

[RedEye]

The internet is certainly a factor, but at the end of the day the quality of journalism is related to the people that do it for a living. Whether it's by internet or by newspaper or by television, the standards of journalism should still be followed. The quality started dipping when journalists stopped following the standards. The internet's existence created the blurred lines (blogs/social media), but it didn't twist arms of journalists to ignore everything they were taught.

Not having jobs has twisted arms to do a lot of things they never thought they would. The internet has destroyed a lot of journalists' jobs as they knew them. For some, it's the choice between standards and food on the table.

[dfs]

Meh, I disagree with you guys. Hal McCoy was excellent in his prime and he was often critical.

Again...Hal McCoy wrote nothing bad about Bob Boone or Ray Knight till after they left the club.

Very simply, you don't pee in the pool.

[Unassisted]

So often in this forum, Paul Daugherty's columns get raked over the coals. Doc's columns are the opposite of John Fay's. His stuff is nothing but opinions and usually strong ones!

I just find it amusing that John Fay gets criticized here for not writing more like Doc, when Doc's writing is such a frequent object of ridicule.

[nmculbreth]

It's not the media's job to call out any manager. It's their job to report on the club.

The editorializing of news is why journalism is disappearing. Criticizing Dusty, or any manager, is not in their job description.

Couldn't agree more. A beat reporter has no business calling out anyone, whether it be the manager, players or the organization itself.

That being said there are times when being a good reporter involves asking tough, probing questions and often times it seems like the Reds' group of beat reporters are unwilling to ask those questions. I know that it's important for the beat reports to maintain good working relationships with the players and coaches but that doesn't mean that they should be asking nothing but softball questions.

[joshua]

Couldn't agree more. A beat reporter has no business calling out anyone, whether it be the manager, players or the organization itself.

That being said there are times when being a good reporter involves asking tough, probing questions and often times it seems like the Reds' group of beat reporters are unwilling to ask those questions. I know that it's important for the beat reports to maintain good working relationships with the players and coaches but that doesn't mean that they should be asking nothing but softball questions.

Asking tough questions is the job of any reporter. Any manager/coach in Cincinnati has it easy. A couple of beat writers and not a whole lot of pressure from the fans compared to other places.

Imagine what Baker would have faced in the clubhouse after a game like Sunday's if he were in a Red Sox uniform. Hell, imagine the grilling Spier would have gotten. Cincinnati is a cake walk.

[Brutus]

Not having jobs has twisted arms to do a lot of things they never thought they would. The internet has destroyed a lot of journalists' jobs as they knew them. For some, it's the choice between standards and food on the table.

I disagree strongly. That had nothing to do with it. They didn't have to do anything different to save their jobs. Being "first" rather than being "right" certainly wasn't going to keep them employed. Roasting managers or coaches wasn't going to keep them employed. Reporting things without corroboration, especially when it turns out they weren't even reporting accurately was not going to keep them employed.

As someone who has come from journalism, had an uncle serve a long time as an editor of a newspaper and have dozens of friends in the industry, I wholly take issue with the idea they were simply saving their jobs. I'd say it's more about ego than job security. They didn't like kids fresh out of school and ripe with pimples going on blogs as a hobby and scooping them on things. Heck, I can relate having done this myself... there is most definitely ego among the profession. Job security is nor has it ever been remotely the reason for people in journalism ditching standards.

[CrackerJack]

Exactly. People have this notion that reporters are supposed to have opinions. Their job is to report. Leave the punditry to the pundits.

It's sports, always has been, not world news, politics, life or death. Don't take it so seriously folks.

[Caveat Emperor]

Exactly. People have this notion that reporters are supposed to have opinions. Their job is to report. Leave the punditry to the pundits.

Put it this way:

If you walked up to your team's beat writer at the bar (presuming that you recognized them) and wanted to talk about the team, would you want him to report only facts or would you want him to share his opinions about the team?

That's twitter. It's a conversation with individual people who might also have other jobs. John Fay (and other writers) aren't required to be reporters 24/7 when conversing with people over the internet. Twitter isn't a newspaper report, a blog posting on a newspaper site, or a published piece of journalism.

And to whoever said his attitude sucks -- you've obviously never hung out with a reporter or someone in the news media before. They're almost all jaded and cynical to the core. It's difficult to cover the news well if you don't have that attitude, honestly.

[jfleur87]

I think Fay's conduct on Twitter is inappropriate and I have politely told him as much. He is a professional journalist in a position of public trust, and this status requires a certain level of decorum that he lacks on Twitter. No journalist would answer a phone call to the newsroom with the attitude that Fay has on Twitter, so why should Twitter be any different?

Very difficult to conduct one's self on twitter as they normally would. The idea is to gain a following. Controversy helps this cause. But I see nothing with the tweet that Fay put out there regarding Dusty. Was merely replying to someone else's opinion.

Twitter and standard journalism have a different set of rules. They should be seen as apples and oranges.

[reds44]

John Fay struggles with grammar (which is amazing considering he's a professional WRITER) and he would sever one of his legs before he'd criticize Dusty.

Fay has no problems criticizing Reds fans, though. You know, the people that help pay his salary (if no one is reading, those ad dollars aren't coming in). In fact, Fay comes across like a (word I can't say here) on Twitter. I know some fans can be annoying. Well, ignore them. Many times a Reds fan will have a legitimately good question and even then Fay will give some condescending answer. The guy has no personality, is a bad writer and is scared of Dusty. Other than that, I love him.

Have you seen Reds fans on twitter? THey deserve to be criticized.

[Brutus]

Put it this way:

If you walked up to your team's beat writer at the bar (presuming that you recognized them) and wanted to talk about the team, would you want him to report only facts or would you want him to share his opinions about the team?

That's twitter. It's a conversation with individual people who might also have other jobs. John Fay (and other writers) aren't required to be reporters 24/7 when conversing with people over the internet. Twitter isn't a newspaper report, a blog posting on a newspaper site, or a published piece of journalism.

And to whoever said his attitude sucks -- you've obviously never hung out with a reporter or someone in the news media before. They're almost all jaded and cynical to the core. It's difficult to cover the news well if you don't have that attitude, honestly.

Absolutely mistaken. If what you were saying were true, reporters wouldn't be getting fired constantly for making insensitive remarks on Twitter or saying something controversial.

Fact is, every reporter is told they should act like they're on the job while on Twitter. It's a public representation of their professional persona. Their job is to act like a professional on Twitter.

Twitter has become, for journalists, part of the job.

[RedEye]

Job security is not nor has it ever been remotely the reason for people in journalism ditching standards.

I'm not as connected to the field as you are, so I'll defer to you here in general.

I will say, though, that I've also got several friends in the industry who constantly complain about the social media era and what it has done to reporting standards. Twitter has changed the way that news breaks (as do reddit and other sites). The short format trend that goes along with handheld media consumption has altered the ways in which information is digested on an everyday basis, and more and more journalists are forced to either go to a "bullet point" or a 140-word format or die trying. According to folks I've talked to, hiring practices are also more and more driven by the number of hits you can generate online -- and this can affect reporting accuracy standards, since the quest for truth isn't always what attracts people to click through to a story, whereas being "first" (in whatever fashion) often is.

Of course, there has to be a spectrum of quality in any new form. Some reporters are really good at using the new limitations with pithy wit, whereas others (like Fay) are not laconic enough (or too mistake prone) to pull it off.