Thursday, November 8, 2007

'Roid Rage and Reportage, or Something Like It

This winter is not just a crazy off season because of the new Yankees’ manager or the new vacancy at third base, or even the uncertainties of whether Mo, Po and the free agent co will resign. This winter, there is the probable release of the Mitchell Report, the results of the congressional investigation into the use of performance-enhancing drugs.

While we might joke about the baseball names that seem to be obvious to be released in connection with the report, such as Rafael Palmeiro and Barry Bonds, and while we might dread the idea that any of our favorite players might be revealed, there is something else we need to consider.

George Mitchell, the leader of the investigation, is not merely a senator assigned to the task. He is a director for the Front Office of the Boston Red Sox.

Consider that for a moment. Ask yourself if that’s not a bit unlike asking the CEO of Ford to lead an investigation into car safety, or asking the head of Prudential to investigate insurance fraud.

Can I get a ‘conflict of interest’?

Can I get a ‘why has this not been mentioned by the mainstream media’?

I had no idea that George Mitchell was in Boston’s front office until others mentioned it to me on a Yankees’ blog. I had a hard time believing it at first—it seems so unprofessional, to say the least.

Now, I don’t know George Mitchell. As far as I know he could be the world’s most honest man. However, whether or not Mitchell is an honest man, and that he’s treated those on the Red Sox the same as those on all of the other major league teams, is not the point.

The point is, hiring someone with a direct stake in the results of the report is unethical, to say the least. We’ll probably not know for sure whether or not any special treatment was given to Boston players, but what’s done is done.

What’s getting to me right now, though, is the lack of coverage this conflict of interest seems to be getting. It’s a no-brainer that it would come up on Yankees’ forums; we have a great sense of Schadenfreude, especially when applied to the Red Sox. However, the Yankees are not the only team Boston plays in the course of a year.

Is it coincidence that Paul Byrd was mentioned in connection with HGH just as he was pitching in the ALCS? An ALCS that happened to go seven games? It’s not entirely likely Cleveland would have won at Fenway, but again, that’s besides the point.

Like many Yankees fans, I tend to see a pro-Boston bias with ESPN and some of the other mainstream media outlets, so perhaps I’m a bit jaded, but for this to get no mention at all? Are people really that thick? Do they just not care?

All right, I’m done ranting.

I’m setting the odds on when the names are leaked at 5:1 before Thanksgiving, 10:1 between Thanksgiving and 14 December (the end of my Semester), 20: 1 between 15 Dec and Christmas, and 50:1 between Christmas and New Year’s.

8 comments:

  1. The pro-Boston bias on ESPN is based on ESPN reporter Peter Gammons, an outwardly Red sox fan who has alot of clout with them.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bob DuPuy was asked the conflict of interest issue by Mike and the Mad Dog a few weeks ago. DuPuy said that nobody in baseball questions the integrity of Sen. Mitchell considering the things he has done while a senator and after he left office. I believe the interview is still listed on MMD's archives at WFAN.com.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Can I get a ‘conflict of interest’?

    CONFLICT OF INTEREST

    Can I get a ‘why has this not been mentioned by the mainstream media’?

    Why has this not been mentioned by the mainstream media?

    I can't believe more hasn't been made of it. You hit all the right notes. Even if everything is on the up and up, the findings can't be taken seriously when the source can be legitimately perceived as tainted.

    ReplyDelete
  4. mike--the issue isn't so much whether or not Mitchell is honest (and I like to believe he is), but that they chose someone with a direct stake in the outcome of the investigation is an ethical concern.

    As is the lack of coverage outside the NY media...unless I'm wrong and simply don't read enough!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Bob DuPuy was asked the conflict of interest issue by Mike and the Mad Dog a few weeks ago. DuPuy said that nobody in baseball questions the integrity of Sen. Mitchell considering the things he has done while a senator and after he left office.

    Well if Bob DuPuy said it, I feel so much better

    Seriously, is that the best he can do? It's a joke how weak MLB's defense is.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Put it this way... if the situation was reversed and Mitchell was a director from the Yankees front office... there would be 150 point 'Conflict of Interest' headlines all over the place. I am sure of that.

    You probably should have also added to your rant:

    "Can I get a double standard?" :)

    As for Bob DuPuy, the man has his head in the sand on most matters concerning baseball. Just because no one has questioned him directly, doesn't mean they're in agreement with it. In fact, their silence to him might speak louder than any words.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'll throw this into the mix: Mitchell had a notable career in the Senate, helped broker a peace agreement in northern Ireland a few years back, and has a reputation for integrity. So, when Bud wanted to do a serious investigation on the PEDs issue, he calls in a heavy hitter with a considerable rep. I'm not defending Mitchell but I wouldn't be surprised if he plays it fair. Of course, I'd rather see a Fay vincent in the commissioner's seat than the owners' old buddy, Selig, hiring the investigator.

    good luck with your GREs!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yes, it's a giant conspiracy! Call the Feds!

    Everyone is out to get you yankee fans. Put on your tin foil hats and prepare for the worst.

    ReplyDelete