Posted by
Madeline's Dad on Friday, September 22, 2006 9:20:00 AM
It looks like the two reporters in San Francisco that broke the story about Barry Bonds and possible steriod use are going to spend some time in the clink. You can read the story
here..
I've been going back and forth on how I feel about stories like this, when there is an instance of a reporter(s) leaking/breaking a stroy with the use of anonomous sources.
I've always felt that the protections extended to journalists are reserved for sources that would be somehow harmed if their identities were revealed. I'm thinking of folks like whistleblowers in a company where something illegal might be happening, and therefore helping the greater good by exposing the information.
These days, it appears that the "whistleblowers" are using these protections offered to journalists to push a personal agenda. For a few examples, all one has to do is pick up todays local newspapers, and read all of the anonomous accounts from "persons associated with the Administration", or "Senior Pentagon officials" to see what I am talking about.
The Barry Bonds thing drives me crazy. Yes, Barry is a jerk. Yes, Barry has made just about every sportswriter in the world hate him. Yes, Barry is a self-absorbed jerk.
Yes, Barry is the best all-around baseball player of my generation.
Has Barry's attitude and demeanor made him a target for all of those sportswriters he has angered over the years? Without a doubt. When news of the steriod scandal in baseball began gaining some momentum, were there many sportswriters in newsrooms around the Country rubbing their hands with glee, hoping it lead back to Barry?
Unquestionably.
But we can't have it both ways. The blogosphere was up in arms over Rathergate. A fradulent document was produced, and then run with on a National news program. One side of the aisle stood by the document, so obviously false, and claimed "fake, but accurate". Why? Because they wanted to believe it was true, and so therefore, it must be.
There is a portion of the sports population that believes Barry began using steriods during Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa's historic run at home run record in 1998. Those in the know feel Barry wanted the love and attention that McGwire and Sosa were attracting, and made the decision to bulk up to increase his home run output. For the folks that believe that, it's easy to connect the dots, and assume/believe that Barry was cheating.
Fake, but accurate?
I don't know if Barry cheated. If I had to guess, I would say he did. Photos of Barry 10 years ago, placed next to Barry now suggest he beffed up unnaturally. Most people as they grow older have trouble keeping muscle mass, much less adding lots more. Barry admitted to a Grand Jury that he took "the clear and the cream", two products that later were shown to be steriods. It is hard for me to believe that he had no idea what he was putting on his body. Can I prove he took steriods? No. Can it be shown that there is quite a bit of information that would suggest Barry knew he was cheating? Yes.
History will decide how Barry will be remembered in baseball lore. My guess is that he will be in Cooperstown, and rightfully so. Major League Baseball turned a blind eye to a problem in their organization. They knew the players were cheating, and did nothing about it. When things got out of hand, then they cracked down, but the damage was done. The 90's will be remembered in baseball as the "Steriod Period". Every player that had a big season(s) will have to live with the cloud placed over them by McGwire, Sosa, Canseco, Palmerio, and Bonds. Some will be unfairly placed in that group, some will not.
My bottom line is this-whomever the person or persons on the Grand Jury who leaked Barrys testimony to the Press, should go to jail. This is a clear example of someone with an agenda using the "anonomous source" angle to push their agenda of wanting to see Bonds go down. Let justice and our courts decide if Barry broke the law, and then pinish him if he did commit a crime.
But also punish the leaker(s) for their crime of revealing testimony from behind closed doors. If the reporters don't want to help determine if a crime was comitted, then let them be punished as well.