REFUTED: Travis Hines: A look into the ISU BBall program and the Athletic Dept
- Thread starter megamanxzero35
- Start date
Did some people not get free travel to the NCAA tourney and were they upset about it?
Did some players and coaches get upset they were forced to leave the hotel rooms early when they didn't have to go to the hotel for hours?
Was Fred upset at Pollard for the contract stuff?
Were their players/coaches/administrators that felt the AD nickled and dimed the bball program?
Did Hines say that Hoiberg left because of the relationship with Pollard?
Did Hines say that Pollard and Fred had a bad working relationship?
Did some players and coaches get upset they were forced to leave the hotel rooms early when they didn't have to go to the hotel for hours?
Was Fred upset at Pollard for the contract stuff?
Were their players/coaches/administrators that felt the AD nickled and dimed the bball program?
Did Hines say that Hoiberg left because of the relationship with Pollard?
Did Hines say that Pollard and Fred had a bad working relationship?
Not sure what you mean by this.....so there were no sources at all? If they were not un-named, then provide us a list.
anonymous: (of a person) not identified by name; of unknown name.
[COLOR=#878787 !important]"the anonymous author of Beowulf"[/COLOR]
| synonyms: | unnamed, of unknown name, nameless, incognito, unidentified, unknown, unsourced, secret More |
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=anonymous synonyms
The guy wasn't reporting on some illegal political conspiracy. It isn't like his anonymous sources would face prosecution or physical danger if they were named. Its a freakin' joke that he feels he has to "protect" some disgruntled ex-coach or butt hurt donor. Its a bigger joke that those anonymous sources didn't have the guts to go on the record.
This. A new book published as "by Anonymous" just means that it's author is unnamed. The publisher still knows who wrote it but that the author doesn't want to be credited for it.
Exactly........or another example is if you make a donation to a charity online, and you prefer to remain anonymous, the charity still knows your name from the credit card you use, but does not publish or release it.
Un-named and anonymous are synonyms for each other, likely in any English language dictionary one can find.
I don't have a problem with him publishing what anonymous sources said. I do have a problem with him not verifying everything he published. Where there are records available to verify a story they should be obtained and referenced to build the story. Simply following a trail of like minded disgruntled people rather than trying to obtain both sides of a story, or better yet, find the documents that prove some of the allegations true or false is simply bad journalism. The information was available, he just had to do the leg work. If a story isn't ready by a deadline then it shouldn't be published or should be delayed for another issue.
No, it isn't. And I don't know how that can be hard to grasp. Hell, it might have even been a current player who ******* about the hotel room thing. There should be zero expectation for Hines to say who did it, and there should be zero expectation for people to expect ******** about their boss to be done on the record. Hines screwed up by not checking out what they said. Plain and simple. The sources themselves are in no way, at all, the issue with the article.
I don't know how what I typed was hard to grasp either but you apparently weren't able to. I understand the meaning and the point of using unnamed/anonymous sources. In this case, it was pointless. They weren't revealing government secrets. I have no idea what they were even trying to do except stir up a ****-storm that backfired massively.
If somebody asked you about your boss, would you give the same answers if it was off the record vs. your comments being given to him with your name attached? Keep in mind I doubt you're going to be accusing him of anything illegal or revealing government secrets. Just your honest thoughts and feelings.
Well it's also not considered smart to publicly bad mouth your ex-boss-- a philosophy Fred perhaps believes in
In some professions with a tight knit community (coaching, for example) it is considered bad form to go to the media with grievances about previous employers. This type of thing can get you black-balled.
You would? When we interview people at our organization, we're told to not consider any candidates that criticize their ex-bosses!
Yes that is true. And I would say in my profession that is true too, but I don't worry about that.
