For what it's worth, if anyone is to blame on the "journalism" end of things here, it's me rather than Newsday. The paper did report the quote you allude to as well, Roy. However, in my whole-hearted agreement with Soap's point that the guy's comments really shouldn't have been made in the first place, I simply went with what I considered Pap's most egregious quote.
That being said, it wasn't fair to do so without pointing that he did step back on those words later. My bad on that.
Even with that in account, I stand by my replacement for "blah, blah, blah."
-sw
Possibly, Steve, but it's not in the online story you linked to, and it's certainly not implied but the headline they chose to run. I'm still saying typical tabloid journalism.
Are you talking about the headline of the story I linked to...or the headline run by your picture of the cover from the New York Daily News?
I'm not sure it's fair to hold Newsday responsible for the latter...
-sw
So many tabloids on New York, it's hard to keep track.
So, the Daily News used the sensational headline, and Newsday used the inaccurate online story. New York papers are 2-for-2.
To be truthful, I'm a bit confused by the Newsday online story -- I didn't read it as thoroughly as I should have, because I read the comments in the print edition this morning and was just looking for waht I quoted -- though it was paired with Papelbon's retraction when I saw it in print. I'm not sure why the paper would have an online story well
after publication of the print edition that wouldn't feature the retraction. I'll have to find the original story when I get a chance, although I believe Ken Davidoff mentioned both ends of the Pap spectrum in his baseball insider column. That part of it is certainly a bit odd, and you'll have no argument from me on that end of things...
-sw