Cuban: Let's 'Blacklist' Bad Sports Sites

    Mark Cuban cares deeply enough about basketball and the media to be proposing a sort of Sportswriters Police that would “blacklist’’ the media outlets that “fabricate stories,’’ “pass them off as ‘rumors,’’’ and “drive traffic and create awareness’’ that way instead of doing “actual reporting.’’

   Writes Mark on his BlogMaverick:

   Has anyone noticed that its impossible to trust a single word uttered about coaching changes, the draft, trades and even celebration parties these days ?

   Bloggers, sports websites and even the print media have gotten so desperate they seem to have come to the conclusion that fabricated stories, passed off as rumors, are a better way to drive traffic and create awareness of a website or blog than actual reporting.

   Unfortunately, ESPN and local newspapers, radio and TV media have become the patsies of bloggers.  If some random blogger reports that “he has heard that a trade of Joe for John is being discussed”, then the traditional media, as they have told me many times “is requested by their editor to run it down and see if its real”.    Its almost like a sad joke.  How do you make an ESPN reporter jump ? Make up something and put it on your blog. Somewhere a bunch of sports bloggers are playing a drinking game.  Chug if the other guys made up trade rumor makes the ESPN crawl.

   How to stop it ? ESPN.com puts up a page of blacklisted blogs and websites who’s posts they wont comment on or report on in any way.  It will create a short term surge of traffic for those sites, but then they will go away as the proprietors of the sites realize that being discredited is not a good thing

   Before we tackle the issue of who would be the arbiter of which outlets traffic in journalistic fraud, let’s reiterate our belief that this is indeed a problem – and that Mark is correct about the permanent stain that could/should result of being mentioned on such a blacklist.

    Let’s try HoopsWorld. Those boys put in the hours and they have credentials to games and they’ve built an audience. But …

    Just this week, that site reported that Mavs president Donnie Nelson announced at a Thursday meeting with the media “that he is actively seeking a way to move up.’’

   Problem: That is NOT AT ALL what Nelson said.

   This was a Donnie Nelson press conference. Open to the media. Lots of guys listening in and taking notes. Very difficult to misappropriate or misunderstand.

     Yet somehow, HoopsWorld misappropriated, misunderstood … and mis-reported.

    What Nelson actually said: "We're looking to trade up, trade down, trade all around, as far as the pick goes. … We think we're going to get something good at 22. It's a good area. … It's a decent area and we feel like we can get something good down there. … It means that at 22 we'll probably grab just the best player." 
    Which part of any of that can possibly be reported as:

   “Mavs GM Donnie Nelson told us today that he is actively seeking a way to move up’’?

    So do we “blacklist’’ HoopsWorld and others for that low level of accuracy? And does ESPN get to be the Chief of Police, not to mention the judge, jury and executioner of the “blacklist’’?

    And if the answer to the first question is “yes,’’ we need look no further than this week in other Mavs “news’’ for more ban-worth outlets.

    How about anybody who reported that Anderson Varejao has a contract offer from Dallas?

    How about anybody who was calling Dirk Nowitzki a “cad’’ for their predictions of his actions in the Cristal Taylor case?

    How about anybody who seems to “fabricate stories,’’ “pass them off as ‘rumors,’’’ and “drive traffic and create awareness’’ that way instead of doing “actual reporting’’ in the case of the Josh Smith-to-Mavs trade story?

    Problem: Until DallasBasketball.com shot it down, everybody was whispering about the Varejao thing.

    Problem: The “cad’’ angle that we challenged came from the Huffington Post; they are big enough not to care if the sports world “blacklists’’ them.

   Problem: ESPN, the proposed Policeman here, is the source of the ridiculous Josh Smith story.

   So ESPN is on both sides of the law. And therefore cannot be the arbiter, cannot sit in judgment, cannot be in charge of the “blacklist.’’

   (Mark's instincts for how trained media members actually work are accurate. How do you make a real reporter jump? Make DallasBasketball.com use two full days of resources to track down and shoot down Varejao and Josh Smith trade "stories.'')

    We’re certain that when Mark Cuban thinks of ESPN, he considers the reputable people he deals with, reads and listens to. That means people like Bill Simmons and Marc Stein and Jeff Van Gundy and Michael Wilbon and John Hollinger and Dr. Jack Ramsey. On a local level, it also means 103.3 ESPN Radio (disclosure: I’m a small part of that ESPN family.)

    What Mark doesn’t think of when he thinks of ESPN (and good for him): The employees who dot their national roster who absolutely make a living from trafficking in “look-at-me’’ bullshit.

    So maybe Mark Cuban’s “blacklist’’ idea simply needs some tinkering; a panel of established “judges’’ from across the media spectrum? A United Nations of bloggers? A “Good Housekeeping Seal’’ for honorable outlets, an Ebert-esque “thumbs-down’’ for the disreputable and the sloppy?

   Or, maybe, we’ll have to do this the old-fashioned way, and the long-and-arduous way: Over the course of time, the quality will rise to the top. And the quality will be judged by the Sportswriters Police who are already in place:

    The readers.