Apparently I have to say this: treat recruits with respect

Submitted by Brian on

Brandon posted an article about 2016 recruit Teryn Savage, and this is his takeaway from his experience at MGoBlog:

https://twitter.com/TerynSavage/status/382644691738451968

So congratulations, leftrare, MGoBrewMom, JuggernautRides, and chitownblue2, and the other people in that thread who insulted the kid for no reason. Guess what: people are interested to see what people say about them on the internet, and now a potential recruit doesn't want to talk to Brandon. 

If you think that 2016 is a magic land from which news cannot come, don't read it. We're going to report on kids that are being recruited. 

Going forward, anything that could be interpreted as an insult to a blameless high school kid will result in a no-warning ban. Even if that interpretation is crazy. Any "pedo" references will also result in a ban. 

In conclusion, guh.

MGrad

September 24th, 2013 at 9:28 PM ^

It is sad that this had to be stated and sad that what seems like a cool kid felt any stress from the nonsense.

I hope that nobody would say mean spirited things in front of any kid. So don't be that way on the blog.

MGoStrength

September 24th, 2013 at 9:28 PM ^

I've been busy for a few weeks so I'm trying to piece together what happened.  Are we saying you are at risk of being banned if you insult a recruit (i.e. name calling, profanity, obscenities) or are we saying you are at risk of being banned if you are providing criticism of a recruit (i.e. pointing out a recruit said something immature or acted too boastful)?  Or are we not distinguishing between the two?  

 

I only ask because in the past I have called it like I see it, meaning if a kid says or does something that I think is pretty cool, like being mature, saying the right kinds of things, doing really great stuff like the Mone piece, etc. I will praise that.  I have also shown some criticism for silly, egotistical, immature, etc. stuff when I saw that as well.  I have never been disrespectful IMO, but I have shown criticism when I didn't like what a recruit said or did.  Is that all the same or can I get a clarification?

JuggernautRIDES

September 24th, 2013 at 9:33 PM ^

Wow. It feels like every single one of those posts on that thread was linked to my one comment.

This whole thing is absolutely ridiculous and completely blown out of proportion, but that's why I love this blog. 

I'd just like to point out that all the people name-dropped in Brian's post have very old (4+ years) accounts and have been supporting this blog for years, and not just with hits... 

Doesn't matter to me though, I still love all of you guys!

turd ferguson

September 24th, 2013 at 9:35 PM ^

I think it's funny that we all think this board has gone to hell because of the presence of posters who behave differently from us, yet we all have different ideas in mind about whose posts are good and whose posts aren't.  I guess one man's douche bag is another man's friend?  Nah, that sounds kind of gross.

xxxxNateDaGreat

September 24th, 2013 at 9:54 PM ^

This board is going to hell because of the extremely rapid increase of idiotic jerks who lash out at people and try to start flame wars all of the damn time.

Really, I have gotten into good, spirited debates on this board in the past that changed my perspective on topics. It wasn't always kittens and moonbeams, I know. Mr. Rager has been a long time member and Section 1 has become something of a modern myth. But nowadays, the amount of general douchebaggery, flaming, and borderline personal attacks on members, coaches and current/future players, as well as the increasing amount of "hurr durr im right ur wrong, bro" comments over the last few months has become staggering.

DirkMcGurk

September 24th, 2013 at 10:07 PM ^

Couldn't have said it better. Board is crashing because too many people trying to pile on with a "funny" comment or slam.



I started a thread to discuss the turnover issues and I get bombarded with captain obvious comments and then the bang up mods delete thread.



Really little actual debate/discussion goes on anymore just slams and people pissing and moaning because the team isn't destroying people and the trolls can't go and post smack on Sparty and Buckeye boards.

Brian

September 24th, 2013 at 9:36 PM ^

I'm not going to reply individually to everyone in this thread. In sum:

I don't care if you don't think it's offensive. The upside is zero--lame snark on a message board--and the downside is getting my ass reamed out by the department for stuff I didn't even post, and maybe a recruit thinking poorly of Michigan fans. 

It was offputting. We have this direct from the recruit. If you think that's dumb, no one cares, because we want Michigan to win football games and your feelings can jump in a lake. 

It was never my intent to remove user moderation. I have no idea how it happened with our server move, but it did, and I spent a week trying to put it back, and then it was the season and I had no time. I apologize for the jankiness and I am going to fix that as soon as I possibly can.

Maybe some of you should consider whether this is the community for you. This is not a free for all. There are places that are that. Immediate reactions in game threads are one thing, but persistently disrespectful interactions with other community members are on the upswing and I've about had it with the tone of many comment threads. Butterfield and chitown, I'm looking at you. All you do is get in fights. If all you post is how other people aren't living up to your standards, leave. There will be a benighted place for you somewhere in this crazy internet.

There is nothing wrong with asking a prospective recruit if he wants to give us an interview. Brandon is polite and desists whenever asked to. If you think contacting a kid on social media is not the point of social media I don't know what to tell you. Ridiculous to assert that talking to a kid for a recruiting article is immoral but the preps page of your local newspaper isn't, or that it's bad when Brandon does it but not when ESPN does. 

Thank you, MGoBrewMom. I know that wasn't your intent but it is difficult to tell how things will be taken on the interent.

Brian

September 24th, 2013 at 9:57 PM ^

Here's how this works. 

1. Ask kid if he wants to be interviewed.

2. If he says yes, interview him.

3. Post what he says, say nice things about him. 

If he does not say yes, the cost has been one email equivalent of his time. That's it. The kid either does or does not, and his life continues on exactly as it was before. If you find that "disgusting" so be it. I find that point of view ludicrous.

mooseman

September 24th, 2013 at 10:58 PM ^

Now thankfully through high school who, although not division one football recruits, still had many demands on their time, I find your attitude about these concerns flippant.  Taken as one request the time demands don't seem so bad. In a highly sought after recruit I'm sure it can be overwhelming. This doesn't even take into account that an adult is contacting my minor son potentially without my knowledge.

The barrage that these kids get from schools is bad enough, multiply it by the hunger for content from third party sites and it is ridiculous. Many kids love the attention-that doesn't make it any better. Kids love a lot of things that aren't necessarily in their best interest.

This will all continue and only get worse. I'm a realist. But have a kid or two of your own and get back to me on how ludicrous this point of view is.

TheGhostofChappuis

September 24th, 2013 at 11:14 PM ^

If it's overwhelming, then the kid can say no.  Did you even read what Brian said? This was a short interview, and it's not going to have any negative consequences for the kid.  As far as you not knowing that your kid is being contacted, welcome to the 21st century.

Jeff09

September 24th, 2013 at 11:11 PM ^

Small suggestion, but I think a legitimate one: maybe consider getting parents' consent before doing interviews. I have no problem with the HS recruiting industry in general and follow recruiting news closely. That said, were I a parent (I'm not), I would definitely want to be consulted before someone I didn't know asked to speak to my child and post the answers in a public forum. It's your site and you'll do what you want, but that's what I would do. Not trying to be a dick, just trying to be constructive.

Brandon Brown

September 24th, 2013 at 10:01 PM ^

I'm not trying to be a smartass, but it sounds like you have a personal issue with this, as in something may have happened to you or someone you know. If that is the case, I am truly sorry, but I can assure you that I use social media to cover football news and that is aIl.

I really am trying to understand why people think using social media to find out recruiting news is creepy because I honestly just can't see it. If someone has ill-intentions and uses social media to prey on young people, then yes, obviously that is disgusting and should be addressed any way that it can. What I, and every other person who covers recruiting, uses it for is harmless. The kids enjoy it and it only helps them gain recognition.

I just find it impossible to believe that if anyone had a 16 year old son, who was dominant in high school football and was getting regional or even national attention for it, that you as a parent wouldn't be ecstatic about it. I know I would be. How could you not be proud, happy, and excited for the potential opportunities for your child? They aren't being preyed on, they are being celebrated and given credit for the accomplishments they have achieved. At least that's how I see it.

xxxxNateDaGreat

September 24th, 2013 at 10:08 PM ^

I guess if you take away the fact that TALKING TO TALENTED, UP AND COMING HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL PLAYERS IS THIS MAN'S SOLE JOB AND THESE KIDS USE SOCIAL MEDIA AS THEIR PRIMARY FORM OF COMMUNICATION then, yeah, I guess I could see how it might be momentarily unsettling to the untrained eye.

btw, good job with the interview.

 

DirkMcGurk

September 24th, 2013 at 10:10 PM ^

I can tell you I know people who at a similar age were taken advantage if and even sexually molested by people who contacted kids pretending to have connections with recruiting.



Let's be clear I don't see you as that guy, but the slope is slippery. I would recommend sticking to Seniors and Juniors for recruiting interviews.

In reply to by DirkMcGurk

xxxxNateDaGreat

September 24th, 2013 at 10:48 PM ^

 

 

Firstly, that is horrible and I hope everything is okay now. I wouldn't wish that on anyone.

Second, I think that the risk would probably be lessened if parents and coaches take a more active role in what the kid is doing. Easier said than done, I know. There are players with parent(s) working two or three jobs just to support the family. Plus, kids aren't always the most cautious to begin with.

The only thing we really can do is just educate players, coaches and parents.

Shop Smart Sho…

September 24th, 2013 at 10:53 PM ^

Brandon,

 

If I had a 16 year old son and you contacted him through a social media site without getting my permission, we would be having an unpleasant conversation.



Signed,

Lots of Parents

 

 

Maybe don't worry about being the first person to interview a kid?  Talk to his parents or coaches first.  Is taking one extra step to create contact with a high school kid such a bad thing?  Especially considering that the extra step will protect you from a lot of potential hazards?

TheGhostofChappuis

September 24th, 2013 at 11:18 PM ^

IT'S AN INTERVIEW.  If you don't want your kid on social media, it's your responsibility as a parent to not have him on social media.  If you don't want your kid doing interviews, it's your responsibility as a parent to explain to your kid how to turn down interviews. And what potential hazards are you even talking about?  There is nothing illegal or immoral that could come from interviewing a high school football player about his college choice.  Christ.

Shop Smart Sho…

September 24th, 2013 at 11:25 PM ^

Parent: "Don't do interviews without clearing it with me."

Kid: "Ok."



Reporter:  "Want to do an interview?"

Kid: "Ok."

Can you see how that above situation could be very common and lead to all sorts of issues between the parent and kid?  And also, if the reporter doing the interview is associated with a specific school, as Brandon is, could leave a bad taste for the school with either the kid or parent?

Now, in that situation, the kid is wrong.  However, the reporter can easily prevent any issue from arising by simply contacting the school/parent first.

 

You can't possibly imagine any potential hazards from an adult interacting with a child without the consent of the child's parent?  Even if nothing happens, it is a situation ripe with negative possibilities.  That is why every coaching manual and teaching manual I have ever seen places a HUGE emphasis on not being alone with kids, and with not interacting through social media with kids.

The majority of that can be avoided simply by getting permission for a parent first, which doesn't seem to be much to ask.

TheGhostofChappuis

September 24th, 2013 at 11:45 PM ^

"You can't possibly imagine any potential hazards from an adult interacting with a child without the consent of the child's parent?  Even if nothing happens, it is a situation ripe with negative possibilities."

I'm asking you to name a few, which you haven't been able to do.  Again, what is the fear?

Shop Smart Sho…

September 24th, 2013 at 11:54 PM ^

You are a truly pedantic person, aren't you?

 

1.  Accusations of conversations between an adult and child that are improper.

2.  Anger that a parent was removed from the decision making process about whom their child speaks with.

3.  Violation of school policy by contacting a recruit without clearance by the school.

4.  Use of an image without parental consent.

5.  Questions about the propriety of a booster (which Brandon might be considered) interviewing a potential recruit.

 

Is that enough for you?

TheGhostofChappuis

September 25th, 2013 at 12:23 AM ^

1.  So it's improper because someone might accuse it of being improper? Um, okay.

2.  That's between the kid and his parent and is a very minor consequence.

3. I have never seen a school policy like this.  Do you know of one, or are you just making this up?

4. Nothing illegal or immoral about this.  This image was part of a public document which presumably was already approved by the parent and the minor. 

5.  Please be more specific.  What questions are you talking about?  This is completely within NCAA rules, so I have no idea what you're referring to here.

Shop Smart Sho…

September 25th, 2013 at 12:26 AM ^

I'm done with you.  You don't know what you are talking about when it comes to how high schools attempt to protect their students.  You have made that painfully obvious.  Multiple people in this thread are concerned about the methods being employed by Brandon.  If Brian is going to ban ChiTown for not contributing, he needs to get rid of you too.  

WolvinLA2

September 26th, 2013 at 5:28 PM ^

Although I think his attitude probably suggests he's not a parent, but I am a parent of two boys and I don't really disagree with his overall point.  If my son was a high schooler who was a D1 recruit, I would expect this sort of thing to happen.  I would try to keep an open dialogue with him about it and ask that he tells me about these interviews before they happen, and I would want to be a part of them.  But I wouldn't fault the interviewer for doing it. 

My thought process would be this:  My son will be getting free college because he plays a sport people really care about.  Also because people care a lot about it, people will be interested in him, which I cannot control as a parent.  Thus, my son can take as much or as little time as he wants giving out interviews, as long as it's his time he's using.

I will also ask to be a part of these interviews.  Is it possible, or even likely that he won't always tell me about them?  Sure, but if that's the worst thing my kids hide from me, I'll be in good shape. 

TIMMMAAY

September 27th, 2013 at 8:22 PM ^

Otherwise this is a waste. 

This is a strange situation. I don't disagree with anything you just said, as in I don't think it's wrong at face value. 

But the whole issue is that the parent should have the right to opt out, or otherwise control access to their child for these purposes. It's as simple as requiring parental permission, and the whole problem is solved. There are more sides to this than I care to really get into, most has been covered here already. It's a "slippery slope" situation, and I think the industry in general, but more specifically this blog needs to proceed carefully. My issue with the way it's being handled here is the offhand dismissal of the concern of many, topped off with a very flippant attitude about the whole thing. 

On the whole, I think the blog doing these type of interviews is fine. But get permission from the parents, problem solved.

I wouldn't be opposed to my son doing these type of interviews, as long as I know the situation. Just as you said, I would have that talk with my child, but kids don't always follow advice. I could see it getting out of control to the point of being a major distraction, then I worry about the general character development of any child in this situation. Kids get very full of themselves very easily, which can be a very bad thing. 

I just think more attention is needed here, and management would do well to at the least pay lip service to their core audience when valid concerns are raised. 

 

CRex

September 24th, 2013 at 11:56 PM ^

This is really what it boils down to.  Print journalism ethics first begins with question why you must interview minors.  Clearly in this case, because they are potential Michigan recruits.  Secondly you determine if parental (or gaurdian) consent is needed.  If you determine it is not, you should leave contact information with the minor so his parents can contact you if they later object to the interview being used.  I'd say that is pretty standard.

So in this day and age, personally I strongly disagree with Brown's method of going from contact to publication.  There is no reason why the initial contact could not also include "Also, I want to clear it with your parents, my email is [email protected]."  Clearly of course the kid could set up a fake email and impersonate his parents, but at least there is more of an effort to be upfront and reach out to the parents there.  Here of course we enter into a slippery slope in that how much due diligence Brown has to do.  The core issue though is right now he is doing nothing. 

At the end of the day, tweeting kids "Hello X, follow me back" seemingly out of the blue* and dropping interviews on 16 year olds strikes me as extremely low professional standards and I'll post negative comments about it.  One of the first things you normally learn in the professional world is just because you are on social media, doesn't meant professional standards are thrown out.  

Ultimately that is going to happen is Brown is going to run an article and some parent is going to be pissed the fuck off by it and when that happens, if Brian thought the AD was on his ass before, he's going to wake up and find the Athletic Department so far up his ass, Dominos is opening a branch in his colon.  

*There also does seem to be an element of hypocrisy here, what did Kyle Kalis and Tuley-Tillman teach us?  Don't tweet recruits.  Yet now a business function of the blog is doing it via a personal twitter account and lacking any sort of formal letterhead...no thank you.

CRex

September 25th, 2013 at 12:30 AM ^

It's all right here.  He clearly states he has not talked with a parent or coach for every interview, which in turn means that speaking with the parents is not part of the standard contact package.  As for his contact method, @BBrown has a clear history of sending out Tweets in the form of "Hey X, follow back", which in turn is designed to allow for private direct messaging. No additional context is provided by Brown in the initial contact.  

TheLastHarbaugh

September 25th, 2013 at 1:16 AM ^

Exactly.

It's also far more appropriate than tracking down recruits on Twitter and randomly spamming them for follows so that you can DM their account.

Is it really that difficult to first go through the proper channels (i.e their parents, coaches, schools) before resorting to Twitter? 

CRex

September 25th, 2013 at 1:21 AM ^

As I said, ask the kid to pass a request along to the parents in your first contact package.  Alternatively if directly contacting the kids is seen as unacceptable, every school in America has a public phone number and someone who answers the phone during the school day.  Leave the coach a voicemail and ask him to pass it on to the parents.  

In a lot of cases you don't even need to go that far, as a fair amount of the higher star ranked prospects have a Twitter or Youtube account dedicated to recruiting, which one assumes an adult is at least aware of, if not checking.  Hit up that account, speak briefly with a parent, and move forward.

Again the issue comes down to the fact that Brown's standard workflow does not included "Speak with a parent or gaurdian" as a step before interviewing a 16 year old.  

Which forms of social media are used and how you use them is something that is still up in the air, as some new social network comes out every six months it seems, but changes in the mechanics of contact doesn't at all influence the issue that sooner or later a parent is not going to be happy and the fact Brown doesn't attempt to speak to them as a matter of course only increases the odds of it happening sooner and more frequently.  

Cope

September 25th, 2013 at 10:06 PM ^

I have always been a civil and balanced poster. But when you continuously badger M-Wolverine, who has been my most respected poster for three straight years and is intrinsically tied to the culture of this board, you alienate yourself from it. You will not be respected here if you keep instigating fights. If you don't like the universally respected posters here, perhaps it's you who doesn't belong.

Alright, I'm back to civility and respect.

lbpeley

September 25th, 2013 at 9:36 AM ^

Crex achieved MgoFame for writing an insanely entertaining piece about his dealings with his gf-fiance-then wife's family and their South korean culture. This does not make his epinions any more or less the pulse of the MgoCommunity.

Your 40k+ comments come from feeling the need to comment on seemingly EVERY post in EVERY thread. The vast majority of your posts are mostly white noise, now I see your personal dislike for Brown is driving your latest self cross-nailing. That's definitely within your rights, but this issue is not as black and white as it you are making it out to be. 

M-Wolverine

September 25th, 2013 at 10:36 AM ^

But my point was that he is hardly a contentious poster, unlike me, or chitown, or you, apparently. So his concerns shouldn't be lumped in as argumentative or insulting to recruits. He's brought nothing but fun, and a bit of insight, to the blog.  If he had an issue, I'd listen.

Crime Reporter

September 25th, 2013 at 8:08 AM ^

As a print journalist, I have to go through the proper channels before interviewing kids for stories, especially when I first started out with the school beat.

Generally speaking, the schools here in Florida have kids sign a media sheet prior to the school year giving said school permission to use their image in videos and other forms. When I went to schools for various stories, I had to make sure any kid I interviewed or photographed had that permission slip on file. It was a pain in the ass but kept me from getting angry calls or worse.

Doing the police beat, I wouldn't normally have any reason to interview minors given the subject matter and fact that many are the victims in my stories.

On subject, I like to read recruiting updates like the next guy but I think the whole business has gotten out of hand. I enjoy coming here and I respect Brian for what he does but I think users have raised valid points.

maizenbluenc

September 25th, 2013 at 1:10 PM ^

you may want to check and see how many completely unknown people have communicated with your 16 year old son on Facebook, Twitter, reddit, etc., etc., etc.

If Brandon contacts them in the way he has, offering a means of communication with their parents or coach, and walking away if they say no .... well that is a hell of a lot more ethical than most of the people our kids come in contact with on the internet.

Lots of Parents: your job is to establish expectations with your children, and try as best you can to monitor who they are interacting with.