Freep's deceptive headline on Brandon hiring
What impression would the headline about David Brandon's hiring on the front page of the Detroit Free Press's website have you believe?
New U-M AD Brandon doesn’t fear NCAA probeZOMG! Except, well, no. That headline links through to the Freep's normal story, which is a straight story about Brandon's hiring. Take it from a journalist (I am one): The story should absolutely make reference to the NCAA probe Brandon is inheriting. It'd be irresponsible to exclude it. As the story itself is written, it gets three grafs in the middle of the story, which is appropriate. But what's deceptive is the headline the Freep is slapping on its front-page story (which is far different from its hed within the story, the far less charged: "University of Michigan officially selects David Brandon as athletic director). Look, this practice happens all the time. Editors want to sex up and sell stories on their front page. There isn't anything wrong with it, per se. HOWEVA, the choice for this, frankly, biased headline on the front page shows a conscious decisions by the Free Press's editors to a) frame the story as squarely part of their own, b.s. story on the practice "violations"; and b) keep the NCAA storyline alive by virtue of their own choice for the external headline. The fact is that the NCAA component of Brandon's hiring is, by far and away, not the most salient takeaway from Brandon's hiring. Whatever that takeaway should be must be their main site's headline. Anything short of that ranges between irresponsibility and shoddy work by the Freep's editors.
January 5th, 2010 at 2:46 PM ^
/s. Not surprised for some reason... can't put my finger on it though.
January 5th, 2010 at 4:29 PM ^
is why people still read the Freep?
I stopped after Jihad II and haven't looked back. I don't care what those hack journalists have to say, it's not worth it.
January 5th, 2010 at 2:47 PM ^
I like the journalistic insight, but nothing really new here.
I wonder if Brandon has enough money from being Domino's CEO to purchase the Freep and bury it........
January 5th, 2010 at 2:50 PM ^
but I'm sure he does. Even if he didn't, once you factor in the options he must have he would have MORE than a enough scratch to put them in the dirt.
GO BLUE!
January 5th, 2010 at 2:53 PM ^
Or, he could save his money and let it die on its own in the next 5 years.
Prediction: Brandon will be around longer than Freep will
January 5th, 2010 at 3:05 PM ^
The paper will likely not last 5 years, but the online format could last for decades.
Decades of even shoddier journalism and "click whore" reporting.
January 5th, 2010 at 6:44 PM ^
...was it right next to the headline that said, "Saint Dantonio Cures Cancer?"
January 5th, 2010 at 10:48 PM ^
I wonder if Brandon has enough money from being Domino's CEO to purchase the Freep and bury it........So you wonder if he has an extra $5 laying around?
January 6th, 2010 at 12:37 AM ^
Haha, that picture gets me every time.....Try to make eye contact with him.
January 5th, 2010 at 2:48 PM ^
I am a former journalist. Used to actually be a fancy Managing Editor, although it was a one-man show weekly, so I didnt really manage anyone, lol.
When I was just a reporter, I hated my editors for trying to be cute with headlines on my stories.
Then, when I became editor, i was always stumped on headlines. You see this still playing out with my diary and blog posts. Its easier than people think to fall into the sex up the headline trap or try to be so witty that the header has zilch to do with the story.
I hate headlines
January 5th, 2010 at 2:52 PM ^
I hate headlines, too (I have to write my own). But our obligations as journalists are to at least be faithful to the content of our own damn stories. It's like writing a story on the stimulus package, then headlining it "Obama saves economy" or "Obama kills economy" as a teaser headline.
FWIW, the DetNews's hed on this is much more responsible (hold your shock).
January 5th, 2010 at 2:52 PM ^
DAVID BRANDON ISN'T AFRAID OF US BUT HE DAMN WELL SHOULD BE!
Freep wrote a story leading to an NCAA investigation
January 5th, 2010 at 2:50 PM ^
Yeah, nothing like lying to create an angle.
January 5th, 2010 at 2:52 PM ^
The Freep's headlines are about as informative as half the mgobloggers.
/sarcasm
January 5th, 2010 at 2:55 PM ^
Uh, everyone here is convinced that the Freep has it out for Michigan. So, if someone is looking for a story about the new Michigan AD and does an Internet search, they will get the "U-M Probe" thrown up in front of their face. A probe "unearthed" by the Freep.
Why is this surprising to anyone?
January 5th, 2010 at 2:55 PM ^
"Pizza causes diabetes, heart disease, three kinds of AIDS;
New UM AD Brandon linked to millions of deaths."
January 5th, 2010 at 2:58 PM ^
or maybe he just has a healthy prostate.
January 5th, 2010 at 3:01 PM ^
Wait a minute, are you joking about that headline,or is that really how they led into the story?
Either I'm really gullible, or that newspaper really is a pile of meritless $%&#
January 5th, 2010 at 3:14 PM ^
There's this sentence:
"The program is under investigation by the NCAA because of allegations of training abuses."
"Abuses"? That's cute. After the Free Press has confessed that no player had complained to anyone, and that all of the Freep interview subjects ("former and current players") were persons who were approached directly by the Free Press and asked for thier comments.
And after NO evidence had ever been surfaced that players were falling behind in coursework as a result of CARA counts, and of course there had been absolutely no injury or any physical harm to any player, real or imagined, alleged or implied, in any of the free Press reporting.
"Abuses." They (Rosenberg) find the mere possibiilty of a technical violation of a technical counting rule, by virtue of nothing more than an audit report that suggested no real rule violation but only an inability go back in time to do a count.
That's how the Free Press employs the term "abuse."
January 5th, 2010 at 3:19 PM ^
Hold on. Let's wait for the investigation's findings to come out before we make our own up.
First off, we don't definitively know that no one came forward to complain.
Second off, the reason NO evidence was found regarding the CARA counts is because compliance didn't create said evidence.
And, uh, do you honestly think a player booted off the team this fall was complying with coursework requirements at the time he was dismissed?
Step wait, wait for the findings. Neither you nor I know the whole story and we shouldn't act like we do.
January 5th, 2010 at 3:38 PM ^
against the Free Press.
Let's be very clear. Mike Rosenberg has been asked; "Did anyone come to you with complaints? Or did you approach all of your interview subjects?" Answer: "We approached all of the interview subjects."
Did the Free Press have any evidence of players complaining about CARA abuses? They have reported none. Did the Free Press have any documentary evidence at all from the Compliance Services Office before they did their story? They did not; only after the story broke, did Mark Snyder and Jim Shaefer begin to institute FOIA requests to the Athletic Department.
Did Wermers', or any other players', acadmeic ineligibility have anything to do with countable hours? There's not only no evidence of that; I'm not aware that there's even an allegation of that.
You say, "wait for the findings." Do you realize what a collosally insulting, stupid statement that is in light of what the Free Press did? Not only did the Free Press not wait for any investigation to be completed, the Free Press didn't even wait for another side of the story. Do you even understand, that the Free Press went to press in an online edition with its big story on Saturday, August 29, a mere 24 hours after notifying Michigan's staff of the allegation on Friday the 28th? The Free Press don' need no steenking investigation; they got their story, packaged it up with anonymity given (completely inexplicably) to its questionably-biased sources and rushed it into print to get it out in a Sunday edition before just before the football seasson started.
January 5th, 2010 at 3:41 PM ^
Spilled milk, Section 1. You're whining about stuff that happened months ago.
Get over it. The Freep did what they thought was journalistically correct. I disagreed with their methods, as obviously you did as well.
But guess what? Big deal - they've got to live with their reporting. I DO NOT AND YOU DO NOT.
Get over it. You do not know what the investigation has found. Neither do I. You're wasting your fingertips' utility complaining about it here. You're going to look especially foolish if the University ends up self-reporting violations, no matter how minor. So, just relax, and wait, and complain if/when Michigan is cleared.
January 5th, 2010 at 4:12 PM ^
...if the University's self-reporting of minor violations counts as "vindication" for the Freep and "defeat" for the Freep's critics.
What the Freep has set in motion is a long series of very large-scale events, based upon their self-righteous claims that CARA rules are extremely important tools in the NCAA toolkit to combat abuses of intercollegiate athletes.
This case demonstrates that the Freep did not employ much of any judgment as to how its story would be treated. I sneer, quite honestly, at Paul Anger's anguished column that e-mailed "threats" were sent to Michael Rosenberg. Not that such actions should be tolerated -- but the last I checked, the Freep's own website (its Comments pages) is a virtual haven for all manner of hate-speech aimed at Michigan and especially at Rich Rodriguez. And those are MODERATED comments pages. Imagine what gets booted. Face it; for the past six months, Rich Rodriguez has been accused nationally of having been a cheater. The Free Press made those allegations. The Free Press wasn't simply asking questions. And the Free Press never asked the important people in the equation -- coaches and Compliance Services -- for answers to detailed questions. The Freep wanted headlines.
January 5th, 2010 at 3:26 PM ^
Brandon said he "doesn't live IN fear of the probe." Big difference. Nice journalistic license, Freep.
January 5th, 2010 at 3:28 PM ^
i think i would've gone with:
New UM AD Brandon Potentially Falsified Resume
Bo Schembechler School of Leadership Not An Accredited Institution
January 5th, 2010 at 3:29 PM ^
New UM AD Brandon Speculates Reason for NCAA Violations
"No one wants to win more than Rich Rodriguez"
January 5th, 2010 at 3:32 PM ^
Early nominee for posts of the year. +2
January 5th, 2010 at 3:31 PM ^
Not to be a dick about this but how much of a journalist could you be to not know that headlines for articles and online content are usually developed on-the-fly by PAGE editors and not the respective Department editor, except when that editor is also a page editor. Content editors are often out the door before 6 pm, much less before press deadline. I used to work for a major Michigan newspaper and got to come up with as many alliterations or subtle title zingers as I wanted - Editors would often either not catch it or not (really) care.
January 5th, 2010 at 5:18 PM ^
Take it from someone sitting in a newsroom right this moment: Things don't exactly break down that way most of the time.
You can have your copy editors write all the headlines in the Land of Theory, but you're kidding yourself if you think other editors don't weigh in sometimes, if not often.
It happens more often at online-focused publications, toward which the Freep is drifting more and more.
January 5th, 2010 at 3:31 PM ^
I just e-mailed my sister, who's an editor at a major metropolitan newspaper -- not in Michigan. She called the headline "incredibly irrelevant" to the story. In a matter of seconds she came up with two catchy headlines:
-- The Dominoes Are in Place: Brandon Named UM AD
-- Brandon Gets His Dream Job
January 5th, 2010 at 3:51 PM ^
Can we please not read, reference, give a damn about the freep.
Ignoring them is far worse than complaining about them.
January 5th, 2010 at 7:31 PM ^
Ditto. I'm sick of Freep taking up space on the board.
January 5th, 2010 at 4:25 PM ^
This has happened to me as well. Now, I will always suggest a headline to go with my story.
Usually, these headlines are written by people on the copy desk who do not even read the entire story. They look at a few graphs and come up with something that will fit in the columns available. It's a common problem, but since this is online, it is likely a stupid editor did it.
January 5th, 2010 at 5:08 PM ^
Their sole intention is to sell as many papers and generate as many web hits as possible to keep the paper afloat and continue to collect paychecks.
Aside from a few petty agendas that's pretty much it. Best bet is to snicker, ignore it, and move on