Now that former Patriots employee Matt Walsh has finally come forward and said he did not tape the Rams' final walk-through practice before the 2002 Super Bowl, the Boston Herald is coming under increased scrutiny for its report three months ago that said someone on the Patriots had, in fact, spied on the Rams.On ESPN Radio this morning, reporter Chris Mortensen suggested that the Herald reported that "scoop" not because the Herald had better sources than other media outlets, but because the Herald had lower standards than other media outlets.
"Other media outlets including ESPN, had this allegation and pursued this allegation for months, and it just didn't meet the standard in terms of what you needed to report it, and the Boston Herald evidently felt they had met the standard to report it," Mortensen said. "They need to come out and say, 'We stand by our story' or they need to have a retraction and apology and deal with the consequences of it, but certainly it's damaging to the Boston Herald at this point, especially if they stay silent on the subject."
I agree with Mortensen on that last part about the Herald needing to step forward and say something. But I find it a little surprising that he's saying ESPN had the allegation and didn't feel that it met the Worldwide Leader's standards. Obviously, ESPN has relied on anonymous sources for stories that turned out to be wrong plenty of times, including, for instance, Mortensen's report last year that Michael Vick would not be indicted. I point that out not to embarrass Mortensen, but simply to say that all reporters occasionally get stories wrong. And we still don't know if the Herald got its story wrong, although that's what everyone seems to be assuming today.
Previously on FanHouse:
Boston Herald Owes Its Readers an Explanation on Patriots Spygate Story
Matt Walsh Sends NFL 8 Tapes, Rams' Super Bowl Walkthrough Not Among Them
The Matt Walsh-NFL Indemnity Agreement: A First-Hand Review of What It Means
ADVERTISEMENT
_thumbnail.jpg "NASCAR Cowboy Hats")
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 1)
1. I'll give you another example of ESPN reporting something that ended up not being true: Les Miles to Michigan. I can't believe some ESPN people I have heard say that the Boston Herald could be sued for liable and that they should issue an apology. Have you ever heard of ESPN issuing an apology?
Posted at 10:26AM on May 8th 2008 by spedalecastro
2. I think the whole situation is another example of peolple out to find something to rag the Pats on.The coach is a jerk,they don't have running game, they don't have a secondary, Brady's a pretty boy, the list goes on . I wonder how many of those people would trade their average teams for an organazation that just wins. The Patriots have come along way from the Sullivans and being embarassed 46-10 in that nightmare of a Super Bowl.To this day I still hate Dick Enberg for his comment that Patriot fans should at least feel that Walter Payton finally got his ring. Enberg you snot bomb.Now can we finally get over this ball of crap.
Posted at 10:49AM on May 8th 2008 by chan emery
3. Taking an anonymous source on faith is irresponsible to say the least. You have to investigate. This source wasn't anonymous. And yet it still didn't have enough evidence for ESPN. Probably because of the reason you guys just pointed out. Now as we know now, ESPN could have run with the story anyway. Right or wrong with the truth and because people hate the Pats could have gotten away with it. They could have released it on one of those discussion/debate shows to make it seem like it just a rumor that's floating around. People would have eaten it up. And the legal ramifications would have been covered cuz it was released on one of those discussion shows.
Oh, wait, they did that already...
Posted at 7:31PM on May 8th 2008 by jsharpe0047
4. Mortensen is covering his ass. If that's what he knew he should have said so in February. I heard him say that he met Walsh during the pro bowl and said he seemed credable. Another ESPN phony!
Posted at 4:20PM on May 10th 2008 by Stuck on RT 1
5. The proof is in the pudding.
Stories about the Pats cheating; 196 comments.
Stories about the Pats being exonerated: 3. No, let's count mine. 4.
But, hey, all you haters are not haters at all, and we Pats fans are just scumbags protecting our team. But you probably aren't reading this now, anyway. LOL.
Posted at 10:07PM on May 10th 2008 by joe wallace