正在加载图片...
With this caution in mind, consider the early decision-making. What if Dohrmann had been pulled off NBA coverage earlier? What if less time had elapsed between his contacts with Gange hoff? Might the story have broken sooner, and its tim ing been less incendiary? In pondering whether the pace of the reporting ought to have been different, it's useful to consider these views Lundy, says that, when Emilio first informed him about George talking to Gange hoff, Frankly I wasn't too excited. I couldn 't be lieve there was something there -or that we could prove it. Garcia-Ruiz, sim ilarly says that when the season started, he didn 't have anyone but Dohrmann to cover it. Besides he adds, "I didn't think we'd ever get proof of what Gange hoff was saying. As for the later decisions, after the pairings were announced, says Lundy, Vicki(Gowler, the managing editor) and I had a brief conversation about the fact that this story was gonna hit somewhere around when they were going(to the tournament), and i thought some would say, Hey wait a m inute. Did you time this? We called the university We called the unive rsity on Monday. We had some hope we could go on Tuesday. We were gonna get racks printed outside the building. I called, and they said they could do them at 7 p.m."But the university didn't call back. By Tuesday, the paper had given the university 24 hours. Lundy was deem ined he would go with the story Wednesday. Even so, he said If they'd called and said, we need 48 hours we'd have given it to them. As for Dohmann, he too thinks the tim ing couldn t have been very different. I really needed to give [Gangelhoff] room to breathe for a while Moreover, his confirm ing source, Donahue, was out of the country for much of the reporting period, returning only on March 1 One other piece of inform ation about what the journalists' expectations were, and how they influenced their decisions on tim ing: Both Garcia-Ruiz and Lundy contend they did not expect that the story would result in players being declared ineligible for the tournament. As Garcia-Ruiz puts it There is a practice in the ncaa that if there is an eligibility question about a player, you report it to the ncaa and then you appeal it. So, in a sense you appeal your own reporting And the NCAa says, okay, pending us checking into this, the kid can play. We thought they'd sus pend four kids, appeal, and the NCAa would say, you didn t have time to look into this, and they' d play. It was note worthy says Garcia-Ruiz, that the university didnt end up doing that-that whatever the kids told them that day made them decide they weren't going to appeal. InWith this caution in mind, consider the early decision-making. What if Dohrmann had been pulled off NBA coverage earlier? What if less time had elapsed between his contacts with Gangelhoff? Might the story have broken sooner, and its timing been less incendiary? In pondering whether the pace of the reporting ought to have been different, it's useful to consider these views: Lundy, says that, when Emilio first informed him about George talking to Gangelhoff, "Frankly, I wasn't too excited. I couldn't believe there was something there—or that we could prove it." Garcia-Ruiz, similarly, says that when the season started, he didn't have anyone but Dohrmann to cover it. Besides, he adds, "I didn't think we'd ever get proof of what Gangelhoff was saying." As for the later decisions, after the pairings were announced, says Lundy, "Vicki (Gowler, the managing editor) and I had a brief conversation about the fact that this story was gonna hit somewhere around when they were going (to the tournament), and I thought some would say, 'Hey, wait a minute. Did you time this?' " 'We called the university' "We called the university on Monday. We had some hope we could go on Tuesday. We were gonna get racks printed outside the building. I called, and they said they could do them at 7 p.m ." But the university didn't call back. By Tuesday, the paper had given the university 24 hours. Lundy was determined he would go with the story Wednesday. Even so, he said, "If they'd called and said, 'we need 48 hours,' we'd have given it to them ." As for Dohrmann, he too thinks the timing couldn't have been very different. "I really needed to give [Gangelhoff] room to breathe for a while." Moreover, his confirming source, Donahue, was out of the country for much of the reporting period, returning only on March 1. One other piece of information about what the journalists' expectations were, and how they influenced their decisions on timing: Both Garcia-Ruiz and Lundy contend they did not expect that the story would result in players' being declared ineligible for the tournament. As Garcia-Ruiz puts it, "There is a practice in the NCAA that, if there is an eligibility question about a player, you report it to the NCAA and then you appeal it. So, in a sense you appeal your own reporting. And the NCAA says, okay, pending us checking into this, the kid can play. "We thought they'd suspend four kids, appeal, and the NCAA would say, you didn't have time to look into this, and they'd play." It was noteworthy, says Garcia-Ruiz, that the university didn't end up doing that—that "whatever the kids told them that day made them decide they weren't going to appeal." In
<<向上翻页向下翻页>>
©2008-现在 cucdc.com 高等教育资讯网 版权所有