Cam Newton, Joe Schad and the Collapse of Journalistic Standards

The headlines of the past two weeks have been damning, to say the least. Anyone who confined their consideration to headers and opening statements must surely have concluded that Cam Newton and Auburn University are guilty of a series of NCAA transgressions. Of course, why would they not when even the "journalists" covering this story care little for facts or truth?

Many of the allegations made against Newton are based on his alleged actions and irresponsibility while attending the University of Florida. While accusations of cheating are certainly disheartening and Newton's driving record might make a person afraid to walk the streets of Gainesville, none of those stories have a single iota of bearing on Cam Newton's eligibility at Auburn University.

God help every college football player if the press intends to research driving records and high school mischief! Since the press was so diligent about looking into Newton's motor vehicle record, how about doing the same for all of the other Heisman hopefuls and other collegiate stars?

The cheating allegations are of more concern but they also represent events two years ago. Perhaps Newton has matured a bit because surely we should also learn from the mistakes of our past. Regardless, that any such information was leaked represents a federal criminal violation that should be investigated before this turns into a standard expose' for athletes in the future.

Indeed, the unidentified source that leaked the story of Cam Newton's alleged honor violation at Florida is a great segue to the various stories dogging Newton in regards to a supposed pay to play scheme.

Emblematic of the problem facing this entire discussion is the attitude of ESPN "reporter" Joe Schad who responded to a question about his sources by stating, "I don't really care who's the source on any story. I don't care, and I don't know why people are so worked up about it. All I care about is what is true."

Joe Schad, you are wrong and worse, you are evidently stupid. It behooves ANYONE to consider the reliability of a source when weighing matters of truth. To do otherwise makes for irresponsible journalism.

Of course, Joe Schad knows who his sources are. If we knew, we might agree that they are indeed reliable sources of information (at least to the extent that they might believe what they are telling Schad).

However, we don't know the the identity of the sources and for Schad or any other reporter to think that we should simply accept their reports as representing fact (and by extension truth) is the height of hubris.

Journalistic history is replete with reporters and sources who have been wrong or just plain lied. Remember Dan Rather and the Killian Documents? How about the Boston Globe's expose' on GI's raping Iraqi women back in 2004 that turned out to be commercial pornography?

Maybe some people remember Jack Kelly of USA Today who asked friends to identify themselves as sources for fabricated stories? A bit further back in 1998, Stephen Glass of The New Republic was found to have fabricated 27 of the 41 articles he had written for the magazine.

If such egregious failures of journalistic ethics can happen in the field of conventional news coverage, then surely the sports media is not immune to reporting stories based on lying sources, erroneous sources, presenting information sans context, and participating in other dubious means of generating interest other than by doing their job the way it is supposed to be done.

Protecting sources is certainly important, but if a reporter can not find one credible source to go on record (and preferably more) then the public rightfully has cause to be suspicious of the story as it is being presented.

Clearly Cam Newton is not being tried (at least at this time) in a court of law. Evidentiary rules do not necessarily apply. Yet that does not excuse the public (much less the press) from irresponsibly rushing to judgment when no persuasive proof has been offered other than the sheer volume of accusations flowing out of the mouths of unidentified sources!

Not a single member of the media or its readership would want their present and future activities shadowed by allegations made only by people that refuse to identify themselves and offer no proof of their tale. So why should Cam Newton be any different?

The day may come where some sort of reasonable proof may appear in the form of recorded conversations documenting clear intent to do something illegal or against NCAA rules. Maybe at some point an intrepid reporter will be able to show demonstrably genuine documentation of money paid to Newton from boosters or even schools themselves.

And perhaps other evidence will surface that offers solid reasons to doubt the integrity of Cam Newton in the face of the pay to play accusations. But that day is not yet here and that evidence is not yet before us.

It has been said throughout this ordeal that where there is smoke there is fire. Sometimes that is indeed the case. Other times, however, the smoke we see comes from a smoke grenade tossed by someone else to conceal their own activities or intent while working against us. Real journalists don't assume the relationship between smoke and fire.

Too bad Joe Schad won't see this post. He could surely use the lesson.