I have been thinking about this topic for some time based on some of the recent posts regarding the quotes and stories from the MSM regarding the Broncos.  I think we sometimes get confused by what are journalists versus commentators, in the days of 24 hour news and constant needs for stories; that the problem is that journalists are having a hard time separating themselves as a commentator or a journalist.  Many journalists are finding it harder to meet the standards of good journalism and have turned to being glorified commentators wrapped in the idea that their comments, words, or story carries some journalistic integrity due to their background.

Journalists have a duty to report facts, to get statements, verify, and determine what the story is.  Now journalists do have some leeway to frame the story, and hopefully they have the integrity to frame the story without personnel bias.  These types of journalists are very rare these days, especially in the world of professional football, I think Adam Schefter, Rick Reilly, and a few others fall into this category.  The problem is that in today's media demand, being a journalist is hard work, it takes a lot of time, and a lot of effort.  You have to find stories, develop relationships, and build a level of trust with many people.  Networks want instant stories and don't care about the other issues associated with getting the story and making sure it is accurate and unbiased.

Commentators, by contrast, are not paid to report facts, they are paid to offer an opinion.  The opinion hopefully can be well reasoned and researched thoroughly, and there are some in the business that do this.  However, many use minimal information or unreliable information to base their opinions and offer knee jerk reactions, rather than carefully reasoned thoughts.  But commentators are just that, someone with an opinion and a vehicle to express it.

I see people have anger over guys like Jamie Dukes and others that are commentators regarding their opinions on the Broncos.  I really don’t care, they are doing what they are paid to do, provide an opinion to get viewers.  If their opinions garner reaction and viewership, they will be employed, if they don’t then they are slowly removed.  Guys like Dukes, Sapp, and other former players need to have a presence and garner a reaction in order to keep their gigs.  You have seen guys like TD who generally had rather strait forward and logical opinions get moved out of the main segments due to him not getting much reaction.   We need not concern ourselves with these guys, they will always be there and there will always be talking heads looking for reactions.  You can get rid of Dukes or whoever you can't stand and I will guarentee they will be replaced by an equally or more annoying commentator.

The problem I have is with commentators masquerading as journalists, I speak of guys like John Clayton, Skip Bayless, and Chris Mortenson.  They have their roots in newspapers and print media and they should know better.  I think that they have bowed to the pressure of TV to have something newsworthy and try to mask their rather uniformed opinions as a legitimate news story or something that carries more weight than an average fan.  These guys have done minimal research on the subjects they are giving opinions and provide some expert insight based on what they have heard from colleagues or maybe from one source, which usually is nameless and may have some personnel bias in the story.  There is no scrutiny to the formation of their opinion and what it is based on, yet because they carry what is seen as some journalistic credibility they have been given higher pedestal than the typical commentator.  What annoys me is that ESPN and some other networks continue to trot these guys out as experts and yet they continually have the story wrong and their opinions are based on a very limited amount of information.

What can we do about these guys?  First, I would recommend turning the channel when they pop up, second I would suggest sending a nicely worded email to the network explaining that you are sick and tired of this type of commentary presented as journalism, and that you will refuse to watch networks that employ this tactic.  The final step is to send similar emails to some of the bigger sponsors of the network explaining your concerns and that you will stop using products of companies that support this form of reporting.  The bottom line is guys like Clayton and Mortenson will keep this up until the networks realize that it is costing them financially.