According to Anonymous sources, and by that i mean a poster on this site named Anonymous, Mike Francesa on Friday owned up to a personal beef between him and David Wright due to Wright's refusal to appear on Mike's show, which was due to Mike and Chris claiming that Wright was behind Carlos Delgado not taking a curtain call for the Mets earlier in the year. Yes, as ridiculous as that last sentence is (in terms of both grammar and sentence structure) the scenario it's detailing is worse.
We are, I believe almost two weeks deep into Mike Francesa's crusade to get the Mets to trade David Wright. After several days of this many of us began to wonder why Mike was so adamant about this issue. It appeared that David Wright not only ran over Mike's dog, but also took said dog and shipped it piece by piece to Mike inside liter bottles of Diet Coke, thus destroying the low calorie soda for Mike forever. As Mike's ranting against David Wright went on and on and on and on and on.. (add about 20 more "on's" and you are close to the real time of it all) it became crystal clear that this was not about David Wright the player but rather David Wright THE PERSON.
Suddenly ON FRIDAY.. FRIDAY, about 7 days too late Mike reveals to Ed Coleman that there was a PERSONAL beef between him and David Wright. That there was lingering tension because of the Delgado curtain call issue (it's amazing when you write this down and look at it that we are talking about adult human beings here. An extended argument over whether or not David Wright told Carlos Delgado to take a curtain call or not. Is that not insane? Couldn't they get on the phone and squash it? Or if the phone is not an option, maybe some sort of Morse code? This is an issue that causes a long term rift between two people? A curtain call?).
When I was first going to write this post, I was simply going to write how incredibly pissed off this made me, but then I realized that there is a bigger question at stake here. A question about what Mike does and does not owe his audience with regard to this kind of issue. It's a question about journalism. We have all read articles by the Time Warner owned CNN.com or SI or Entertainment Weekly where they always reveal in stories, where there could be assumed conflict, that they are a part of the TW corporation. We have all seen the stories that destroy journalists who don't acknowledge conflicting relationships or bias in their reporting. These are proper standards of journalism and foundations of the practice and the way we interpret the information we read in newspapers, on websites or watch on television. It's simply telling the truth.
This leads to the question that is the title of this post, "is Mike Francesa a journalist?" The answer to this question dictates a bit how to react to the David Wright fiasco. If Mike is to be considered a journalist, if his show should be considered some form of journalism or news information, then what follows is that Mike should be held to the journalistic standards of integrity and honesty in situations like what has occured with David Wright.
I personally am not sure of the answer. I would bet that if you asked Mike he would say that he is not a journalist, he is a personality and therefore could say whatever he wants, however he wants to say it. I know that our pal Colonel Nathan Jessup "does not give a damn what we are entitled to" but I would say that we as listeners or viewers of his show are entitled in this scenario to know FROM THE VERY BEGINNING that there is a personal negative relationship at work here. In my opinion, Mike was being not only completely dishonest but he was misleading all of us by attempting to make this sound like a baseball opinion, when it was really a personal attack due to a childish grudge.
In the end, I probably don't believe that Mike Francesa is a journalist but I will strongly argue that he needs to hold himself to some form of journalistic integrity and that he wrongly served all of us, the members of his audience, who like and dislike him, by not revealing the truth and the personal bias he holds against David Wright.
This is not about whether his opinion on this issue of to trade or not to trade is correct or incorrect, it's about his ethics and integrity. With regard to those two moral staples, Mike Francesa has certainly not been Wright.
And Now, A Note From Brian Powell
7 years ago