Public Eye
July 30, 2007 9:27 AM

…But Isn't The Real Question Which One Is More Now?

(AP)
What do you get when you combine a sportscaster – who mostly gabs over highlight clips, with an occasional quip – with a controversial hard news story?

Among the printable ways I could describe it, how about …. Trouble?

CNN’s sports anchor Larry Smith was on the frequently-unwatchable “Nancy Grace” program last week, discussing the Michael Vick story. Grace was wondering why Michael Vick wasn’t choosing to face the media to discuss the federal case being brought against him and showed a clip of Kobe Bryant – during his sexual assault case – sitting before a throng of reporters, with his wife at his side. The discussion went like this:
Grace: That is Kobe Bryant after rape allegations were leveled against him, which he beat, I might add. And sitting next to him in that exact presser was his wife.

Out to Larry Smith, CNN sports correspondent and CNN anchor. What`s Vick afraid of? Come on. He`s been in front of the camera a million times. What`s so hard about declaring your innocence?

Smith: Yes, well, that`s -- he`s been in a lot of trouble lately, when you think about all the other incidents, and this is just the worst one of all. Keep in mind, too, that while Kobe Bryant is a situation we can sort of compare this to, this really is much worse. [Emphasis Mine] Not only can you argue that the crimes are much worse in terms of, you know, killing dogs and that kind of thing, but as an NFL starting quarterback, you are the most visible face in that city. I`ve said all along, in fact, you know, if you go through and, you know, very quickly name 10 mayors of major cities in the country...

Grace: Larry Smith, did I just hear you say...
Yeah, Nancy. You just heard what you thought you heard. CNN’s Larry Smith was saying that Michael Vick’s potential crime was “much worse” than the rape charges made against Kobe Bryant. That’s problematic on so many levels I don’t know where to start.

But to anyone who’s ever listened to sports talk radio, such a comment seems predictable. Every event in the sports world is up for argument, and needs to be put into a competitive context. As soon as Peyton Manning won the Super Bowl, the sports chatterers wanted to debate where he ranked among all-time QBs. The Golden State Warriors upset the Dallas Mavericks in the first round of this year’s NBA playoffs, and the next day’s discussion wasn’t “how did they do it” as much as it was “where does this upset rank in playoff history?” The entire sports world is built upon pitting two or more teams or people against one another; that’s the way people within it view things.

So the next time a major cultural story breaks with a sports angle to it, my $.02 to TV bookers: Don’t book a sports guy to discuss it. He or she can discuss stats or league issues, but it may ultimately veer into Bad Comparisons Territory and probably end up ranking somewhere between Larry Smith on “Nancy Grace” and Jim Rome’s infamous “”Jim/Chris” interview.
Tags:
Michael Vick ,
Nancy Grace ,
Larry Smith ,
Kobe Bryant
Topics:
4th Estate Debate
Share:
  • Share
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Mixx
Add a Comment
by sanfelz July 30, 2007 8:49 PM EDT
Some of the sports commentators seem more bent on self-aggrandizement rather than insights about the game, the player or the effects on society. Matt Lauer and Bob Costas thought it was vital to the story to include the Costas/Vick exchange in their discussion.
Nancy Grace cares not about the presumption of innocence or any facade of fairness. She is especially outraged when a jury has the temerity to judge contrary to her opinion.
Reply to this comment
by k-sozer July 30, 2007 4:02 PM EDT
Although I agree with you that the notion of comparing the crime of rape to the crime of torturing and killing dogs is a poor one, and I agree with your implication that rape is the more serious of the two crimes, I believe that this is the minority view.

People are much more viscerally, emotionally upset by the Vick situation that by most other crimes that have been in the news of late.

Maybe it's because of the novelty of Vick's crime. Maybe because the evil is so clearly premeditated. Maybe the fallout of the bogus Duke "rape" case is that people are now more likely to wait to pass judgment, to not assume guilt, for that crime, while they are very ready to pass judgment on Vick. Maybe people are just more sensitive when it comes to abuse of pets.

Whatever the reasons, Vick stands largely convicted in the court of public opinion.
Reply to this comment
by memekiller July 30, 2007 4:00 PM EDT
This is what I like about this site. Aside from providing an outlet for me to vent my frustration at the media in general, and take it out on you guys, who tend to be the least of the offenders, you find media controversies like this you don't see on the more politically oriented blogs.

And thank you for not looking at Ms. Clintons $@!s. Any mention of Hillareolas ought to be solely for the purpose of a well-deserved spanking. (These pundits are spanking something).
Reply to this comment

About Public Eye

Description for Public Eye

  • MOST POPULAR