But You’re Wrong About…the Adam Schefter situation.

Adam Schefter is an NFL insider. If you’re reading this article, you probably already knew that, but my point is not to inform; rather, it is to bring attention to the fact that Adam Schefter is not, at least in title, a journalist. That is not to say that Schefter is not regarded as a journalist in his work with ESPN and the NFL, as his reputation for providing unbiased, fact-based information (at least prior to this past week), was solid.

This past week, however, Schefter’s journalistic integrity was called into question after emails were released from 2011 which seemed to show Schefter willingly allowing former Washington Football Team president, Bruce Allen, complete editorial authority over an unpublished article about the NFL lockout. Schefter provided a response to this criticism that was, in my opinion, more evidence of his dishonesty. More on that later.

Now, I should make it clear from the outset that I am not a journalist either–at least not yet. I would consider myself a sports writer, but journalism requires a higher standard of training, and a proven track record of responsible and well-informed work. Nonetheless, I have an understanding of responsible journalistic practices and the reasons why such practices are vital. And therefore, it is my hope that I can provide an analysis of Adam Schefter’s journalistic practices that is not undercut by my personal lack of experience in the field.

So, without further ado, But You’re Wrong About…the Adam Schefter situation.

What did Adam Schefter do, Exactly?

Emails between Adam Schefter and Bruce Allen were released over the past week in conjunction with the NFL’s investigation into the Washington Football Team. The emails between Schefter and Allen seem to show Schefter willingly (almost gleefully) allowing Allen full editorial authority over the contents of the, then, unpublished article.

Schefter promptly responded to criticism about his journalistic integrity by, essentially, acknowledging he made a mistake while simultaneously denying having ever done anything wrong.

Why this is so Damning for Schefter

Will Rogers once said, “It takes a lifetime to build a good reputation, but you can lose it in a minute”. The revelations about Adam Schefter’s journalistic practices this past week, were enough to represent his “fatal minute”. That said, in my opinion, Schefter’s decent began back in April when he decided to release his Aaron Rodgers “story” on the eve of the NFL draft.

This moment proved to me that Schefter was and is, to put it bluntly, a hack. This move was not meant to further any important conversation, or to add any foregone fact to a current narrative; rather, it was very obviously a pathetic grab at attention and ever-so-valuable online “clicks”. This article is not about Schefter’s practices in that moment, so I will not delve any further into the details there.

The Current Situation

The situation at hand offers far more apparent evidence of Schefter’s disingenuous journalistic practices. For the sake of reference, I’ve reiterated Schefter’s email quote below:

“Please let me know if you see anything that should be added, changed, tweaked.”

“Thanks, Mr. Editor, for that and the trust. Plan to file this to ESPN around 6 a.m.”

Let’s take this a line at a time and analyze the potential wrongdoing as we go. Just a reminder, these emails were sent to Bruce Allen, the then president of the Washington Football Team.

To start, Schefter invites Allen to provide additions, changes, and tweaks. In Schefter’s response, he stated that this represented the common journalistic practice of verifying information with sources to assure accuracy. If this were the case, however, why would he not just say this in the email instead of granting Allen editorial power? Perhaps Schefter was just speaking loosely and granting editorial power was not his intention. Even if this were the case, the casual nature of this correspondence is unprofessional at best.

Don’t get me wrong, I believe sources ought to be quoted correctly and they should be allowed to ensure that their arguments or opinions are represented in a charitable and accurate manner. This, however, is a wholly different thing than allowing for additions, changes, and tweaks to a full article.

Evidence that Schefter was not merely confirming the accuracy of his reporting comes in the following line wherein Schefter refers to Allen as “Mr. Editor”. Allen is most certainly not an editor, and for Schefter to refer to him in this way is alarming and grossly inappropriate. Not to mention the fact that in the following sentence, Schefter thanks Allen for his “trust”. This begs the question, what was Schefter entrusted with? Providing a favorable story? Coddling those in power?

Finally, Schefter gives Allen direct information about the time at which the article will be published. This, along with the granted editorial authority, gives Allen power over the story. It allows for planning, coordination, and the maintenance of an agenda. The fact that Schefter still has a job after something like this is at best outrageous, and at worst, telling of a deeper issue at ESPN.

The Problem with Adam Schefter’s Response

Schefter’s response to these reports provided, to my eyes, further evidence of Schefter’s dishonesty. This is because Schefter’s response amounted to nothing more than gaslighting. Schefter acknowledged some wrongdoing in the beginning of his statement, but ended with the strong claim that he had never and would never, “cede editorial control or hand over final say about a story to anyone…”.

But this is exactly what he did. Schefter referred to Allen as “Mr. Editor” and gave him the space to provide changes, additions, and tweaks as he saw fit. Schefter is trying to have his cake and eat it too. The result? A pathetic attempt at covering his behind with cake all over his face. The problem here isn’t just that his attempt is pathetic–its that his attempt is disrespectful and dishonest. Sports fans are not stupid, and I would hope that fans everywhere will only trust Schefter for the nuggets of information he provides about injuries and personnel moves–nuggets that can be verified by other, now more-reputable sources.

Journalism, among other things, is meant to speak truth to power. This cannot be accomplished if those in power are allowed to have the final say on what is true.

JC