Feldman fiasco reveals ESPN’s misplaced priorities

If you’re a sports fan and a social media regular, you surely got caught in last week’s Bruce Feldman Twitter storm.

For nearly a day, Feldman, an ESPN college football reporter, became an internet martyr, whose supposed suspension represented all that’s wrong
with ESPN.

ESPN followed on Friday with a short response saying he had not been suspended.
Determining whether he was will probably be an unrewarding venture into semantics. Clearly, though, the fiasco reinforced some of the biggest dangers in our new journalistic world.

A few years ago, with the support of ESPN brass, Feldman agreed to write a book with then-Texas Tech head coach Mike Leach who later sued ESPN for defamation, saying their coverage of his treatment of Adam James, son of ESPN analyst Craig James, was damaging.

With the release of “Swing Your Sword,” approaching, ESPN executives were likely taken aback by some of the book’s content.

Last week, the sports blog, “Sports By Brooks,” reported that ESPN had suspended Feldman indefinitely for his involvement with the book.

Brooks’ report used an unidentified source and did not quote someone from ESPN. Readers should have been more cautious.

Twitter has made news consumption both rewarding and dangerous. I cannot blame anyone for getting caught up in the #freebruce charge because I was right there with you. The acts of solidarity displayed by fellow journalists were refreshing.

The situation also showed the hazards of social media fervor. We live in a world where protests are waged with hashtags instead of picket signs. Once a 140-character message goes viral, it can be the word of record. It’s created a reckless environment, especially when things aren’t refuted quickly.

This is where ESPN completely missed the ball. The network could have quickly exonerated Feldman, but instead let nearly a day pass, allowing the situation to fester.
It appears the network is tacitly supporting Craig James. For a company as large as ESPN, there should be an expectation that conflicts will arise between the business and news sides of the operation.
But ESPN should allocate its immense pool of resources to defend its star journalists like Feldman. They shouldn’t support James at the expense of someone who has more to offer to the
company.
Even after the initial outpouring of support, Feldman will have to deal with the lingering effects of the mini-drama. Questions about his ability to cover certain teams and coaches will arise.

At this point, it is obvious and understandable that ESPN is wary of the release of “Swing Your Sword.” There will be information that — regardless of its validity — will be damning to the network’s operations.

What I don’t understand is why there wasn’t a quicker defense of Feldman. It reeks of a situation where loyalty to an ex-jock outweighed that of a talented journalist.
For that, we’re all losers.

­— sealogan@indiana.edu