It is what it is

In the classic movie Bull Durham, there's a scene where Crash Davis teaches Ebby Calvin LaLoosh about interview cliches. I think that advice has never been more valuable than it is these days. In this age of accessibility, athletes need to watch what they say because there's always the possibility for it to be taken out of context and misconstrued. The media will do whatever it takes to get a story, and spin things however they want to.

Yesterday Terrell Owens said he's not going to be as open to the media.

"Over the years I've always kind of spoken openly about whatever is being asked with my answers, so the last four or five years I've kind of noticed that and tried taking some steps to prevent some of those things from happening."

Though I have not appreciated his craving for attention, I have always appreciated T.O.'s honesty and I do believe he gets mistreated in the media. The fact of the matter is that athletes get belted for hours by questions left and right, and the thing is most of the questions are the same. Every person has a breaking point, and if you have the slightest bit of desire to go into any detail and say what's on your mind, you are screwed.

T.O. and other athletes and coaches who seem to be vulnerable to this kind of quote manipulation are not without fault. I do understand that there is a fine line to be walked between giving insightful answers and setting yourself up to be misrepresented. The problem is that most people don't know how to walk that line, yet we expect them to.

The biggest problem in all of this is that for the sake of being provocative, and for the sake of reading ease, interview quotes are printed without the questions being asked. Therefore, you have no context, and you're left to your own imagination to fill in the blanks. A perfect case was during T.O.'s interview on Sunday.

ESPN reported:
"Just going with the plays that are called," Owens replied repeatedly to those questions. "Whether I like them or don't, I'm just going with the plays that are called."

The problem I have is that if you read, "Whether I like them or don't, I'm just going with the plays that are called." It makes it sound like he is frustrated and perhaps truly doesn't like the play selection. In actuality, he was asked, "Do you like the plays that are called?" In light of the question being asked, I think this is a more than acceptable answer that implies no frustration on his part. If you lose a football game and are asked that question, what the heck are you supposed to say?

This environment of journalists trying to goad athletes into saying things that can be spun around is a shame. It's a shame because it's given birth to absolutely insipid interview responses.

How many times do you hear a player say, "It is what it is." That phrase is the interviewee's best friend. For one, words come out of your mouth, giving the illusion of a response. Secondly, you don't actually say anything. You don't give any insight and you can't be misquoted. There is an inherent negative judgement given to the speaker when he responds, "No comment." On the other hand, "It is what it is" says effectively the same thing, but has a more positive connotation, which means everything in the forum of public perception. If I was an athlete, I would be really relaxed, which projects an image of honesty, and give the first sentence of what I would really like to say. Then I would pause and say, "but you know what, it is what it is."

Earlier this year, when asked about new teammate Owens, Trent Edwards pointed out that he won't make any judgements on Owens because he knows the media takes things that Owens says out of context, and that he can be misrepresented.

I think that's the thing that gets lost on us all. We can't take anything for face value, and the minute we make a judgement about something that is reported without doing some investigation about the context, we are also to blame.

A good case is that of Raul Ibanez. Earlier this year Ibanez was furious because there was reportedly a blogger who had suggested Ibanez's spike in power numbers suggest he is on performance enhancing drugs.

"Make them accountable. There should be more credibility than some 42-year-old blogger typing in his mother's basement. It demeans everything you've done with one stroke of the pen," said Ibanez.

However, if Ibanez had actually read the article, which I can't seem to find the link to, he would have known that the "blogger typing in his mother's basement" was responding to an email asking if Ibanez was on steroids, and that the blogger actually defended his spike in power, citing changes in factors such as ballparks played in and pitchers faced. The blogger does an excellent job forming a statistical basis for an explanation that says Ibanez is not juicing. When I read the article a few months back, I had no idea why it had created such a firestorm.

Now I know. It's because nobody bothers to check what was actually said, and just likes to go off and make things as crazy and sensational as possible. If we want to believe anything that is said in the media, this all needs to stop. Journalists and media outlets need to stop trying to make money at the expense of the reputations of others.