I can't speak for Tipton because I don't know the nature of the interview setting. Was it a one-on-one? Was it done by e-mail? Maybe he did. In Q&A's like this, sometimes editing happens for clarity -- such as a particular question being asked in two different ways and the answer is combined.

 

He may have. The Herald Leader hasn't apologized. Either way a majority of UK fans will side with UK on this one. I don't blame UK for their actions unless The Herald Leader has a different side to the story.

I can't speak for Tipton because I don't know the nature of the interview setting. Was it a one-on-one? Was it done by e-mail? Maybe he did. In Q&A's like this, sometimes editing happens for clarity -- such as a particular question being asked in two different ways and the answer is combined.

 

The gathered reporters were given something like 8 minutes, one-on-one, with the players.

Or maybe Tipton is trying to deliver some insight on players and their personalities, etc., to a fan base that clearly craves it.

 

But huskier tone? Really?

 

We also have to remember Tipton taking subtle shots @ Patrick Patterson during his junior year for the vehicle of his choice.

 

I don't hate the LHL like a lot of UK fans. I enjoy the writings of both Mark Story & John Clay. But Jerry Tipton takes the negative slant & goes out of his way to drum up controversy...even if it means asking a kid if he wishes he had a "huskier tone." Seriously, that's just creepy.

He may have. The Herald Leader hasn't apologized. Either way a majority of UK fans will side with UK on this one. I don't blame UK for their actions unless The Herald Leader has a different side to the story.

 

I wouldn't count on any apology being forthcoming.

But huskier tone? Really?

 

We also have to remember Tipton taking subtle shots @ Patrick Patterson during his junior year for the vehicle of his choice.

 

I don't hate the LHL like a lot of UK fans. I enjoy the writings of both Mark Story & John Clay. But Jerry Tipton takes the negative slant & goes out of his way to drum up controversy...even if it means asking a kid if he wishes he had a "huskier tone." Seriously, that's just creepy.

 

Not necessarily. Maybe it's something that came up in conversations with other players and he just followed up on it.

Not necessarily. Maybe it's something that came up in conversations with other players and he just followed up on it.

 

I very much doubt that, but have to acknowledge it is plausible.

 

Tipton's reputation precedes him. This is his M.O.

I'm not sure this was Tipton that changed it though is the thing, it might have been an editor.

 

Yeah but to me this goes a lot deeper than just the question and how it was worded or who changed it, etc. Jerry Tipton and his negativity have plagued the UK program for years now and more often than not he ends up in situations with players/coaches that end up being very awkward. To me he is an embarrasment to the program with some of the stunts he has pulled over the years, the Kentucky Basketball program deserves so much better than a basketball beat writer for the local news paper who is at times almost anti UK. A lot of the things he gets into aren't even relevant and his constant negative nancy vibe is unfair to the program. I guess what I am trying to say is these guys need someone who is going to support them, not look for ways to bring them down. I could see it if he was writing for the CJ or TMZ but he is the Kentucky beat writer and instead of protecting the program and its players ala the CJ he seems to only stir up controversy a majority of the time.

Not necessarily. Maybe it's something that came up in conversations with other players and he just followed up on it.

 

If that's the case, he should preface his questions with "Some of your teammates mentioned your "high-pitched voice"....

Yeah but to me this goes a lot deeper than just the question and how it was worded or who changed it, etc. Jerry Tipton and his negativity have plagued the UK program for years now and more often than not he ends up in situations with players/coaches that end up being very awkward. To me he is an embarrasment to the program with some of the stunts he has pulled over the years, the Kentucky Basketball program deserves so much better than a basketball beat writer for the local news paper who is at times almost anti UK. A lot of the things he gets into aren't even relevant and his constant negative nancy vibe is unfair to the program. I guess what I am trying to say is these guys need someone who is going to support them, not look for ways to bring them down. I could see it if he was writing for the CJ or TMZ but he is the Kentucky beat writer and instead of protecting the program and its players ala the CJ he seems to only stir up controversy a majority of the time.

 

Jerry Tipton is not paid by the University of Kentucky and it is not his job to be a public relations person for the basketball program. His job is to write stories about UK basketball, no matter if the information is flattering, neutral or controversial. UK hoops already has someone on staff to take care of their PR.

 

A reporter's job is to tell the whole story, not just the rosy stuff.

If that's the case, he should preface his questions with "Some of your teammates mentioned your "high-pitched voice"....

 

Perhaps. Again, I can't speak for Tipton on that matter as I'm not a party to those conversations, just like the rest of us on here.

What rules are you speaking of? Is there some codified rule that says "don't ask players about their murdered parents?"

 

By agreeing to arbitrary "rules," it compromises the journalist's integrity and throws their objectivity into question. At that point, you're just a shill for the basketball program, and they have won their battle to control the message.

 

For me, I think it's against my rules of personal professionalism to ask a kid a question and then re-word it when I release it. That could totally throw things out of context, in my opinion.

 

I typically just ask my questions and then release it exactly the way I asked it.

 

Look, I've met Jerry Tipton and I like him. For the most part, he does a really good job and obviously isn't afraid to go for the tough angles. That being said, I think he's in the wrong on this one and I also think he was in the wrong on the article about Patrick Patterson's new vehicle.

 

The rule I was referring to is that I actually do think it's against the rules to look a kid up in the student directory and hunt him down for questioning. I think the kid from the Kernel made a mistake on that one. He probably would've been alright if he would've simply said, "I talked to a good source who confirmed that..." Instead, he actually said something like "I looked him up in the student directory...contacted him...." blah blah blah.

Jerry Tipton is not paid by the University of Kentucky and it is not his job to be a public relations person for the basketball program. His job is to write stories about UK basketball, no matter if the information is flattering, neutral or controversial. UK hoops already has someone on staff to take care of their PR.

 

A reporter's job is to tell the whole story, not just the rosy stuff.

 

I agree with this, and I don't hold it against the LHL or Tipton for their involvement in exposing UK's cheating in the late 80's. That's doing your job, even though you're going to loss mass readership for it.

 

But I think Tipton goes over the line on many occasions, trying to create a negative story where there isn't one or trying to draw out a negative reaction. The Gilchrist incident is an example of that, but I think Harrow & Patterson are greater examples of it.

Tipton should be relieved of his duties at the LHL. Totally irresponsible journalism.

Tipton should be relieved of his duties at the LHL. Totally irresponsible journalism.

 

Disagree on the first sentence. Totally agree on the second.

 

Personally, I enjoy Jerry being around. As much as I think he's a toad, his Debbie Downer ways can sometimes be entertaining.

What rules are you speaking of? Is there some codified rule that says "don't ask players about their murdered parents?"

 

By agreeing to arbitrary "rules," it compromises the journalist's integrity and throws their objectivity into question. At that point, you're just a shill for the basketball program, and they have won their battle to control the message.

 

I assumed the rule was that when you do an interview and put it in print, you don't add to or change a question. If that's not a rule, it should be.