Then maybe Tipton should have asked him properly how his dad died during the interview instead of trying to sneak it in after the interview.

Clearly they both knew how his dad died. Didn't need to ask him.

I'm guessing this response is about more than just this one instance.

 

I agree that Tipton and the Herald-Leader do not owe the basketball program anything. But, neither is the opposite true. If they feel like Tipton is doing some questionable reporting or is trying to dig up dirt, why should they grant him any access? I wouldn't.

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.

 

If you go back and read the stories about the dust-up with the Kernel, these "rules" are simply that UK Media Relations wants all interview requests to go through their office — again, so they have control over the message and can "coach" the interview subjects — but there is no obligation for any journalist to agree to these requests ("rules") in advance. Frankly, it's ridiculous for them to even suggest that reporters agree to these requests, and that's why newspapers and journalist organizations across the country gave UK Media Relations seven kinds of hell over their heavy-handed methods during the Kernel incident.

IF, and that is a big IF, Tipton was honest about this, he could have asked Gilchrist if he could ask him about his father, about how he died, about how that effected him. But to sit there and ask the question one way, but have the question another way in the article is not only dishonest to the person being interviewed, but to the people who are reading it. Later inserting "died of multiple gunshot wounds" changes they whole response as you are not asking about how his fathers death effected him, but how he died.

I'm guessing this response is about more than just this one instance.

 

I agree that Tipton and the Herald-Leader do not owe the basketball program anything. But, neither is the opposite true. If they feel like Tipton is doing some questionable reporting or is trying to dig up dirt, why should they grant him any access? I wouldn't.

 

Incorrect. The University of Kentucky is a government entity, and is therefore subject to the same open records laws as your local city council or fiscal court.

Incorrect. The University of Kentucky is a government entity, and is therefore subject to the same open records laws as your local city council or fiscal court.

 

But that doesn't mean they have to respond to reporters' questioning...which is what I think 5wide meant.

IF, and that is a big IF, Tipton was honest about this, he could have asked Gilchrist if he could ask him about his father, about how he died, about how that effected him. But to sit there and ask the question one way, but have the question another way in the article is not only dishonest to the person being interviewed, but to the people who are reading it. Later inserting "died of multiple gunshot wounds" changes they whole response as you are not asking about how his fathers death effected him, but how he died.

 

Incorrect. It was still the same basic question — how did the death affect him.

But that doesn't mean they have to respond to reporters' questioning...which is what I think 5wide meant.

 

That's not how it reads.

 

But yes, in an interview setting, the interviewee certainly has the right to refuse to answer a question if the interviewee feels it is out-of-bounds.

Apples and oranges.

I don't see the difference, ethically. I agree with Mr. Schue, the question was changed in print to give the reader context. How is it acceptable to change an answer but not a question, when both are done in service of the understanding of the reader?

I don't see the difference, ethically. I agree with Mr. Schue, the question was changed in print to give the reader context.

But there are some that want to hammer the Herald-Leader and Tipton at every opportunity ...

That's not how it reads.

 

But yes, in an interview setting, the interviewee certainly has the right to refuse to answer a question if the interviewee feels it is out-of-bounds.

 

I don't know how else it could have read Jim. We're talking about reporters and interviews in this thread. Why on earth would I go off on a tangent related to public records?

 

To be clear, I meant that access to the players for interviews is not something the HL is entitled to. I thought that was clear enough the first time around.

That's not how it reads.

 

But yes, in an interview setting, the interviewee certainly has the right to refuse to answer a question if the interviewee feels it is out-of-bounds.

 

Certainly how it read to me? No where in this thread were we talking about open records?

Certainly how it read to me? No where in this thread were we talking about open records?

 

Jim is trying to deflect from the media because in his eyes they are never wrong.

Another UK fan poster vs UL fan poster topic?

Jim is trying to deflect from the media because in his eyes they are never wrong.

 

Hardly. Just trying to point out what might have gone on that others in this thread might not understand, such as the fact that the Herald-Leader's job isn't to be a UK cheerleader.