Michael Schmidt of the New York Times reported this week that David Ortiz and Manny Ramirez were two of the baseball players who tested positive for for anabolic steroids as part of Major League Baseball’s non-disciplinary and anonymous steroid testing in 2003.
Jon Pessah, a senior writer at ESPN Magazine, responded that the “real questions about steroids” raised by the New York Times story involve the illegal activity that resulted not only in the government seizure of the list but also the subsequent leaking of the names.
The seizure of the list is the subject of a lawsuit by the Major League Baseball Players Association (MLBPA) against the federal government. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals imposed a gag order on all parties involved in the case preventing the leaking of names under the penalty of contempt of court.
Jon Pessah, writing for True/Slant, questioned whether reporters are themselves breaking the law in their aggressive purusit of steroid users in Major League Baseball (“The Real Questions About Steroids,” July 30).
Are reporters actively soliciting sources for the test results?
It makes a difference. If a source gives the media documents under seal, the reporter is on safe ground. If the reporters are pushing sources to break the law, they are complicit.
Michael Schmidt, the New York Times reporter responsible for the David Ortiz, Manny Ramirez and Sammy Sosa steroid stories, openly detailed his plan “to speak with anyone who might have seen the 2003 list” in an interview with a senior editor from Editor & Publisher (“NY Times’ Reporter ‘Had a Plan’ to Get Steroid List Names,” July 30).
Schmidt says he increased his pursuit of the 2003 list after Sports Illustrated in February revealed that Alex Rodriguez was one of the names. […]
That is when he set out a plan, to speak with anyone who might have seen the 2003 list. […]
Schmidt said he sought to speak with anyone who might have had knowledge of the list. “Lawyers, clerks, assistants,” he said. “Anyone from baseball to the players union to the federal government. Anyone who would have seen it.”
The Major League Baseball Players Association released a statement critical of the New York Times’ pursuit of the David Ortiz and Manny Ramirez story (“MLBPA Response to New York Times Report,” July 30).
Today The New York Times, once again, reports what it asserts to be information contained in documents under court seal… The active pursuit of information that may not lawfully be disclosed because it is under court seal is a crime. That its informants, according to the Times, are lawyers is both shocking and sad. That the Times is pursuing and publishing what it openly declares to be information which may not be legally disclosed is equally sad.
We intend to take the appropriate legal steps to see that the court orders are enforced.
Where does a reporter draw line between simply reporting information that was criminally leaked and becoming complicit in a crime when obtaining that information?
About the author
Millard writes about anabolic steroids and performance enhancing drugs and their use and impact in sport and society. He discusses the medical and non-medical uses of anabolic-androgenic steroids while advocating a harm reduction approach to steroid education.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.