Pete Thamel piece analysis

[NOLATiger 0]

This is long. Take a spin if you're willing. I write this as an Auburn journalism graduate and professional newspaper reporter. 

The article – which I am not linking, b/c I don’t want to give Thamel the hits --  is based on an initial, objective, inarguable fact. Au burn was indeed ranked fourth in the APR at it s peak. The school is now 85th. ... BUT (you knew it was coming) there are a litany of questions/problems with the piece. In no particular order:

1) Pete didn't tell us when the latest APR numbers were released. That's an important detail that colors the tenor of his story. The academic standing of a national championship contender is newsworthy anytime, including game week. But if these rankings are old -- I just did a quick Google news search and couldn't find anything, which tells me these came out a while back -- then the only rational way to do the story this week is to at least include Oregon's ranking as well. He did not. So, there’s a little support for saying “Hmmm, Pete, why are you writing this now?”

2) There is a glaring lack of context at multiple points. Yes, he gives us the context of Auburn having the third largest drop and nibbles around the edges of the possible whys and wherefores of that. But he doesn't go far enough to justify the framing of the story. He doesn’t dig into the other schools that drop, which includes Ole Miss. He mentions transfers with coaching changes as a variable that can negatively impact APR, but he doesn’t give the numbers at Auburn or anywhere else. Those fact would not have been hard to find with a little digging if you are really interested in explaining a statistical occurrence. Context often is the difference between a fair and a suspect story, even if that story hangs on an initial fact, as Thamel’s does.

3) Continuing with context, it is disturbing to see the disparity in graduation rates among white and black players. But this certainly deserves some context. What are those numbers among the general student population at Auburn? What are they among athletes at other SEC schools, other Division I schools. What are those numbers nationally among all students. There is a larger story there: Many African-American athletes at predominatley white schools come from bad K-12 public school systems are at a disadvantage when compared to the Ryan Pughs and Bart Eddins of the world. No slight on either the white or the black students there. Just pointing out that Pete nibbles at a big can of worms there that goes waaaaay beyond the Auburn football program. Yet he highlights this fact in a way that clearly is a finger wag at our football operation. Auburn is one of many schools and part of a larger society that should be asked queustions about a stistics like that. (Again, I wonder what Oregon’s ranking here is.)

4) My favorite (sarcasm intended): Why in the hell is Gordon Gee quoted in this story when no effort was made to talk to Jay Gogue? Or Ed Richardson? You know, Pete, the guy who is president of the school that is the subject of your story and the guy who was president at the time of the sociology scandal? I see you tried to talk to Jay Jacbos, who should have known better than not to comment. But if this is an academics/athletics story, itt goes beyond Jacobs’ purview. Auburn alumni reading this story deserve to have the reporter show the good faith effort for you to contact our president, particularly after you have the temerity to let another president take a shot at us as the LEAD QUOTTE. (As an aside, I find it laughable that Gordon Gee, president of the school that gave us Maurice Clarett and plenty of other gems, gets to give us such a backhanded compliment.)

Listen, I’ve tried to read as much of the national coverage of Auburn as possible. And I recoil at the “shoot the messenger” approach. I deal with that myself from sources and readers who are defensive and whose accusations about my biases say as much about themselves as they do about me. I’m not tryign to be that kind of reader. But this story is bad. Not the fact that it was done at all, but the manner in which it was repoted, written and timed.

Thamel would do himself a service if he just wrote opinion columns where Auburn is concerned and acknowledged the conclusions he has already drawn during his previous reporting: He believes that Auburn University – as part of its cultural mentality down to its very institutional core – does not go about its business in the “right way,” that the school cuts corners to win football games, that it has no balance between academics and athletics. Remember, this is one of the reporters whose initial Cam Newton story began with: “Auburn University is under NCAA investigation for its recruitment of star quarterback Cameron Newton.” He never attributed that statement, even to anonymous sources. And we now know that it is just plain wrong. But Pete went on Paul Finebaum’s radio show in subsequent days talking about how his and the ESPN.com story – that piece that used no justification to work Cecil Newton’s church into the fray, i.e. clearly connoting that the Newton’s had received money (well beyond a half-baked, MSU-based solicitation scheme with Kenny Rogers) – “did a good job showing the ugly underbelly of collegte athletics.” That’s one big conclusion based on a few anonymous sources about solicitation. But, hey, let’s not let facts and innuendo and competing versions of events from inconsistent and questionable sources get in the way of a good story, right, Pete?

He can’t write a story this particularly way and come of as anything other than such a reporter. For the record, I don’t apologize as a journalist for having opinions or reaching conclusions during and after my reporting process. “Objectivity” – a nebulous notion to begin with – doesn’t mean I can’t reach conclusions. What I strive for is ACCURACY, FULL CONTEXT and INTELLECTUAL HONESTY. On those points, the latter ones in paticularly, Pete Thamel failed miserably.

An aside where Auburn is concerned: Our media relations department has GOT TO DO A BETTER JOB of handling stories like this. These rankins are public, meaning we know about them. We have to anticipate the coverage angles that are coming from stuff like this. And we have to be prepared to handle questions, even from national reporters who aren’t being fair. Auburn alumni should never read “Jay Jacobs declined comment” on a story like this. We shouldn’t read Coach Chizik have to fumble through answers to obviously difficult questions that blindsided him during a week that is otherwise about, you know, a football game. I don’t fault Coach Chizk for that. I can understand that Jacobs may even have been a little blindsided, but there are better ways to handle this.

Might I suggest for coach: “We make a concerted effort to do things the right way so that every one of our athletes is successful. That doesn’t always work out, and we certainly are aware of many of the varying backgrounds that our athletes bring with them to campus and how they might affect their academic coursework once they are here. That is a part of how we prepare them and work with them as long as they are at Auburn. Where we are not as good as we should be, we are trying to get better, and I think every one of my players knows that. Every one of them, and every one of their mamas and daddys and grandmothers and grandfathers and whoever else trusted them to me, knows that my goal for them includes to watch them walk across that stage and shake Dr. Gogue’s hand at graduation.” That’s not just P.R  talk. I think Coach Chizik has demonstreated that he cares about his players, right down to calling some of his former Auburn players when he got back and telling them to get their rear ends back to campus to finish their degrees. (Another detail that is out there for Pete Thamel to have used for context if had chosen.)

For Jay Jacobs: “We are constantly looking for ways to improve our total experience for student-athletes. We’ve handled the problems that were exposed a few years ago, and we’re moving in the right direction. I’d love to have you to Auburn and show the academic center that overlooks the practice facility.  I’d love to have you talk to some of our professors who have taught generations of Auburn athletes. You’re weclome anytime. I think it would help you give a fair perspective of who we are and what we represent as a university.” (How’s that for our own sideways barb?)

[ballrun44 0]

Good points NOLA.  I would hope our PR folks could be a little more pro-active, especially in light of the fact that there is a lot of attention on Auburn (and Oregon) these days.  Why not take advantage of the situation?

[daveforau 2]

I read Thamel's article and I am not a journalist, but I am a college professor and I had some similar questions as NOLA, I am glad someone with the expertise to do so framed those concerns and questions in this way, thanks. I don't know where or who you write for, is it possible for you to do a response piece to Thamel's and call  him out and challenge him at the point journalistic integrity? Probably wouldn't accomplish much on second thought, but great analysis of his "opinion piece".