Dater-gate Reaches an End, or does It?

by BReynolds on Nov 20, 2009 3:24 PM CST Comment 1 comment

By now you have all heard the story that Adrian Dater, Denver Post Avs beat writer, posted a tweet about a shouting match in the Flames locker room the other night. There has been back and forth all over the internet about it, and today Dater ended his involvement on Twitter.

For those of you that are Twitter maniacs (looking at you Nathan), this is a loss. Maybe not a huge loss, but a loss. Anytime a voice is silenced, it is a loss to the conversation. I don;t follow Twitter as much as I likely could (should?), and feel no shame in saying I rarely agree with Dater. However, I have a burning question, one that no one seems to have answered.

Was there a shouting match in the Flames locker room that night, and did it involve Dian Phaneuf? If there was no shouting, or if Phaneuf was not involved, then Dater has some apologizing to do. However, if there was indeed a shouting match, and it did indeed involve Phaneuf, then Dater was... wait for it... doing his job.

Reporters everywhere, including myself and our illustrious hero Michael Russo, report second hand knowledge all the time. Sources give leads, and when we feel comfortable, we report it. If it turns out to be false, we correct the information and apologize if need be. If the information turns out to be correct, well then, the ends justified the means. This isn't little league baseball, and the feelings of those involved are not what matter, as harsh as that may be.

Adrian Dater is a member of the main stream media who was using a non-mainstream media to voice information he had. Russo does it all the time. Does anyone jump Russo if the information is inflammatory? To answer that, ask yourself if the Wild wanted Russo to reveal the frustration at practice yesterday.

Again, while Dater generally grates on my nerves, he is professional, and he has earned his place in the hallowed halls of beat writers.

So, all of you folks out there who are going after him for tweeting second hand knowledge, back off. The only thing that really matters is was the information valid?

-Buddha

0 recs | Comment 1 comment | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I have no problem with this, it ultimately goes the credibility of the person making the statements

Right or wrong, he still was within his constitutional rights for saying whatever the fuck he wanted. If he is right, he doesn’t/shouldn’t have to say anything more—whether the parties liked he revealed the information or not. If he is wrong, like you said, he apologizes, and he takes the hit to his credibility—which in this situation, I would probably give him the benefit of the doubt, forget it and move on.

IMHO, the only possible argument against “tweeting at will” for anyone “in the business” is the fact inside information is at times received where a certain level of trust has been built. As such, one must have relationships with these organizations to do their job. With that, they must excersie a certain level of discretion. I think Russo said something to this effect recenlty when talking about Burnsie.

To bring it back to this story, my thought is that Dater’s reaction might be a little akin to joining AA. If Dater doesn’t trust himself on Twitter for fear of alienating sources to do his job, then he should remove himself from the temptation. Just like an alcoholic shouldn’t go to the bar if they don’t trust themselvs around all that alcohol.

Let's Go Wild!

by redheadzeb on Nov 20, 2009 5:46 PM CST reply actions 0 recs