Post-Mortem

riboflav

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
9,078
NOVA
Naive question perhaps, but why can't Mort say that his source came from the NFL without ever divulging who specifically gave him the bad info? Is this because there would have an agreement between the source and Mort as to how to characterize where the info came from - e.g. anonymous v. league source v. NFL office, etc.?
 
It just seems he'd do both himself and Brady a world of good if he A. narrowed where the source came from and B. corrected the freaking story.
 

Omar's Wacky Neighbor

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
15,043
Leaving in a bit to the studio :)
riboflav said:
Naive question perhaps, but why can't Mort say that his source came from the NFL without ever divulging who specifically gave him the bad info? Is this because there would have an agreement between the source and Mort as to how to characterize where the info came from - e.g. anonymous v. league source v. NFL office, etc.?
 
It just seems he'd do both himself and Brady a world of good if he A. narrowed where the source came from and B. corrected the freaking story.
Because he wouldnt lose just this single source, but likely every source in the NFL office.  As my Dad would say, he'd be killing his golden goose.
 

redsoxcentury

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
2,140
NYC
edmunddantes said:
Apologize. Say you got used. Don't need to give up the source. Retract the story. He's done none of it.
It really is as simple as this. heck he could have say there was a miscommunication or misinterpretation between him and his source. honest mistake you move on. Mort has been in this business a long time. he should know how to figure out how to correct this. unless maybe he WANTED this to look bad for the Patriots too...
 

jsinger121

@jsinger121
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
17,138
redsoxcentury said:
It really is as simple as this. heck he could have say there was a miscommunication or misinterpretation between him and his source. honest mistake you move on. Mort has been in this business a long time. he should know how to figure out how to correct this. unless maybe he WANTED this to look bad for the Patriots too...
To me there is something in it for Mort by not retracting in that he will continue to receive future information from the NFL league office. They kept this false report up to make the Patriots look bad in the eyes of the public. No reporter would continue to do this if he knew he was duped unless he was getting future kick backs on info.
 

bigyazbread

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 24, 2001
516
Woodbury, Connecticut
Mort needed to get out in front of this shitstorm.  He is the Judith Miller of the NY Times to Kensil's Scooter Libby on WMDs.  Miller took a lot of shit for her being used, but she's still a reporter.  Mort would still be a reporter if he retracts...even if he doesn't name Kensil by name.  The damage that the shield wanted was done, now it's time to admit that he got used in a nefarious way and disavow the 11 of 12 balls underinflated story.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
22,450
Los Angeles, CA
dcdrew10 said:
Good. Maybe it will make them think twice about blindly reporting everything they're fed by the NFL.
That's absurd. The legal standard the Patriots would have to meet is so high that no news organization would be legitimately worried about this.

Their concerns about drawing shitty Monday Night Football matchups in the future is much more likely.

Mort might be telling a half truth in that, if WEEI didn't make such a big deal about the appearance beforehand, it could have flown under the radar and happened before ESPN / NFL execs could apply pressure.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
35,960
AZ
Two seperate issues about protecting sources that are being conflated. First are reporter's shield laws. These are laws that make it so reporters cannot be compelled to reveal their sources. These usually do not turn on whether or not the source lied. The reporter stll cannot be held in contempt for refusing to divulge a shithead source in most states.

I think these rules do not generally protect the source. If you get the source in a depo you can ask the question and a person usually cannot claim a privilege because he was talking to a reporter.

Second are the duties owed by a reporter to a source. These are governed by journalistic ethics and tradition. But fundamentally they are treated by most reporters as contracts -- you and the source agree on the ground rules. My guess is that Mort wasn't entirely clear here. If he didn't have a course of dealing with his source or didn't expressly say "if you lie I will burn you," then he has himself in a pickle and may feel stuck.

I guess I've always assumed Mort's source may well have been an indirect source -- that is, someone from the Colts who got it from the league. This puts him in an equally difficult pisition. If Mort's source swears he merely repeated what his source told him, what can Mort do here? He got used. And he possibly fucked up his reputation by running with a second hand source. But he can't really burn his source without knowing he was lying about what he heard.

All that said, there may be a case here. I think the material was plainly defamatory, or at least that goes to the jury. The harder question is when did Mort learn the truth? If it was a when the world did, it's tough to nail him on a failure to retract/correct or continuing publication theory. But if it was earlier, I could see a case getting legs.
 

naclone

lurker
Jul 15, 2005
131
NYC
Mort wasnt really burned though. Sure, we think so. But we don't matter. Nobody else knows/cares that Mort's tweet was wrong or that it in any way changed the course of deflategate. This fall, everyone else is going to set their fantasy lineup based on Mort's tweets and that's just how ESPN, Mort, and every other fan wants it. Which is exactly why things happened the way they did. And won't change.

We're in a bubble. Mort's credibility is rock solid as far as everone else is concerned.
 

JayMags71

Member
SoSH Member
Not a lawyer, here. What grounds do the Patriots have for damages? It seems unlikely they lost revenue as a result of Mortensen's false report. Nor did fine or docked draft picks come from mort that was the league's investigation. How does a court define "damage" here?
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
35,960
AZ
JayMags71 said:
Not a lawyer, here. What grounds do the Patriots have for damages? It seems unlikely they lost revenue as a result of Mortensen's false report. Nor did fine or docked draft picks come from mort that was the league's investigation. How does a court define "damage" here?
You get an expert to give an opinion about tarnishment to the brand, effect on sponsorships, merchandise, and the like. Putting numbers to non-obviously calculable economic harms happens everyday in courts around the country.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
49,837
djbayko said:
Mort might be telling a half truth in that, if WEEI didn't make such a big deal about the appearance beforehand, it could have flown under the radar and happened before ESPN / NFL execs could apply pressure.
 
Yes, I mean, Mort works for ESPN and everyone knows that if there's one thing ESPN understands it's that they would never hype things that would appear on their family of networks for the benefit of ratings.
 
I got in the car today and ESPN Radio was on.  Their topic was something like "Predictions for what will go wrong for your NFL team".  They were expecting a caller to say, "Yeah, I'm a Cowboys fan and I don't know if we did enough to replace DeMarco Murray"...etc.  Well the first caller I heard said, (paraphrasing) "The worst has already gone wrong for my team.  Mortensen got duped by Mike Kensil and your network caused a whole firestorm for nothing.  Why won't Mort set it right?  Why won't you guys talk about it?".  One of the hosts was former NFL lineman Booger McFarland and I think the other guy was Barrett Sallee.  They quickly hung up on the guy and said (again paraphrasing), "Look, Chris is the best in the business and if something was reported wrong, that's between Mort and the Patriots.  We're not going to speculate and I'm sure Chris will address things in the future if he feels he did something wrong.  But he's a professional and the best there is.  Next caller..."
 
And that was it.  
 
I switch to Mad Dog Radio on Sirius only to hear Jamie Dukes ripping on the Patriots for releasing the emails.  He says, (paraphrasing) "Who do they think they are?  Are they special?  So ESPN might have gotten wrong information, so what?  Is the NFL supposed to drop everything and investigate the leaks and set the facts straight?  Why?  A ton of leaks come out in a scandal, some are right and some are wrong.  The Patriots think they deserve extra attention to validate the facts and investigate the leaks?  More arrogance from the Patriots.  But I'm sure some of their fans will call in and argue but they'd be wrong."
 
So, being the douchbag I am, I call in.  The co-host, Lance Medow is sticking up for NE while I'm on hold but Dukes keeps shouting him down.  I get on about 15 minutes later and say "First off, the Patriots just wanted to have the accurate information relayed to the press.  The NFL knew the PSIs were incorrect but let it hang out there for months.  And secondly, there is a big difference between a leak and a leak from Mike Kensil".  The fat-ass on the other end starts yelling, "Wait wait wait...the Patriots aren't special.  The information came out eventually after the investigation was done.  The NFL can't just drop things to address the PSIs and ESPN had a source and went with it.  That said, nobody knows it was Mike Kensil.  It's pure speculation."
 
I then brought up the Jets unapproved football in 2009.  Their answer was, "It wasn't used in a game, so it's a moot point."  
 
Infuriating.  
 

H78

Fists of Millennial Fury!
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2009
4,613
I'm starting to actually believe this was a fix. And I think the reason the fix was in was the NFL was pissed about the way the Patriots took advantage of a loophole in the rule book against the Ravens in the divisional round.

I think they were trying to fuck the Pats over in the AFCCG while that game was still close, only the Patriots weren't affected and instead came out and destroyed the Colts in the second half. This is all insane but I am genuinely starting to think the league did not want the Patriots in SB49.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
58,907
Rotten Apple
bigyazbread said:
Mort needed to get out in front of this shitstorm.  He is the Judith Miller of the NY Times to Kensil's Scooter Libby on WMDs.  Miller took a lot of shit for her being used, but she's still a reporter.  Mort would still be a reporter if he retracts...even if he doesn't name Kensil by name.  The damage that the shield wanted was done, now it's time to admit that he got used in a nefarious way and disavow the 11 of 12 balls underinflated story.
No she isn't. She was drummed out of her Times gig and now only appears on FOX News. She's been reduced to writing books about her own experiences (spoiler alert, she thinks she did a great job) and goes on tour to promote the book. She's been totally discredited by the industry, and rightly so.
 

JayMags71

Member
SoSH Member
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
You get an expert to give an opinion about tarnishment to the brand, effect on sponsorships, merchandise, and the like. Putting numbers to non-obviously calculable economic harms happens everyday in courts around the country.
I thought NFL sponsorships and merchandising were subject to revenue sharing. Doesn't that complicate things (especially when you consider that it was probable that Mort got his info from a league source), or is that a non-factor?
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
28,676
What if Pats refused to credential anyone from ESPN this year? A lot of league pressure and perhaps fines would result, but would it have impact?
 

jsinger121

@jsinger121
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
17,138
PedroKsBambino said:
What if Pats refused to credential anyone from ESPN this year? A lot of league pressure and perhaps fines would result, but would it have impact?
 
They have a MNF football home game against the Bills so that can't happen. They like Reiss at 1 Patriot Place. It won't happen but I'd try to restrict creds on certain people at ESPN.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
35,960
AZ
JayMags71 said:
I thought NFL sponsorships and merchandising were subject to revenue sharing. Doesn't that complicate things (especially when you consider that it was probable that Mort got his info from a league source), or is that a non-factor?
Possibly. Good cross examination. Still time for you to go to law school, you know. :)
 

Doctor G

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 24, 2007
2,331
H78 said:
I'm starting to actually believe this was a fix. And I think the reason the fix was in was the NFL was pissed about the way the Patriots took advantage of a loophole in the rule book against the Ravens in the divisional round.
I think they were trying to fuck the Pats over in the AFCCG while that game was still close, only the Patriots weren't affected and instead came out and destroyed the Colts in the second half. This is all insane but I am genuinely starting to think the league did not want the Patriots in SB49.
Watched the replay the other day on NFL channel,and the Colts were really trying to strip Blount on every run in the second half. This complaint was never about The guy who ended up being accused TB.They just couldnt tie it to Bill. This is why they didnt correct Morts story. They were shaking the trees.
 
JayMags71 said:
Dude is straight-up trolling. And you took the bait. Saying shit like that is his job.
 
He was the one who flipped out on air, not me.  Surprisingly all but one of the calls I listened to defended the Patriots.  They were more "Roger and the NFL can't be trusted" type calls than anything else.  He went crazy on the caller after me - telling him he was "dumb" and that the Patriots have zero chance to win in court.  Medow had to tell him to "relax".  Dukes said he was tired of listening to Heath Evans, Willie McGinest and Patriot callers defending NE when Brady should just "take one for the team."  So thanks but I'm fine with my call.   :)
 
But it's still infuriating listening to some of the media who refuse to see both sides and report actual facts.  Medow kept saying that he thought the Pats did something but there wasn't a lot of proof and the penalty is ridiculous.  Dukes reply is the commission has final say on the penalty.  
 
 
PedroKsBambino said:
What if Pats refused to credential anyone from ESPN this year? A lot of league pressure and perhaps fines would result, but would it have impact?
 
Jaymags is right.  The Pats aren't banning anybody.  ESPN and those geniuses from First Take are going to be at the Pats facility (I think) next week.  They're visiting every team and the AFC East is first in line. 
 

CaptainLaddie

dj paul pfieffer
SoSH Member
Sep 6, 2004
34,168
where the darn libs live
Doctor G said:
Watched the replay the other day on NFL channel,and the Colts were really trying to strip Blount on every run in the second half. This complaint was never about The guy who ended up being accused TB.They just couldnt tie it to Bill. This is why they didnt correct Morts story. They were shaking the trees.
You realize they try and strip guys, I mean they try really hard, every single time they have the ball, right?
 

djhb20

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 7, 2004
1,887
10025
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
You get an expert to give an opinion about tarnishment to the brand, effect on sponsorships, merchandise, and the like. Putting numbers to non-obviously calculable economic harms happens everyday in courts around the country.
I do IP valuation and damages for a living. The Pats can call me whenever they want.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
49,837
The most the Pats might do is freeze out Mort and anyone else they feel was over the top.
 
I remember a blurb months ago that said the Pats were paying attention to who was saying what.
 

Doctor G

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 24, 2007
2,331
CaptainLaddie said:
You realize they try and strip guys, I mean they try really hard, every single time they have the ball, right?
I knpw. Have you seen the replay, they were trying to strip Blount after he was down early in the 2nd half.
 

Laser Show

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 7, 2008
5,052
PaulinMyrBch said:
Mort saying he hasn't corrected because he's still trying to figure out twitter. 
Oh of course. Shame on us for jumping all over him then.

Wow what a lame excuse.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
36,595
Here
LOLOLOL, he claims he never retracted because he doesn't understand Twitter. This is sublime.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
43,128
PaulinMyrBch said:
Mort saying he hasn't corrected because he's still trying to figure out twitter. 
Dennis and Callahan ‏@DandCShow  4m4 minutes ago
Chris Mortensen says he has not figured out how to delete a tweet......
 
https://support.twitter.com/articles/18906 Its RIGHT THERE MORT
 
 

Deleting a Tweet


Did you Tweet something and then change your mind? Don't worry! It's easy to delete one of your Tweets. Please note that you can only delete Tweets that you have made, you cannot delete other users' Tweets from your timeline.

How to delete one of your Tweets:
  1. Sign in to Twitter.com.
  2. Visit your Profile page.
  3. Locate the Tweet you want to delete.
  4. Click the More icon (•••).
  5. Click Delete Tweet.
  6. Done! Your Tweet has been deleted.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
6,902
Very defensive.  Implying that his source was simply generalizing.
 

PaulinMyrBch

Don't touch his dog food
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2003
8,316
MYRTLE BEACH!!!!
This stuff should be over here. But yea, this is a mess. 
 
He keeps trying to pigeonhole things into 11/12 were still significantly under inflated. What if I had reported that, which I sortof did. 
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
36,595
Here
I assume someone here will have found a tweet Mort deleted last year sometime by the end of the night.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
36,595
Here
He couldn't, you know, send out another tweet? Say something on air? This is such bad theater.
 

amarshal2

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2005
4,908
He basically accused somebody of an elaborate scheme to rob a bank and upon hearing the news that they were caught with $1.35 in their pocket says, "I was close enough"
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
6,902
Come on guys.  He just said it was technically a mistake to not delete the tweet.
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
10,936
Springfield, VA
Says that he believes nothing would have changed if he had just omitted the 'two pounds" part and just said 'significant".  Wow.  Just, wow.
 

JGray38

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2003
3,012
Rockport, MA
Wow, is that lame or what? He's got airtime on a huge network- easy enough to correct it that way instead. Has he done that yet? Nope.