- The relationship between the "anonymous source" and Guillen was not specified. If you're going to use one source in a story, you should at least 1) verify the information, or 2) tell us why your one source is in the know. Even in journalism -- a fact we forget more and more with every CNN or Fox News or ESPN Deportes abortion -- there is a such thing called prudence and you are in fact allowed to practice it.
- "Living hell in Kansas City" did not come from Guillen but that anonymous source who has unspecified insight into Guillen's mind.
- "He would do anything he can in economic terms to ease his way out of Kansas City" is flatly rejected by Guillen, who apparently replied to the KC Star, "This is completely catching me by surprise."
Did you catch that? Replied to the Kansas City Star. And more denials. Let's pull down the veil, shall we?
Neither Jose Guillen nor Trey Hillman were contacted for the story.
Why ESPN.com's editors ran with this is utterly baffling. Let me repeat: neither Jose Guillen nor Trey Hillman, the principle subjects of the story and two guys who are -- how shall we say -- ubiquitous in the clubhouse... neither of them were contacted by Rojas for comment.
We have a phrase in the profession for when something like this happens: You've gotta be f***ing kidding me.
Actually, correct that: the worst part is folks in the blogosphere linked to this excrement and ran with it, ultimately accomplishing what the anonymous source hoped to get: a controversy. Bravo, Enrique Rojas and your anonymous source. After my anger passes, I will realize you have joined the likes of Tom Miller in saddening me just a little more in regards to our profession.