HERE’S A SCOOP: SPORTS MEDIA ‘INSIDERS’ KEEP BLURRING SERIOUS ETHICAL LINES
When the New York Times and other outlets employ reporters capable of moving betting lines with wrong information — such as Shams Charania, who also is paid by FanDuel — the hint of scandal exists
Back when newsgathering was journalism, not show business, an “insider’” was a proud description. “The Insider,” in fact, was the title of an acclaimed film about the profession. CBS News producer Lowell Bergman realized his network was selling out to Big Tobacco when his interview with a whistleblower was stonewalled. He told “60 Minutes” to kiss his ash and founded the investigative reporting program at Cal-Berkeley.
Today, in the context of the media’s insidious relationship with Big Sports, being an “insider” can be slimy, unethical work. It might even be criminal.
When used responsibly, information makes the world a better place. It also could be funneled nefariously, if a sports insider so chooses, into a plot to make large sums of money in the legalized gambling market — for himself, for his sources, for family members, for friends, for anyone with a wagering app. Or, a sports source could take advantage of an insider and plant a lie for his own financial benefit. Worse, in what already is a disturbing reality, an insider can be paid as a contributor to a gambling company AND by a media company controlled by the owner of two major-market sports teams — and make money for that gambling company, at the expense of bettors who lose money, simply by moving the betting line with a tweet that turns out wildly inaccurate.
There is insider trading in the stock market. There easily can be insider trading at the highest levels of media, a problem when many of those companies — such as The Athletic, owned by the New York Times — purport to peddle the highest forms of journalism.
Shams Charania has worked hard to gain the ears, tongues and thumbs of people throughout the NBA. Most often, his scoops involve trades, contract signings, usual league business. But last Thursday, hours before the draft, his tweet about a so-called major development shifted odds dramatically. He was hearing that the Charlotte Hornets, picking No. 2, could abandon plans to draft forward Brandon Miller and that guard Scoot Henderson was “gaining serious momentum” within the braintrust. His information prompted some of his two million-plus Twitter followers to hurriedly place bets on Henderson. They would lose their investments when the Hornets selected Miller, then said they’d not once wavered on their thinking.
This led to a trail of suspicion:
The online sportsbook FanDuel, which pays Charania to appear on its TV network, pocketed the money lost by those who bet on Henderson.
And the Times, which pays Charania to break stories on The Athletic site, had to explain the raging conflict of interest that somehow escaped its oversight.
And the Stadium network, which pays Charania to appear, was left naked as a media company under the majority control of Jerry Reinsdorf, owner of the Chicago Bulls and White Sox, who shouldn’t be anywhere near the sniff of a potential gambling scandal.
As yet, this hasn’t reached the level of a Shams Sham. But with the Times unlikely to investigate itself, other news organizations immediately should be on the gumshoe march. Oh, wait, ESPN has its own issues. Last year, NBA insider Adrian Wojnarowski also moved the betting line with an erroneous pre-draft tweet — he tweeted that Orlando was drafting Jabari Smith Jr. with the top selection, which caused bettors to lose money when the Magic chose Paolo Banchero. Hmm. The gambling speed train left the tracks long ago in Bristol, headed to Vegas. That’s where the host of the network’s “Daily Wager” show, Doug Kezirian, bragged two years ago about partnering with a “pro bettor” and winning almost $300,000 on an NFL draft prop bet. Did ESPN chairman Jimmy Pitaro even flinch when Kezirian ignored 100-1 odds and bet $3,500 that Tyson Campbell would be the first safety taken? Did Pitaro care when Kezirian told the Las Vegas Review-Journal that he’d been tipped off by “the pro bettor” that the Georgia product’s stock was rising?
Hmm. Where did that tip come from? Could this be considered insider trading, media version? Because Pitaro doesn’t want tough ethical questions impacting his summer vacation plans, he won’t dare touch the Wojnarowski situation as it relates to Charania. Plus, he’s responsible for the Woj Bomb scoop phenomenon after creating it in his previous job at Yahoo Sports. The Times, which seems to have weekly headaches involving The Athletic, was left to justify Charania’s existence when asked by the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal.
“Shams does not pick games or encourage people to gamble,” a Times spokesman explained. “He simply reports on news around injuries, trades and transactions.”
And moves betting lines.
The Times claims to have firm rules about Athletic reporters and gambling; knowing Reinsdorf’s general recklessness and hypocrisy, I assume he doesn’t care. At The Athletic, Charania isn’t allowed to open a FanDuel account, and reporters are banned from gambling on the sports they cover. Should I insert the laughtrack here? An insider could have anyone open a FanDuel account and use his inside information. Same applies to players recently suspended by the NFL, which led Congress to write letters to the commissioners and presidents of 12 pro leagues and the NCAA about “suspicious sports betting activity.” As for reporters and gambling — and the basic ethical problem of how coverage or commentary might be impacted by whether they won or lost a bet — how do media employers intend on tracking if and how much money they’re betting? Answer: They don’t.
Rather than defend these practices — rather than hem and haw and cover their hind-ends — what serious media companies should do is enact a sweeping new rule: NO MORE INSIDERS. Why subject an entire news operation to doubt because you want clicks and subscriptions from sports rumors? Furthermore, why allow reporters to become so entrenched with sources that they court ethical trouble?
As it is, wink-wink deals between insiders and sources can be hokey — more the transactional function of a $800 billion industry than anything honorable. Agents are a big problem, providing information to stay in cahoots with the reporters, who then might protect or favorably promote the agency’s clients. These are not sources. They’re trade-off sycophants. No real work is necessary when an insider simply can look at his phone and see his next “scoop” tweeted at him.
I’m not sure how ESPN’s NFL insider, Adam Schefter, kept his beat — or his job — after he sought approval from a team president before publishing a 2011 story. “Please let me know if you see anything that should be added, changed, tweaked,” Schefter wrote in an email to Bruce Allen, who was general manager of the Washington Football Team at the time. “Thanks, Mr. Editor, for that and the trust. Plan to file this to espn about 6 am ….”
Does Schefter sound more like someone trying to appease Allen — and fit the executive’s version of the truth — than an independent reporter seeking facts from all sides about a labor-related story? His response was dubious when the email was revealed in 2021. "Fair questions are being asked about my reporting approach on an NFL Lockout story from 10 years ago," Schefter said in a statement. "Just to clarify, it's common practice to verify facts of a story with sources before you publish in order to be as accurate as possible. In this case, I took the rare step of sending the full story in advance because of the complex nature of the collective bargaining talks. It was a step too far and, looking back, I shouldn't have done it. The criticism being levied is fair. With that being said, I want to make this perfectly clear: in no way did I, or would I, cede editorial control or hand over final say about a story to anyone, ever.”
To be clear, it’s not common practice to write, “Thanks, Mr. Editor” to the general manager of a sports franchise.
I wrote at the time that Schefter and Wojnarowski should be required to trade beats. Old-school sports editors once made swaps to make sure relationships with leagues and teams didn’t become too cozy. Pitaro doesn’t care. He’s too busy trying to help the financial bottom line of a company, Disney, that might be his to run when Bob Iger finally re-re-retires.
The only insiders publicly connected to betting lines, so far, are the two NBA rivals — Charania learned the trade from Woj and now tries to beat him. Sports leagues don’t care any more than media companies; they’re in the gambling business together, swimming in the sludge while waving the betting carrots at inevitable FanDuel and DraftKings losers. Along with the Reinsdorf connection, it’s curious that the outgoing principal owner of the Hornets — the organization that seemingly fed Charania his fake news — is Michael Jordan. He has been involved in a gambling scandal or two, hasn’t he?
Sports leagues are too far gone — and have taken too much money — to start enforcing gambling rules now. Once crooked, always crooked. But a media company can put an end to the appearance of schemes, if not their existence, any time it wants. Do we dare hold our breath? All I know is, I’m proud to have saved the career of a newspaper colleague who was so in deep with a gambling habit — he took a loan from the star player of the NBA team he covered — that I ordered him to fess up to his editor-in-chief and get help. And, all I know is, my eyes still haven’t recovered from the staredown I received from a Denver colleague, once upon a time, who slammed the press-box table with unusual force early in the Broncos’ 55-10 loss to San Francisco in Super Bowl XXIV.
He wasn’t mad because he was a fan of the team. I looked at him and said nothing, only wondering how much money he had on the game. He glared at me, then disappeared elsewhere in the press box. Last I heard, he was running a bar. Reporters are supposed to be full-time journalists, not gamblers dabbling in beat coverage, yet the sleazy rise of Barstool Sports and Dave Portnoy has crapped all over business ethics. If the New York Times can’t identify a potential scandal in its ranks and end the charade, well, here’s a scoop.
No one will.
###
Jay Mariotti, called “without question the most impacting Chicago sportswriter of the past quarter-century,’’ writes general sports columns for Substack while appearing on some of the 1,678,498 podcasts and shows in production today. He is an accomplished columnist, TV panelist and talk/podcast host. Living in Los Angeles, he gravitated by osmosis to film projects.