The Detroit News Needs to explain Iverson Allegations http://tinyurl.com/ceuade Last Monday, Pistons beat reporter Chris McCosky of the Detroit News wrote on his newspaper blog that Allen Iverson had been banned from two Detroit casinos for "boorish behavior," which included throwing his chips at dealers when losing. Two days later, on April 15, the Detroit Free Press refuted McCosky's story, citing casino spokesmen who denied that Iverson had ever created a disturbance, let alone been banned. 上礼拜一，Detroit News 的 Pistons 专栏作家 Chris McCosky 在他的部落格中爆料指 出，战神因为一些 "粗鲁的举动"(输钱时将赌场的代币丢向庄家)，而被底特律两间赌场 踢出去。 两天後，比较有良心的 Detroit Free Press 引用赌场发言人的话，驳斥了 McCosky 的无稽之谈。 战神从来都没有在赌场里面捣乱，更不用说被我们踢出去了!! As I mentioned last week, barring some sort of organized cover-up by both casinos, it seems clear McCosky fell for a bad tip. Except, here's the odd part: instead of posting a retraction, McCosky actually went on the offensive with another post on April 15, glossing over the fact that the thrust of his original report (that Iverson was banned) was wrong while adding that Iverson was seen "spitting at a dealer" and "even accused of cheating more than once." Under Michigan gaming laws, cheating at a casino is a felony offense. 就像我上周提到的，除非两间赌场都有计画性地帮AI擦屁股，不然 McCosky 就是被假内幕 给骗了。补上个八卦，4/15，也就是Detroit Free Press反驳McCosky的那天，McCosky 不但没有po文更正之前的说法，反而更为曲解事实的补上两枪，说 噢sorry阿，AI的确 没有被踢出赌场，但却有目击者说看到AI 对庄家吐口水、被抓到诈赌不只一次 揪眯^.< 然而根据密西根博奕法，在赌场诈赌可是一项非常重的罪阿。 这边开始是一段来自McCosky的文章片段 (略) These aren't light accusations -- spitting on someone is a disgusting act, and accusing a professional athlete of cheating in a casino could have serious repercussions with his livelihood. Clearly McCosky must feel extremely confident in his sources, no? Given the other details he gets wrong in his post, perhaps he shouldn't. McCosky的控诉文里并没有任何bright side，对某个人吐口水可是件非常恶烂的动作， 指控一个比专业还专业的运动员诈赌更是会对他的生活产生非常严重的影响。McCosky 很显然地对自己的来源非常有自信，可不是吗？po文不附图此风不可长，给你另一个 过去他也在文章乱豪洨的例子，或许他不该这麽自信的。 For instance, there was in fact a recent incident involving one of his bodyguards, but not at Greektown Casino. Instead, it occurred at a nearby nightclub, and the man pressing charges (who required nine stitches after being hit in the face) admitted he didn't know if Iverson saw the incident or was even aware that it happened. All in all, Iverson was never accused of doing anything wrong, except, I suppose, keeping poor company. 举例来说，最近AI的保镳的确有卷入某个事件，但是地点并不是在Greektown Casino。 事发地点其实是附近的夜店，而那个被打之後缝九针的男人承认 他并不知道 AI 本人 是否有察觉到或者甚至看见整起事件。总而言之，AI根本未曾被指控做出任何不对的事， 如果真的有，应该只是请错保镳而以吧我想。 A few days later, a different reporter for the Detroit News eventually "corrected" that piece of info, tacking onto the bottom of an article about the incident this "clarification": Reports this week said the incident occurred at Greektown Casino-Hotel and that Iverson had been banned there, as well as the MGM Grand Detroit. "(Iverson) is not nor was he banned from our property at any time, and the incident that was reported did not happen at Greektown Casino-Hotel," said Amanda M. Totaro, vice president of marketing for Greektown Casino-Hotel. 终於，几天後另一位Detroit News的记者 "矫正" 了前面报导AI被控诉诈赌然後被踢出 赌场的消息，而这段所谓澄清的文字是放在哪里呢？他是放在另一则新闻，嗯，你没猜错 就是放在AI的保镳打人的报导下面。 (http://tinyurl.com/cs4zhk) (下面是迟来且被置底於另一篇关於AI负面报导的澄清) 关於这星期AI被两间赌场被扫地出门的报导 AI并没有也从未在我们的赌场内被赶出门，而那则报导所陈述的事件，也并没有发生过。 其中一间赌场的副总裁说。 Anyone who's been paying attention should be offended by the spin job. Dismissing vague "reports this week" is hardly a retraction, let alone an admission that the Detroit News was directly responsible for a gossipy story that had already gained traction among both independent bloggers and mainstream media outlets, not to mention the national talk radio circuit. 任何有在关注这则新闻的人应该会对他们的摇摇摆摆不爽。 用"这礼拜的报导"，如此模糊且不明确的东西做开头是很难被当作是一种澄清的，不用说 也知道Detorit News得直接扛下他乱八卦的责任，虽然这则报导早已引起了网路作家以及 主流媒体的注意，更甭提全国性的广播节目了。 What's even more curious is the fact that the Detroit News has since removed both of McCosky's original blog posts describing Iverson's behavior, as if removing all stories referencing the allegations were enough to wash its hands of the matter. (Note: the first post can be viewed in its entirety here, and the Google cache for the second here.) Despite this story already being plastered everywhere, the News is essentially pretending it had nothing to do with it -- it's like screaming "fire" in a crowded movie theater before telling everybody the next day that you never left your house. 令人好奇的是，Detroit News因此移除了McCosky原本有关於AI行为上的报导，好像以为 把所有有关此事件的报导都移除，就可以把沾满鲜血的双手洗乾净似的。 (注：第一po可从这理找到完整的文章，利用google的库存页面则可以找到第二po) 尽管这则故事早以在各地发布，Detroit News还是在一副事不关己的样子，这就像是在 人满满的电影院里大叫失火了，但在隔天才告诉大家你根本没离开家门一步。 If McCosky no longer stands by the "countless stories" from "eyewitness accounts" (and the removal of his blog posts implicitly suggests he doesn't) the Detroit News needs to print a prominent retraction. To be honest, even that isn't justice -- the original reports spawned hundreds of additional stories, and a retraction would get a small fraction of the publicity -- but at least it would be a start. 假使McCosky不再站在他的 "众多目击者" 所看到的 "属不清的故事"那边 (但那些把他 部落格中的报导移除的举动，很难让人相信他有所悔悟了) Detroit News应该要印出一份 真正够显眼的道歉(更正)启示。老实说，虽然这未必公允，原po的报导早已像异形产卵一 样衍生出数百则故事，一则道歉(更正)启事或许只能吸引到一小部分的社会大众注意而以 ，但至少这是个开始。 There is no word on whether the paper plans on publishing a retraction, however, or even why they pulled their original blog posts; e-mails sent Friday to McCosky and two Detroit News editors seeking comment and explanation have gone unanswered. 报方对於是否会po出另一份澄清说明，或甚至为什麽把原报导全部移除都只字未提；而周 五寄出给McCosky以及另外二位Detroit News的编辑的email，也如石沉大海一样，音讯全 无。 Iverson may not have the most sterling reputation, but accusing a man of spitting on another person as well as reporting he's been accused of breaking the law is a serious allegation, especially for a soon-to-be free agent who needs to convince his next team that he's not a distraction and truly is just misunderstood. AI或许不是一个拥有最好的名声的人，但是指控一个人对别人吐口水，甚至报导说他违法 ，都是一件非常严重的指控，特别是针对一个即将成为自由球员，必须使他明年所待的球 队相信他不会是一个不安要素，而是真真正正地被误会而已。 --- Orz... 第一次去翻外电，花了我整整一个午夜-.- 明天的生化都不用考不用考不用考 ^.< --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 140.136.149.93 ※ 编辑: momofishj 来自: 140.136.149.93 (04/22 05:24) ※ 编辑: momofishj 来自: 122.116.100.35 (04/22 12:12)