What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Rumors, privacy etc.

Chris Lerch

Chris Lerch

Renaissance Man
Just a friendly reminder - I had to remove a post at the request of a school because of they said it contained inaccurate private information about a member of the college hockey community. Please stick to discussions about confirmed news. Thanks!
 
Re: Rumors, privacy etc.

HockeyFanAttic said:
And Chris, here's what the response should have been, "I see nothing in the post that's inaccurate...Would you like to comment on the situation?"

THAT'S what a reporter does.
Click to expand...

If you're referring to running a story based on unsubstantiated information and THEN expecting someone to come out to confirm, deny or elaborate, then no, that's not what a reporter does. That's what a hatchet man does. That's what a third-rate blogspot wanna-be "reporter" does.

A reporter gets his facts straight, then runs a story.
 
Re: Rumors, privacy etc.

MikeAnderson said:
If you're referring to running a story based on unsubstantiated information and THEN expecting someone to come out to confirm, deny or elaborate, then no, that's not what a reporter does. That's what a hatchet man does. That's what a third-rate blogspot wanna-be "reporter" does.

A reporter gets his facts straight, then runs a story.
Click to expand...

Maybe I know something that you don't about who knows what Mike. :) Maybe I know that USCHO already knows the facts and is holding onto them for whatever reason. But that couldn't be right, could it? Nah, I've only known the man for 21 years.
 
Re: Rumors, privacy etc.

HockeyFanAttic said:
Maybe I know something that you don't about who knows what Mike. :) Maybe I know that USCHO already knows the facts and is holding onto them for whatever reason. But that couldn't be right, could it? Nah, I've only known the man for 21 years.
Click to expand...

This is a college hockey board with posts. I don't get how Chris is supposed act like a reporter about something someone posted. If he was going to be writing a story that is different.
 
Re: Rumors, privacy etc.

The only reliable source willing to go on the record says portions of the information leaked are not true. Based on that and on the level of personal information that would be disclosed, I made the decision to shut it down pending more accurate, on the record information.
 
Re: Rumors, privacy etc.

Chris

That's nice, but it seems that the ONLY information on D-III comes from this message board, not the front page. It was on this board that we find out that coaches have been hired, championship venues have changed, and even the FINAL score of the D-III men's championship.

It seems that D-III is an afterthought, or at worst, the ignored step-child of USCHO. Honestly, I'd love to help, but I'm a good 8 hrs from the nearest MASCAC school and don't have the personal resources to give the MASCAC the coverage they deserve.
 
Last edited:
Re: Rumors, privacy etc.

joecct said:
Chris

That's nice, but it seems that the ONLY information on D-III comes from this message board, not the front page. It was on this board that we find out that coaches have been hired, championship venues have changed, and even the FINAL score of the D-III men's championship.

It seems that D-III is an afterthought, or at worst, the ignored step-child of USCHO. Honestly, I'd love to help, but I'm a good 8 hrs from the nearest MASCAC school and don't have the personal resources to give the MASCAC the coverage they deserve.
Click to expand...

I know your frustration about the lack of news, and I share it. We lost our best "reporter" when RIT, and by extension Chris, went Div I. However, the lack of information can't allow people to post rumors and unsubstantiated stories on this board. It's too easy here, as we all know, to hide behind an anonymous user name. We've also seen too many people come on here with an ax to grind. "I heard from someone close to the program" is not good enough. It's also way too easy for any of us to get it wrong. That's not fair to the school or any individuals that may be harmed. It may also open USCHO to litigation that could shut this site down - then where would we get any information at all?
 
Re: Rumors, privacy etc.

joecct said:
Chris

That's nice, but it seems that the ONLY information on D-III comes from this message board, not the front page. It was on this board that we find out that coaches have been hired, championship venues have changed, and even the FINAL score of the D-III men's championship.

It seems that D-III is an afterthought, or at worst, the ignored step-child of USCHO. Honestly, I'd love to help, but I'm a good 8 hrs from the nearest MASCAC school and don't have the personal resources to give the MASCAC the coverage they deserve.
Click to expand...
I agree with the premise of the thread that rumors are bad, but as far as real news you are being more than fair with your assessment.
 
Re: Rumors, privacy etc.

I disagree with the premise of the thread that rumors are bad. I have a journalism degree, and I understand that true journalism needs to be told, but this is a fan blog forum, and truthfully I think that all rules are off. If this were FOX, ABC, NBC, CBS, etc., I believe that they would have to have their facts straight before breaking a story, but it isn't. I also have no problem with Chris editing what should be printed and what should not.
 
Re: Rumors, privacy etc.

jabber811 said:
I disagree with the premise of the thread that rumors are bad. I have a journalism degree, and I understand that true journalism needs to be told, but this is a fan blog forum, and truthfully I think that all rules are off. If this were FOX, ABC, NBC, CBS, etc., I believe that they would have to have their facts straight before breaking a story, but it isn't. I also have no problem with Chris editing what should be printed and what should not.
Click to expand...

Can I follow in your footsteps of obtaining a journalism degree and just owning a bar instead?

How about I buy that gas station across the street from your place and open up my bar?;)
 
Re: Rumors, privacy etc.

That would be fine with me. Anyone with a journalism degree knows that it doesn't pay **** and you work too many hours for no god**** reason.:(
 
Re: Rumors, privacy etc.

maybe you should have thought that one through.

let's stop treating uscho.com like it's cnn.com. if the information "leaked"....it leaked and there's no chance of stopping the ripple. secrets are secret until the bridge of trust collapses at which point everyone is entitled to know.
 
Re: Rumors, privacy etc.

walktheline said:
maybe you should have thought that one through.

let's stop treating uscho.com like it's cnn.com. if the information "leaked"....it leaked and there's no chance of stopping the ripple. secrets are secret until the bridge of trust collapses at which point everyone is entitled to know.
Click to expand...

The problem was that there was apparently faulty information in the original post. If that's the case - it has to come down.
 
Re: Rumors, privacy etc.

I’ve tried to avoid this topic, as I adamantly despise unsubstantiated rumors that are hearsay from sources that can’t be identified as to why they should be in a position to know, such as “I heard” versus “sources within the XXXX, who wish to remain anonymous, as they are not authorized to speak about…” That said, there often is information that those “in-the-circle” want released, but aren’t in a position to officially do so, “leaks” such these IMO are acceptable, when the presenter is willing to publically identify themselves and not hide behind anonymity.

What is the difference – the difference is that creditability is created and someone is willing to take responsibility for deciding to publically announce the information. There is also a difference between postulating an opinion or viewpoint and claiming it to be fact or the only viable alternative.

Furthermore, “leaks” of information of a personal and private nature, that is stating information that can not be gotten from a public source is uncouth and a discourtesy at best. That said, an acceptable argument may be made, for releasing information about someone’s actions on a public matter or on the public's behalf, anonymously when the person releasing the information may suffer retaliatory consequences, if their identity was known, yet they feel the information should be public knowledge. That’s my two cents :eek:

If it hasn't been publically released or there is no public benefit to knowing and/or it is information reasonably considered false or strictly personal in nature, then it must be "taken down".
 
Last edited:
Re: Rumors, privacy etc.

norm1909 said:
I’ve tried to avoid this topic, as I adamantly despise unsubstantiated rumors that are hearsay from sources that can’t be identified as to why they should be in a position to know, such as “I heard” versus “sources within the XXXX, who wish to remain anonymous, as they are not authorized to speak about…” That said, there often is information that those “in-the-circle” want released, but aren’t in a position to officially do so, “leaks” such these IMO are acceptable, when the presenter is willing to publically identify themselves and not hide behind anonymity.

What is the difference – the difference is that creditability is created and someone is willing to take responsibility for deciding to publically announce the information. There is also a difference between postulating an opinion or viewpoint and claiming it to be fact or the only viable alternative.

Furthermore, “leaks” of information of a personal and private nature, that is stating information that can not be gotten from a public source is uncouth and a discourtesy at best. That said, an acceptable argument may be made, for releasing information about someone’s actions on a public manner or on the publics behalf, anonymously when the person releasing the information may suffer retaliatory consequences, if their identity was known, yet they feel the information should be public knowledge. That’s my two cents :eek:

If it hasn't been publically released or there is no public benefit to knowing and/or it is information reasonably considered false or strictly personal in nature, then it must be "taken down".
Click to expand...

I would agree, and also point out that USCHO is regarded as a legitimate media outlet, and since this board is on their site, and is moderated, they do have to comply with journalistic standards. If this was an unmoderated site on norm1909.com, and norm1909.com wasn't interested in being credentialed to cover DIII college hockey from the press box, it might be a different story
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top