[BostonCard]

Teejers, on this one I think we agree, and perhaps I didn't express my position well.  Even if there was a policy that said not to identify individuals on social media (which might make sense for a media outlet that needs to protect sources), the fact that they were threats mitigates any privacy concerns about the individuals.  My suspicion is that the reporter would not have been suspended had she not previously criticized Kobe (hence the Al Capone reference).  Since there is no policy prohibiting raising very real concerns about an athlete, she seems to have been nailed for the one thing she could get nailed for (social media policy violation).

Also agree that waiting a day might have been a good idea, though I have to say, at the end of things I was a bit uncomfortable at how whitewashed the discussion of Kobe's legacy was yesterday.  People are complicated, and one can be a once-in-a-generation athlete who supported a bunch of commendable causes and an alleged rapist.

BC

[BostonCard]

Teejers, on this one I think we agree, and perhaps I didn't express my position well.  Even if there was a policy that said not to identify individuals on social media (which might make sense for a media outlet that needs to protect sources), the fact that they were threats mitigates any privacy concerns about the individuals.  My suspicion is that the reporter would not have been suspended had she not previously criticized Kobe (hence the Al Capone reference).  Since there is no policy prohibiting raising very real concerns about an athlete, she seems to have been nailed for the one thing she could get nailed for (social media policy violation).

Also agree that waiting a day might have been a good idea, though I have to say, at the end of things I was a bit uncomfortable at how whitewashed the discussion of Kobe's legacy was yesterday.  People are complicated, and one can be a once-in-a-generation athlete who supported a bunch of commendable causes and an alleged rapist.

BC