I’ve previously resisted paying for online content from the Wall Street Journal. (Primarily because I’m cheap.) Now that I know that their online content includes reporting something that appeared elsewhere three days earlier and presenting it as brand new, I may have to reconsider my position.
This is a weird one for me to write. On one hand, I’m happy to have our somewhat-controversial story publicly vindicated. On the other hand, I’m pissed that the Wall Street Journal presented this as a brand-new “exclusive” item despite knowing damn well that PFT had reported it days before the Wall Street Journal did.
Here’s the news that was confirmed by the Wall Street Journal: Multiple owners have discussed the possibility of removing Jerry Jones as the owner of the Cowboys. It appeared right here on Sunday night, and it caused a stir. Even though some other major outlets ignored it (either because they couldn’t “confirm” it and/or didn’t want to give someone else credit for it), both Stephen Jones and Jerry Jones were asked about it during separate appearances on 105.3 The Fan this week. So it was out there well before it was reported by the Wall Street Journal.
The article from Andrew Beaton notes that Jerry called the possibility of removal “ridiculous” during a Tuesday radio interview. Since he was responding to a question that specifically mentioned the PFT report, it’s obvious that the Wall Street Journal knew that the issue already had been reported when presenting it as something “exclusive.”
The item also confirms that the league specifically regards the instigation by Jones of criticism Papa John’s CEO John Schnatter as conduct detrimental to the league, which is the standard that justifies various penalties up to and including a forced sale of the franchise.
So thank you, Wall Street Journal, for confirming our story. And as to your failure to give proper credit when reporting it, we’re thinking of another two-word phrase that ends with “you.”