Fight Hype Essentially Admits They Blew The "Koncz Is Fired" Story

Absolutely. Or, more to the point, any writer who jumps the gun has stained credibility. There may be writers on "Fight Hype" who have never jumped the gun on a story/headline who shouldn't be lumped into a possible "stained credibility" pile.

Believe me, I've done it before and paid the price in my career and ambitions. It happens.

I understand, in my opinion, what "Fight Hype" and Ben Thompson are trying to do. And good for them. They have a right to do that, just as they have a right to present themselves as unbiased. It is up to the reader and fellow outlets to decide whether or not they believe that presentation.

Every person who writes -- on a blog, on a site -- owns what he/she writes. I do, you do, Ben Thomspon does, Tim Smith does. We all make mistakes, and how we handle those mistakes can sometimes help others decide what we are all about and where our credibility stands.

 

:good Peace, man.

 

And no reason for you to mind my pointing out the mistake, right?

Or are you the type to get your panties in a bunch about someone else supposedly getting their panties in a bunch?

The way you solve this kind of problem, as a journalist, is you don't write the story until you have it straight. Again: Simple, basic.

If you run it and get it wrong, you deal with the consequences.

Or you could try to change your headline and hope no one noticed the error. Or you may interview the possible source who gave you the bogus story and let him/her rip other writers who potentially took shots at your bogus story and your potentially biased site in a possible effort to do some damage control for you both.

Them's the breaks. :hat

 

Further confirmation of the "Fight Hype" gaffe in the 'Michael Koncz (not) Fired' bogus story:

SOURCE: http://bit.ly/puFjAn

And, more information about who may have been "Fight Hype's" source on the bogus story:

:-(

As I would imagine is the case for most people, I am all for second chances in life.

However, if you plan on running a story/headline that may be based on a possibly self-interested ex-convict's word, you may want to make sure you thoroughly substantiate the claim before running the story.

As the PhilBoxing article linked to above clearly points out, Koncz was never fired and his duties never changed. That seems to directly contradict what "Fight Hype" and Ben Thompson wrote in their latest (as of yesterday) piece on the matter, wherein Thompson apparently falsely says that Koncz "regained" the duties which PhilBoxing reports Koncz never lost in the first place.

So, for the reader, you have two choices about who you can believe here:

1 -- The word of a writer (Ronnie Nathanielsz) who has spoken with, and followed the career of, Manny Pacquiao for years. And a writer who spoke directly with Pacquiao and Koncz on this specific issue, or:

2 -- A site which a number of people seem to think is biased in favor of Pacquiao's main rival, Floyd Mayweather, Jr. And a site and writer that may have relied upon the words of an ex-convict as their primary "source" on this story. An ex-convict who, it should be pointed out, is apparently the owner/manager of Pacquiao's website. Not Pacquiao himself, of course, nor his adviser. Just the owner/manager of his website.

Who you going to side with here?

 

Smith never retracted it or corrected it, if I recall. Very bad move, in my opinion. I believe he hoped it would just fade away. If I remember correctly, Smith is mentioned in the defamation suit Pacquiao filed against Mayweather.

The piece on PhilBoxing comes from the Daily Inquirer, I believe. That's a legit newspaper/news source. It's just reprinted on PhilBoxing, it seems.

If I recall his story correctly (it's been awhile), Smith basically wrote a story claiming that Pacquiao's side, during negotiations with Team Floyd, wrote an email asking what would be the penalties, I think, if Pac tested positive.

Problem was, the email doesn't exist. Or if it does, it wasn't written by Team Pac. To my knowledge, that email has never been produced. You don't write stories based on "sources" like that. Hence, the comparison with the recent, debunked "Fight Hype" piece on Koncz being 'fired.'

Smith avoided Team Pacquiao and the Philippines press for some time after that fiasco, if I recall correctly.

With some papers, you get that kind of thing wrong, you're probably suspended or fired. I think Smith was fortunate. Hopefully, he learned his lesson.

 

You know what -- I actually think you're right.

And the funniest part about all of it?

The guy who Marley seems to be insinuating sent the email, if I'm reading his piece right?

Same guy who may have been the source for the bogus "Koncz fired" story.

Same guy who supposedly used to run the "official" Pacquiao website. A site which seems to have...let's just say...disappeared.

That is, I think that the potential "mole" in Team Pacquiao -- if you want to call this person part of "Team Pacquiao" -- may have been found out and...um...'handled.'

So, back to Tim Smith: Now, I will apologize to him, as a colleague, for saying he made this all up. He did apparently see an email from "Team Pacquiao."

The problem is: He apparently didn't check to see if this person was actually a true part of "Team Pacquiao." That is, if they had the standing to represent themselves as such.

If you notice what Marley says, he makes it clear this person did not have such standing.

And so, we go back to what I wrote in the initial post:

As a journalist, you should never, ever run with a story you haven't checked and double-checked. Smith didn't do that here. Had he done more background checking on this individual, if it is who I think it is, he would have known better than to listen to anyone claiming that person had any standing to write such a letter.

On the other hand, Team Pacquaio clearly has/had an issue. And it's not just with one person. It's at least two people who, I feel, should be sat down and told they may want to stay away with working from certain outlets and writers, outlets and writers which may not have Team Pacquiao's best interests in mind.

3 people, at least, need to hear that message on Team Pacquiao. At least in my opinion. One of those people may already be "handled." But there are two other persons who still are around who should get the word and make sure they don't fall into the same trap/bad decision making that the one possibly "handled" person made.

 

I dont agree with this at all. But I will give you and "Fight Hype" this: I do think they are reporting -- or allowing to be heard -- voices who may feel they are 'key' to "Team Pacquiao." That I will say.

Now, why is this being done, by "Fight Hype?"

That's a whole different issue, in my mind.

 

Yep.

We're talking about "journalism" here, not blogging.

Tim Smith isn't Ben Thompson. Ben almost certainly can get away with some things Tim can't -- or shouldn't, in my view -- be allowed to get away with.

But, based on some very new information presented by Sweet Jones a few posts ago, I will give Tim Smith something of a pass here. He seems to have been scammed, to be sure, but he did apparently actually see a real email. I do not feel he did his due diligence on the story, though, and I think that was a huge mistake that caused all of his subsequent problems. And, I personally question his motivation in running that story.

Now, if Ben Thompson ever wants to become Tim Smith, I don't think he's going to want to keep writing bogus "Koncz fired" stories. I know there are various versions of the story, but the bottom line is that the person who had the opportunity -- the only person who matters -- to fire Koncz apparently never did. That is, Koncz never seemingly was "fired" or "rehired." So, the story would be thus false and wrong.

Was there drama with Koncz? Seems like there was/is. Was he fired? Nope, not from any evidence I am seeing or that I find believable. So "Fight Hype's" headline/story thus appears wrong and false, and that happened because they tried to write that story/headline before all the leaves had settled.

Just like Tim Smith. And, I would say and always will say, that is a bad move that hurts your credibility as a writer and the site's/outlet's credibility that you represent.