Letter to Sports Editors to prevent employees from voting on ANY BASEBALL AWARDS

Letter I wrote to Bill Adee and other sports editors re: BANNING BASEBALL WRITERS FROM VOTING ON BASEBALL AWARDS Sept. 14. 2006

• Mr. Bill Adee
• Sports Editor
• The Chicago Tribune
• 435 N. Michigan Ave.Chicago, Illinois 60611-4024

Dear Mr. Adee: I write you on the urgent matter of newspaper employees voting on high stakes baseball awards, the Cy Young, MVP, Rookie of the year and Hall of Fame Award. As you know, with millions of dollars at stake, many newspapers have already stopped their writers from voting, citing ethics concerns. I’m asking that you contribute to the healthier future of baseball by joining with them. The main reasons: the BBWAA operates in secret--there’s no way to tell if voters are qualified; the few ‘rules’ they have are openly violated by their voters, examples of which I’ll list. You may have heard Randy Harvey’s clear position on this. From the transcript of his interview on NPR’s “On the Media,” November 18, 2005:

• RANDY HARVEY: “I’m a little insulted that editors around the country allow their sports writers to do this, because I don’t think any editor in any self-respecting newspaper would allow the people who cover the courts to vote on who should be on the Supreme Court.

Brooke Gladstone: So, Randy, if not sports journalists, then who do you think should be determining things like the MVP Awards and the Hall of Fame inductees?

• RANDY HARVEY: Well. I think it should come from baseball. The Academy Awards is a good example. The movie industry decides on the movie awards. Well, the baseball industry should decide. The Hall of Fame, I think, should be voted on by living members of the Hall of Fame. People who are in the Hall of Fame should decide who they want to let into their club. I think for Most Valuable Player, then maybe it should be managers.

Brooke Gladstone: Well, that’ll be an objective group.

• RANDY HARVEY: I don’t know why they wouldn’t be objective. The players have bonuses written in their contracts for making the All Starteams, and I think they do a pretty good job of selecting the All Starteam. The football coaches vote on the CNN/USA Today Football poll, and you could make the same claim of them, that they’re not going to be very objective or they’re going to have agendas. But it’s amazing how much their poll ends up looking like the AP poll or now the new poll, the Harris Poll. I think we’re quite good at what we do, at reporting and analyzing baseball games, but I’m not sure we’re any better at evaluating talent than the players themselves or the owners and general managers. I wouldn’t want baseball players voting on the Pulitzer Prize winners, so I’m not sure why we should be voting on baseball awards.” (End of interview) Mr. Harvey, now Sports Editor of the Los Angeles Times, was at the time of the interview Assistant Managing Editor of Sports for the Baltimore Sun.

Why are awards still decided in secrecy at this late date? 3 reasons: It takes a bit of time to change things, and most people are busy.

• But Tim Sullivan of the San Diego Union-Tribune observes:“Enlisting journalists to vote on awards is, foremost, a means of generating publicity. Much as it might appear to flatter your intelligence, the actual goal is to appropriate your ink. In return for recurring ego gratification, reliable subject matter and recognized influence, media types provide priceless amounts of free advertising.” (From his 12/16/05 column)

The BBWAA’s first job is to protect the writers’ jobs (per Scott Miller). Though voting on baseball awards shouldn’t affect their job, it’s a source of power, openly and strangely coveted. And, of course, there’s a lot of potential money for writers whether in the near or long term in book deals and other endeavors including directorships of the Hall of Fame. It’s a fraternity in power with long standing personal ties to corporate officials at MLB and the Hall of Fame, both highly private groups. Jobs and glory pass among the intertwined therein. Regarding my earlier reference to the group’s lax procedures:

• *In 2005, the NL MVP had no Atlanta voters--the 2 votes were farmed out to other markets (one to an ESPN.com employee). The Atlanta Journal Constitution prohibits its writers from voting on this award.
• One of the top 2 contenders for the award happened to be with the Atlanta Braves. The BBWAA swears by its saintly objectivity, yet assigns voters based on perceived geographic perceptions--pretty much saying they acknowledge geographical bias. It became known the ESPN.com employee from Philadelphia did not vote for the Atlanta player.

• Jeff Schultz, AJC beat writer for the Braves, said he would’ve voted for Andruw Jones. (Said on XM MLB Channel 175 on November 15, 2005). AJC sports editor Ronnie Ramos said this was an example of why his writers can’t vote--because they become the news.

*One of BBWAA’s longtime members, Scott Miller, said on November 10, 2005 on XM MLB Channel 175: “Chris Carpenter deserved the NL Cy Young award in part as recognition for lifetime achievement.”

• The rules clearly state the award is to be given for only 1 year’s performance. Here is devoted BBWAA member and previous office holder casually saying he advocates breaking the rules, and obviously fears no consequence.

Miller also says, the BBWAA’s “first job is to protect newspaper writers.” Why is such a group involved in high stakes baseball awards? Awards like the AL Cy Young or MVP are easier to manipulate--there are only 28 voters, so every position means a lot.

• *Then you have open disrespect and dishonesty in BBWAA command, Jack O’Connell, as his own words describe. In discussing his 1995 vote for AL MVP, he says,

“I’d like to think character didn’t make a difference in my vote, but it could have.Subconsciously, it might have.” from the Boston Globe, November 17, 1995.

• The guidelines for the vote include, “general character, disposition,loyalty, and effort.” O’Connell freely states he hopes he didn’t follow the rule, BUT he might’ve, subconsciously. (The voters want you to know they have special minds).

• The sight of award hopefuls waiting by the phone in hushed anticipation with family members for a call that may never come springs to mind. Or the lined face of a veteran who bursts into sobs if the phone does ring. Do they deserve the capriciousness expressed by Jack O’Connell (and others I’ve heard)?

*Another very guarded voter is Ken Rosenthal. He says the system is just fine, but offers nothing to substantiate his strong feeling. In the January 27, 2006 Sporting News, he says, “Evidence is not required to support a conclusion. Voters go on facts; they go on instincts.” Contradiction and arrogance. He says they can say whatever they want without proof; but don’t worry, they go on facts AND instincts. This is a jumble of meaningless words. Do players deserve this? *On January 13, 2006, discussing on XM why ballots are kept secret, Rosenthal said it’s really the HOF that doesn’t want ballots made public, that HOF maintains “a secret society.” But, since writer/voters can become HOF directors, there’s no separation.

• *On January 13, 2006 on XM, Tim Kurkjian said awards voting was the voters’ “reward” for doing their job. Really? He also said,
• “MLB.com writers were stomping their feet” at the last BBWAAmeeting, begging to be allowed to vote. Kurkjian said “the regular writers” felt MLB.com writers were “too close to the teams.” Interesting that MLB.com actually has 10 writers eligible to vote forthe HOF (as honorary members of BBWAA), and the 10 published their ballots on MLB.com on 1/7/06.

*On January 10, 2006 Bob Ryan of the Boston Globe said he manipulated his HOF vote in hopes of reducing someone else’s chances (others say they’ve done the same). He continued his comments on XM saying, "THE MANIPULATION & JEALOUS GUARDING OF POWER BY TODAY's BBWAA IS CRIMINAL.”

• Ryan also said he was “surprised more New York area voters didn’t vote for Goose Gossage.” This shows 2 things--that some voters assume others have a geographical bias, (but in this case disproves the belief New York area voters do so.) However, ignored in all this is a fact that didn’t exist when this group started giving out awards: today many writers are affiliated and financially connected with ESPN or Fox, and their editorial opinions may be adjusted to facilitate success within those large networks. This is just a reality--the writer may see newspaper readership losing ground and seeks to secure his future. Also, writers and potential award recipients change geographic locations throughout their career. Scattered throughout the country are perhaps enough voters with a bias against 1 market or team and hence its player to influence the outcome of the AL awards which have only 28 voters.

*On November 9, 2005, 2 voters for the AL Cy Young awards allowed their reasoning to be published in the NY Times in a Tyler Kepner article. Wondering why Mariano Rivera didn’t receive more recognition, Kepner states, Rivera's "dominance seems to have had a numbing effect on voters."

• He cites the reasoning of one of the voters who left him off the ballot entirely, Sheldon Ocker of the Akron Beacon-Journal: “SHELDON OCKER: "THAT'S PROBABLY ANOTHER THING THAT HURTS HIM: HE'S HAD SO MANY GOOD SEASONS, THAT, WELL, IT'S JUST ANOTHER GOOD SEASON FOR RIVERA. FOR HIM TO GET ANYBODY'S ATTENTION OUTSIDE OF NEW YORK NOW, HE'D PROBABLY HAVE TO SAVE 65 GAMES." Tom Verducci later called the remarks “embarrassing” on a WFAN radio interview, but there were no further consequences I could ascertain. The voter openly states he didn’t vote for someone because he’s good all the time (even though he’s never won a BBWAA award).

*There are situations where newspapers hold ownership in teams, such as in Chicago and Boston. To the best of my knowledge, the papers’ reporters also vote on the teams’ players. The papers’ reporters may also be involved in, among other things, book deals with player(s). There’s a book now being written about a popular active player by a voter/reporter from the local city paper, who’s made it clear for some time he thinks his player/subject should win a prestigious award. He may be correct, but he also stands to gain financially if the player wins the award. In explaining his reasons for quitting baseball awards voting, Tim Sullivan wrote in his 12/16/05 column:

• “I shouldn't be casting ballots that can trigger contractual bonuses or endorsement opportunities for athletes I might have occasion to interview.“In general, it is inappropriate for reporters to vote on awards and rankings; doing so could reasonably be seen as compromising their objectivity," the Los Angeles Times declared in ethics guidelines published July 13. "For critics, whose job is to express opinions on the merits of creative works, awards voting is less troublesome.

"Nevertheless, any staff member invited to vote for an award must first receive the permission of the managing editor. No staff member who votes for an award – whether in sports, the arts or any other area – may be part of the paper's coverage of that award." (Sullivan continues)

• “Faced with an eroding electorate, the Baseball Writers' Association of America formed a committee during the recent winter meetings in Dallas to explore awards voting alternatives.

To some baseball writers, this heralds a looming crisis. To me, it represents an inevitable reckoning. To Peter Schmuck, president of the writers association, it is a curious irony. Because Schmuck works for the Baltimore Sun, he is unable to vote.”

• Mr. Sullivan states the obvious. There’s no defense for continuing the current BBWAA voting system.

On August 15, 2005, Rick Swanson of Baseball Almanac asks, “Since there are 825 members in this exclusive club today, why did only 516 cast ballots in the last Hall of Fame election (2005)?” He wonders if the 309 who failed to vote should forfeit their voting privilege. (Mr. Swanson wrote this in his online column, “Around the Horn”). The point is, over one third of the self-appointed electorate apparently skipped out on the procedure. In published reports, the BBWAA says 520 ballots were cast in the 2006 HOF, an increase of 4 ballots. I’ve spent much time searching, but can’t find out how many members the group now has.

• Sports television now openly campaigns for their choices for awards. Why should newspapers pretend they make the decisions?

Mr. Adee, I’ve no way of knowing your own position on this matter, but thought it might be helpful to gather these facts on paper for your consideration or that of your colleagues. And to address the issue before the next round of awards, not after. The BBWAA’s procedures are an insult to newspaper reporters, other media outlets, fans and most of all the eligible players. I hope your newspaper will consider abstaining from participation. Thank-you for your interest and for taking time to read this letter. Cordially, Susan Mullen Baseball fan

• P.S. “Randy Johnson's contract bumps up $2.5 million for 2003 if he wins the Cy Young Award.” (This fact written October 5, 2002 by Peter Gammons, ESPN.com)

Tweet Stumbleupon StumbleUpon