Greg Oden (via Getty Images)
Greg Oden is a sore subject among Portland Trail Blazers fans, to put it mildly. Fans considered him the final piece of a Big Three, along with Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge, that would win the Blazers their first NBA title in three decades. Except Oden’s 7-foot body broke down – so did Roy’s – and slowly the fans were forced to abandon their lofty dreams.
On Wednesday, web magazine Grantland ran a profile on Oden written by Mark Titus, his longtime friend and college teammate. The piece captivated me, largely because it pulled the curtain back on a press-shy player who has dealt with and continues to deal with an incredible amount of adversity for a 26-year-old.
While I enjoyed reading his piece, Titus’ work left me with several questions – particularly from a journalistic standpoint – that I felt would be worthwhile to address here. I’ll skip the argument about whether Oden came across as a sympathetic figure or whether he came across as making excuses.
1. ARTICLE SHOULD HAVE REVEALED TITUS LET ODEN READ ADVANCE COPY
In response to a question from Sports Illustrated’s Chris Ballard, Titus wrote on Twitter he let Oden read the article before it was printed. This might have seemed innocuous to Grantland’s general readership, but to me, as a journalist, this made me pause. Providing Oden the story beforehand implied he had say so over what appeared in the final article. Typically, providing a source a copy of a story prior to its publishing is a no-no, except in rare instances for accuracy’s sake.
This particular piece raised some interesting 21st century questions: If you have the opportunity to interview a celebrity who does not give interviews do you agree to acquiesce their requests to see the article ahead of time in order to get the exclusive? Also: Do you even worry about such an ethical dilemma if it means passing up hundreds of thousands of page views?
I mentioned my concerns on Twitter and Titus, admirably, responded:
@CajunTomato It was my idea. Wanted it to be his story. Piece was always going to be biased- we’ve been friends forever. No need to hide it
— Mark Titus (@clubtrillion) May 9, 2012
I can understand both sides of the debate here. It’s an old school vs. new school argument and there is plenty of gray area. However, I do not agree with Titus revealing this nugget of information on Twitter. He was upfront with readers about his biases with regard to Oden – something I respect. Why, then, did he not let readers know Oden had a chance to inspect the article before publication? Alas, I did not ask him this question. Regardless, Titus should have mentioned in a footnote that he provided Oden an advance copy. That type of information is the reason Grantland has footnotes.
2. TWO SIDES TO EVERY STORY – EVEN IN PROFILE PIECE
I would be pissed if I were on of the Trail Blazers’ medical trainers. “Oden on Oden” threw them under the bus. Not only did the piece mention them as one of the worst, if not the worst, in the NBA but it openly wondered what the center’s career could have been had he worked with more competent trainers in Oklahoma City – the franchise that selected after Portland in the 2007 draft. The problem: Titus provided no attribution for this other than kinesiologist Zig Ziegler’s extensive account of his work with Oden and the Blazers. (Ziegler is charged with financial fraud in Arizona.)
I asked Titus on Twitter about his attribution or lack thereof with regards to remarks he made on the Blazers’ medical staff:
@CajunTomato 1) Hearing stuff from all of my basketball relationships 2) This article (I linked to it in the piece): bit.ly/HnxoHr
— Mark Titus (@clubtrillion) May 9, 2012
I would have liked to have seen clearer attribution on Titus’ remarks about the Blazers’ medical personnel (i.e., league sources said). I also would have preferred the Blazers had a chance to answer to the remarks. It’s Oden’s story, sure, but Titus insinuated they were culpable for the player’s medical woes. Once again, a footnote featuring a comment from the Blazers or a brief sidebar would have been nice. Or even a no comment from the Blazers’ organization.
Oden’s comments on his psychiatrist, who later became the team’s psychiatrist, also seemed ripe for a follow-up interview. He made it sound like the psychiatrist violated patient-doctor confidentiality. The organization or psychiatrist should have been provided an opportunity to answer to this charge.
“Oden on Oden” left me pondering this question: What responsibility does the author of a profile piece on an individual have to tell a story from both sides, as opposed to reflecting the interview subject’s point of view? Do the same rules of fairness that exist for a hard news story also apply for a profile piece like the one Titus wrote on Oden?
3. WHAT ABOUT THE FANS?
The Blazer fans I talked with about Titus’ piece harped on how negatively it portrayed Portland. For instance, Oden mentioned how difficult it was being young, rich, and black in a city like Portland, where black residents make up fewer than two percent of its total population. Yet, Oden’s comments on Portland could be transferred to any city with an NBA team, even metropolises like L.A. or New York, according to Titus. Whether he realized it or not, his dig on Portland came across as a slap in the face to many Blazers fans.
Titus addressed such concerns via Twitter:
@Gargantujuan I don’t think he realizes that every city is bad if you’re young and rich. Not sure what makes being black in Portland special
— Mark Titus (@clubtrillion) May 9, 2012
I know Blazers fans who regarded Oden as a Top 3 center in the NBA long after his promising start to the 2009-2010 season. They fervently supported him. Perhaps the rest of the basketball world viewed Oden as some sort of sad joke. But Portland fans still believed, perhaps blindly so, in his promise. Oden made no mention of the fans during his interview with Titus – or more accurately, Titus’ story made no mention of Oden thanking the fans.
Some Blazer fans picked up on this:
@GeorgeSchroeder FYI didn’t mean to be so harsh on Blazers. Just pointing out facts & things Greg told me. He said Blazers fans rule BTW.
— Mark Titus (@clubtrillion) May 9, 2012
Also:
@stevenkirby7 Not sure why so many of you think Greg has anything bad to say about PDX fans. The issue is w/ organization. Fans are awesome.
— Mark Titus (@clubtrillion) May 9, 2012
Titus’ omission of the fans puzzled me. Their support, surely, was a bright spot for Oden during his injury-plagued five years in Portland. Acknowledging them on Twitter – Titus has around 40,000 followers – and doing so in the article are two completely different things, though. Titus’ stated goal was to humanize his friend, but, in neglecting mention of Blazer fans, he likely failed to endear Oden to the people who cared for and suffered with him the most the past five years.
