NBC News posts extended interview with Sandusky; still doesn’t include omitted quote

Posted on by

Saw this Tweet from NBC News: RockCenterNBC ‪#Sandusky‬ defense may rest Weds. Watch extended clip of ‪#RockCenter‬ intvu w/ Bob Costas: http://nbcnews.to/M45ZP4

The “extended” video runs nearly nine minutes. It appears most of it is what originally aired. I don’t recall hearing some of the passage regarding Jerry Sandusky’s relationship with Joe Paterno.

However, this portion of the interview does not include this Sandusky quote that somehow didn’t make the original broadcast:

And I didn’t go around seeking out every young person for sexual needs that I’ve helped.  There are many that I didn’t have — I hardly had any contact with who I have helped in many, many ways.

Again, why didn’t NBC post audio from that exchange with Bob Costas?

Still have to hear back from anybody at NBC News.

 

Posted in NBC

Forget time issue: MSNBC should have run full Sandusky interview

Posted on by

I still can’t fathom why NBC or one of its outlets didn’t air the entire Jerry Sandusky interview back in November.

It turns out only eight minutes of Bob Costas’ interview aired on Rock Center with Brian Williams. The actual interview lasted more than 20 minutes.

It included this quote from Sandusky that got edited out:

And I didn’t go around seeking out every young person for sexual needs that I’ve helped.  There are many that I didn’t have — I hardly had any contact with who I have helped in many, many ways.

I’m not sure how you remove any quote in which Sandusky mentions the phrase “sexual needs.”

There were other interesting, relevant passages such as Sandusky’s relationship with Joe Paterno and his mysterious decision to retire in 1999. They didn’t air either.

I don’t buy any notion of a time constraint. If Williams’ show was pressed for time, then the interview should have aired in full on MSNBC and MSNBC.com. In a day and age of multiple 24/7 platforms, there should be no such thing as a time constraint.

Also, this was the interview of the year, given the timing and magnitude of the story. There’s a historical record involved here.

What would have CNN have done? I’m betting if Anderson Cooper has this interview, it airs in it entirety.

The public deserved to hear the entire interview. The prosecutor’s office apparently feels the same way.

Still waiting for a comment from NBC News.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why didn’t NBC air entire Sandusky interview? Potentially damaging passage edited out

Posted on by

It turns out there was more to Bob Costas’ interview with Jerry Sandusky than what originally aired last November.

From MSNBC:

Pennsylvania prosecutors may seek to use unaired portions of an NBC News interview with Jerry Sandusky in November in which the former Penn State defensive coach said, “I didn’t go around seeking out every young person for sexual needs that I’ve helped.”

The unaired portions of the “Rock Center with Brian Williams” interview– conducted by NBC Sports host Bob Costas — could become an issue this week as Sandusky’s lawyers start presenting their defense to charges that he repeatedly abused 10 young boys over a 15 year period.

CenterDaily News.com has the full transcript of the interview. It includes this passage:

BOB COSTAS:

19:00:28:00    But isn’t what you’re just describing the classic MO of many pedophiles?  And that is that they gain the trust of young people, they don’t necessarily abuse every young person.  There were hundreds, if not thousands of young boys you came into contact with, but there are allegations that at least eight of them were victimized.  Many people believe there are more to come.  So it’s entirely possible that you could’ve helped young boy A in some way that was not objectionable while horribly taking advantage of young boy B, C, D, and E.  Isn’t that possible?

JERRY SANDUSKY:

19:01:01:00    Well — you might think that.  I don’t know.  (LAUGHS) In terms of — my relationship with so many, many young people.  I would — I would guess that there are many young people who would come forward.  Many more young people who would come forward and say that my methods and — and what I had done for them made a very positive impact on their life.  And I didn’t go around seeking out every young person for sexual needs that I’ve helped.  There are many that I didn’t have — I hardly had any contact with who I have helped in many, many ways.

Why did that passage wind up on the cutting room floor?

CNN’s Anderson Cooper is among those wondering the same thing. He said in a tweet:

@andersoncooper

I can’t believe the #Sandusky statement to Bob Costas that never aired. Did it sound as shocking to you as it did to me?! @AC360

More tomorrow.

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in NBC

The beat: Beleaguered Schilling earned $114 million for pitching; Will any writers take SI buyout offer?; Simpson’s winning line

Posted on by

Curt Schilling’s problems have gotten so bad ESPN granted him a leave of absence.

I’m not completely familiar with all the legal issues surrounding his video game company, 38 Studios, which has filed for bankruptcy. However, I did find this interesting stat about Schilling:

According to Baseballreference.com, Schilling earned $114 million during his baseball career. And there had to be several million more in endorsements.

All of which begs the question: How much money does a person need?

Changes: It has been disclosed that Sports Illustrated is making some changes to better integrate its magazine and on-line operations. It will result in a handful (less than 10) of staff reductions. Buyouts are being offered, and it will be interesting to see whether any of the writers will grab one.

Bloomberg reports:

Terry McDonell, editor of Time Inc.’s Sports Group, said in a telephone interview yesterday that he is looking to reduce positions of editors and reporters with buyouts being offered through June 21.

“Everything is about money eventually and being more efficient,” he said. Although Sports Illustrated, which has 210 editorial employees, is “very profitable,” the reductions will allow the magazine to become even more so, he said.

Idiot patrol: I hate calling attention to idiots. However, I did like Webb Simpson’s line after some goofball interrupted his award ceremony Sunday.

“Enjoy the jail cell, pal,” Simpson said. Well played.

 

 

 

 

Ratings report: Despite Tiger struggles, U.S. Open still up; another big number for Game 3

Posted on by

Ah, what might have been for NBC and the U.S. Open. Imagine the rating if Tiger Woods actually had resembled Tiger Woods Sunday. Instead, his brutal start had him on the missing person’s report during the meat of the coverage.

As a result, we got a heavy dose of the plodding Jim Furyk and a U.S. Open where par was indeed a good score. It didn’t necessarily add up to compelling golf, but thanks to the primetime window, people still tuned in.

The numbers from NBC:

Sunday’s 6.5-hour (4-10:30 p.m. ET) final-round coverage of the U.S. Open on NBC delivered an 6.6 rating and 13 share, up 29% vs. last year (5.1/12).

The combined Saturday-Sunday overnight was a 6.1/13, up 39 % vs. last year (4.4/11) and the best since 2008 (6.8/15).

Despite competition from the NBA Finals, the rating increased every half hour from 8:30 p.m. ET on, peaking at an 8.1 from 10-10:30 p.m. ET. From 7 p.m. ET on, the rating never dipped below a 6.9.

Yes, there was a finals game last night. Another big number for game 3 on ABC.

From ESPN:

Through three games, the 2012 NBA Finals on ABC – Miami Heat vs. Oklahoma City Thunder – is the highest-rated series since 2004 and the second highest-rated ever on ABC based on overnight ratings, according to Nielsen. The Finals is averaging an 11.3 overnight rating, up 5 percent from a 10.8 last year (Dallas Mavericks vs. Miami Heat).

NBA Finals Game 3 – Miami defeated Oklahoma City 91-85 – generated a 10.4 overnight rating, peaking with a 14.7 rating from 10:30 to 10:45 p.m. ET. The game generated a 41.9 rating in Oklahoma City and a 29.6 rating in Miami.

 

 

Real Sports Interview: Jackson glad NY never called; Says Knicks ‘a clumsy team’

Posted on by

Andrea Kremer catches up with Phil Jackson in the latest edition of Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel (HBO, Tuesday, 10 p.m.).

At age 66 and one year removed from his final season with the Lakers, Jackson doesn’t appear overly eager to leave his Montana retreat. Judging from the view, would you?

Here’s excerpts from the interview.

On the possibility of coaching the Knicks:

ANDREA KREMER: You wouldn’t have taken the Knick job?

PHIL JACKSON: No.  I wouldn’t take…

ANDREA KREMER: Why?  This is—the ties to this job go back as far as your whole career.

PHIL JACKSON: Yeah, it’s great.  It’s great.

ANDREA KREMER: And you’ve always said New York is special to you.

PHIL JACKSON: New York is special.

ANDREA KREMER: Why do you dismiss it then, possibility, even?

PHIL JACKSON: Well, it just– there’s just too much work that has to be done with that team.  You know?  It’s just not quite– it’s clumsy.  It’s a little bit of a clumsy team.  It’s not, you know.—

ANDREA KREMER: What’s “clumsy” mean?

PHIL JACKSON: Well, they don’t fit together well.   Stoudemire doesn’t fit together well with Carmelo.  Stoudemire’s really good player.  But he’s gotta play in a certain system and a way.  Carmelo has to be a better passer. And the ball can’t stop every time it hits his hands. They need to have someone come in that can kinda blend that group together.

ANDREA KREMER: But wouldn’t you have been the perfect person to come in and blend all that talent together?  You sort of have a good history of that.

PHIL JACKSON Yeah.  Well, it didn’t happen.

On perception the game has passed him by:

ANDREA KREMER: Do you think there’s some perception out there that, you know, you are done, you’re– your health and even though you’ve…

PHIL JACKSON The game– has passed me by.

ANDREA KREMER: Do you think that’s what the perception is of you?

PHIL JACKSON: I think that’s possible.

ANDREA KREMER: Is it true?

PHIL JACKSON :Well, maybe it is.

ANDREA KREMER: Well, what do you think?

PHIL JACKSON: Well, I have never– I mean, you know, as much as I’ve been around this game, it doesn’t happen. The game doesn’t pass a person by.

On his final game:

PHIL JACKSON : It was humbling. Not the way I wanna see my players behave on the court. Andrew particularly, you know, took his jersey off and walked off the court in a way that was, you know, sense of arrogance. The game itself was bad enough as it went.So it– it was kinda like– so this is how it’s gonna end, huh? This is an interesting closure to chapter of basketball.

ANDREA KREMER : Everything you just described, the way the game ended, the way the players behaved, it was almost a repudiation of everything that you stood for.

PHIL JACKSON : Yeah. It really was.

 

Still a Johnny Miller fan even if people are getting tired of act

Posted on by

I’ve always had Johnny Miller on my list of must-watch analysts. By that I mean, if Miller is doing analysis of the Springfield Putt-Putt Championship, I’m watching.

He’s going through Lincoln’s hat? You’ve got to be kidding me.

However, after more than 20 years of Miller being the voice of golf for NBC, I’m sensing some fatigue. People are starting to grow tired of his act.

John Strege of Golfdigest.com did a post Saturday noting some negative comments about Miller via Twitter. Here’s a passage:

NBC’s Johnny Miller was eviscerated in the Twitter world throughout the  telecast of the third round, criticism coming from all quarters — fans,  players, counterparts, even a player’s wife.

“How does Johnny Miller have a job when he speaks such nonsense???” Geoff  Ogilvy’s wife Juli wrote on Twitter.

Peter Kostis, a CBS analyst, posted this when Miller called Graeme McDowell  “a driving genius,” who then drove it into the trees: “He’s a driving genius!  Whack, club hits ball, whack, ball hits tree, oops.”

Colt Knost, who missed the cut, weighed in: “According to Johnny miller every  bad shot is BC of nerves!!  There is such a thing as a bad swing. Sorry for  being human”

Then this from Tommy Biershenk, who must have missed Chris Berman’s inane  play on his name the day before, something to do with beer and shank: “Am I the  only one that can do without Johnny Miller? #Mr.Negative.”

I found these anti-Miller Tweets from Sunday.

griffin_flesch8 JohnnyMiller could shoot -18 around Olympic right now from the tips if he wanted to

DanLevyThinks “You have no idea how good that feels, folks.” JohnnyMiller ONCE AGAIN makes it about him.

KegsnEggs JohnnyMiller on winning the US Open: “I’d tell you how good it feels, but you peasants wouldn’t understand.”

@jenny_suh JohnnyMiller is such a great commentator ~ said nobody, EVER!

BKleinGolfweek JohnnyMiller picks on a teen to criticize, taking Beau Hossler to task for over-reaching his goals. Nice going on Fathers Day, Johnny.

Joe Posnanski‏@JPosnanski Nobody ever seems to make the one JohnnyMiller calls “an easy putt.”

Not sure what to make of the reaction other than people simply get tired of hearing the same voice for so many years. In the eyes of his critics, Miller has veered off the road of being refreshingly candid.

I’m still in his camp. I love his candor and his unpredictable say-anything nature.

Here’s Johnny from yesterday’s telecast:

“Phil and Tiger look like they’ve turned back the clock to when they were about five (years old).” On the struggles of Mickelson and Woods.

“That is so dead. That is incredibly dead. That is the end of his chances.” On Padraig Harrington’s approach shot on 18, which landed buried in a bunker left of the green. Harrington was +2 at the time.

“I don’t know what the heck he is reading there.” On Graeme McDowell’s final putt on 18 which would have tied him with Webb Simpson and forced a playoff.

“He just fell apart is what it amounts to, at 42 years old and wanting it so badly…You’ve got to feel for him. He sure deserves to win because he works so hard in every aspect.” On Jim Furyk’s approach shot on No. 18 that went into the left bunker.

It still works for me.

The bottom line for Miller is that he turned 65 in April. I don’t see him doing this job forever. He has other interests.

So we also should enjoy Miller while we can. There never will be another like him.

 

 

 

 

The decision: Game 3 or U.S. Open tonight? Tiger or LeBron?

Posted on by

So what are you watching tonight? Game 3 of the NBA Finals or the final round of the U.S. Open?

We have been handed this delicious Father’s Day bounty thanks to the Open being in San Francisco.

In a brilliant decision beginning with the 2010 tournament at Pebble Beach, NBC decided to air these West Coast Opens in prime time. The last group of Jim Furyk and Graeme McDowell goes off at 6:10 p.m ET. That means the final putt won’t go down until 10:30-11 p.m. ET.

I love it, and so many other golf fans. Nothing like enjoying a beautiful day and then coming home to watch some big-time golf.

But there’s more. Also on the menu is Game 3 of the NBA Finals airing on ABC. Big game to see if LeBron James and the Heat can take control of the series at home.

The first two games have done huge ratings, and they only will get bigger.

For NBC’s sake, it would help if Tiger Woods gets back into the hunt quickly in the fourth round. He tees off at 4:50 p.m. If he makes a charge, people will tune in, especially the casual and even non-golf fan.

Either way, it should be a great night. My remote is in for a workout.

 

 

Sunday bookshelf: Fleck beats Hogan; one of sports’ greatest upsets

Posted on by

With the U.S. Open at Olympic Club this week, there has been plenty of talk about one of the greatest upsets in sports history, not just golf: Jack Fleck, a little-known club pro, beating the great Ben Hogan in an 18-hole playoff to win the 1956 U.S. Open at Olympic.

You can get the complete story from Neil Sagebiel’s new book, The Longest Shot. Bill Scheft from the New York Times gave the book a terrific review. He writes:

“The Longest Shot” is the first book from Neil Sagebiel, the founder and editor of Armchair Golf Blog, and he makes a strong bid to create shelf space for himself alongside 21st-century golf literati like John Feinstein, Mark Frost and Don Van Natta Jr. Sagebiel takes his time, working leisurely as golf demands, but does a thorough job. And his narrative pace during the last hour of that final round, as he bounces back and forth between Hogan in the locker room and Fleck on the course, may have a rhythm more suited to a tennis rally, but here it aces.

In an interview at Geoffshackelford.com, Sagebiel talks about connecting with Fleck, who is 90. From the post:

GS: Tell us a bit about how you approached researching the book and how much access you had to Fleck?
NS: Jack did not have a good history with writers and the press, so I had to gain his trust. I’m a freelancer, not a traditional sportswriter or golf journalist. I told him I had no agenda. I just wanted to tell the story. We talked a lot on the phone and I’d see him two or three times a year at Champions Tour events where the legends played. I hung out with him. I caddied sometimes, ate in the player dining rooms. I also got to be around the other old-timers, hear their stories, pick their brains. Early on I went to the USGA in New Jersey to do extensive research. Later I traveled to the Olympic Club on a family visit to California and spent four days with Jack at his home and home golf course in Fort Smith.