http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/stor...&id=3270983

 

a good article about how much was known in lockerrooms about steroids.

 

However, when I read things like this, or basically any coverage of the steroid era is how much the media is getting a free pass IMO. Look, did I expect baseball journalists to automatically know steroids were a major influence, no, but they should have known something was up and dug deeper.

 

I think it's shameful that ESPN (a partner with MLB in many ways) doesn't take a look at itself and other outlets for turning a blind eye. after the latest round of hearings it seems every ESPN baseball expert Mike & Mike had on said the Mitchell report was a bad idea. IMO of course they do, it makes them look bad that basically an investigation of a small portion of baseball unearthed so many names.

 

I don't know, it just drives me crazy and medias ignorance of the problem is a major part of the story being ignored.

 

Does anyone know of any pieces about the medias coverage? I would be interested to see some if I'm missing them

I believe the Mitchell Report has 600 different articles it cites that mentioned the ballooning problem

One little blurb i did find in that article that I think goes against your contention here...

Mitchell also lists 85 newspaper and magazine articles published between 1987 and 1998 that discussed suspicions of increasing steroid use in baseball, right up until an Associated Press reporter noticed a bottle of androstenedione in McGwire's locker and MLB was forced to address the issue.

Could the media have done more? Always. But it was articles in the media that led to things like the fans in Boston chanting "Steroids" at Canseco all the way back in 88 in the ALCS. It was a media member who wrote about the Andro bottle in McGwire's locker and caused a lot of other people to go nuts over how the media had violated Mac's privacy.

thanks, didn't know that about the Mitchell report, good to see that there was actually some coverage about it.