An article so bad I had to write about it
Look. As a writer myself, I know we can get lazy sometimes.
There are times I make a stupid typo or forget to adjust a headline. I’ve even written articles without properly linking sources before. But I’m a small-time fish in a big pond. When I make a mistake, it’s usually just shrugged off.
This, however, was another thing entirely.
The Daily Faceoff is one of the bigger hockey publications in the world. They’ve employed everyone from NHL insider Frank Seravalli to Matt Larkin. Frank himself is one of the top insiders in the entire NHL. So, to see something this arrogantly, confidently wrong in a publication of that size was a bit of a shock to me.
What am I talking about?
I’m talking about the article briefly titled “The Red Wings aren’t all in enough, and it could cost them a playoff spot”. This might be a nitpick, but this title alone is so SEO-laden I half-expected the words Yzerman, Larkin, etc to be in it. The URL is somehow even worse:
So, already, we’ve got a few yellow flags. Not enough where my alarm bells went off, but enough where I’m curious.
Then I got to the content of the article.
Brace yourself for this one
On the surface, you might read these paragraphs and think it’s a perfectly reasonable take. After all, it’s been a while since the Wings have been to the playoffs. It was a surprise that they didn’t target a 2C, either (except they did and, per FRANK SERAVALLI OF THE DAILY FACEOFF, the market never materialized).
So, already, we’ve got some blatant conjecture immediately fact-checked by this author’s own publication. Don’t worry, though, it gets worse. I want to touch on this quote in particular:
“The Red Wings weren’t one of the teams rumored to be on St. Louis Blues’ center Robert Thomas.”
Here’s Elliotte Friedman of 32 Thoughts directly linking Robert Thomas and the Red Wings in an article from March 11th:
Here’s another article, this one from Nick Kypreos in February, linking Robert Thomas to the Red Wings:
Robert Thomas and the Red Wings have been linked by everyone from The Athletic to Octopus Thrower. This is extremely accessible, widely-known information. So why, then, did DFO completely contradict this statement? Nothing in the article seems to suggest that the author has evidence to the contrary. Nothing they’ve shared suggests the Red Wings did nothing to add during the deadline.
So why? Why write this article?
An issue of hubris
I won’t say that the national media has it out for the Red Wings. While it’s a preposterous statement on its own, it’s just simply not true. If the media has it out for any team, it’s the Toronto Maple Leafs, but that’s a discussion for another day. What this does tell me, however, is that many reporters that choose to cover the NHL don’t possess anything more than cursory knowledge of their topic.
I get it, believe me. If you asked me to write an article about, say, the Montreal Canadiens, I’d be writing about how the pressure is mounting and how there are concerns with the development of prospects. I have no actual knowledge about how the Habs are developing their prospects — just the vibes I gather from past players like Alex Galchenyuk and Jesperi Kotkaniemi.
After doing a bit of research, I realized how laughably wrong I was. After all, Lane Hutson just won the Calder. Ivan Demidov looks like a Calder finalist. But that’s the thing: I didn’t write this article because I don’t know enough about the topic.
This is a much larger issue among the national NHL writing community, I think. It’s understandable, too: how do you expect a reporter to know information about every single team? But, speaking from an editorial perspective, that’s why you have editors. That’s why you have a team of people parsing your articles and pointing out flaws.
This Robert Thomas thing is a no-brainer. It’s easily fixable with a cursory once-over.
I don’t know what goes on at DFO. I don’t have any insider knowledge. What I do know, however, is that one of the biggest hockey publications in the world wrote an entire article based on a false premise.
It begs the question of what else has been published that’s patently false.
Anyway, I think I’ve said my piece. Have a great weekend, everyone!