The way some media outlets handle breaking news has inadvertently shed light on a key reason for declining public trust in journalism. A sports insider's account of reporting on ESPN's decision to part ways with NFL analyst Ryan Clark has drawn attention for what it reveals about the practice of "access journalism."
Andrew Marchand, a sports-media columnist for The Athletic, explained his decision to withhold reporting on Clark's departure from ESPN. Marchand stated on his podcast that he had prepared a story in February but received a strong indication about Clark's impending dismissal about a week before it happened. He explained that he waited to publish because "you want to allow ESPN to tell him first," and only proceeded when the story became "competitive," meaning another outlet was close to publishing.
This approach, where a reporter holds back information to adhere to an institution's preferred timeline, has been criticized as a form of public relations rather than traditional reporting. Critics argue that it allows powerful entities to control the news cycle, releasing information only when it suits them.
This dynamic was further illustrated by a situation involving ESPN's Adam Schefter and NFL coach Kyle Shanahan. After Shanahan suffered serious injuries in a car accident, reports emerged that ESPN and Schefter might have known the details but waited for official disclosure. Sports radio host Dan Patrick questioned the public value of such delayed reporting, suggesting it functions more like a controlled release of information by an institution than independent journalism.
The sequence involving Ryan Clark and ESPN, as detailed by Marchand, appears to support this critique. Despite Marchand's claim of having a story prepared months in advance, his initial report was brief and seemed rushed. His own account suggested he intentionally delayed publishing until another outlet, OutKick, independently confirmed the story and contacted ESPN. Marchand's comments indicated that this external pressure forced ESPN to accelerate its plans and inform Clark, after which Marchand published his report.
While Marchand defended his actions by emphasizing courtesy and attempting to allow an employee to hear significant news from their employer first, critics argue this goes beyond a simple courtesy. They contend that allowing a source to control the timing of publication fundamentally alters the nature of reporting, shifting the focus from uncovering and disseminating information to managing its release.
This practice of "access journalism" involves reporters receiving information from sources in exchange for predictability and favorable coverage. The institution or official provides information, and the reporter, in turn, is incentivized to protect the source's timeline and avoid overly critical scrutiny that could jeopardize future access. This arrangement can be particularly consequential when the subjects are not sports figures but government officials shaping national policy.
Newly released diary entries from Dr. Anthony Fauci, for example, have offered insight into the close relationships some journalists developed with him. These entries documented personal interactions and instances where Fauci reportedly provided questions for interviews. While friendly relationships can yield important information, critics argue that when access, ideological alignment, and personal friendship blur the lines, it erodes the necessary distance between reporter and subject.
This dynamic, where information is selectively leaked and strategically timed to benefit the provider, can lead to reporting that, while factually accurate, functions primarily as public relations. The public value of such "insider scoops" is often limited to speed, as many events like firings or contract extensions would eventually become public knowledge.
The First Amendment protects a free press to serve as a check on concentrated power, exposing information that powerful institutions wish to conceal. When reporters allow corporations and government officials to dictate the timing and framing of news, they risk surrendering this fundamental role.
Recent polling indicates a significant decline in public trust in media organizations, with only 28% of Americans expressing trust in newspapers, television, and radio to report the news fully, accurately, and fairly. While media outlets often cite external factors like polarization or social media for this decline, the practices of access journalism, as exemplified by the handling of the Ryan Clark story, also contribute to the erosion of public confidence.