After Sunday’s game, an emotional Manny Machado initially denied chucking his bat toward the Oakland A’s infield intentionally. There wasn’t a person in the world who believed him — not after seeing the downward spiral of events that began on Friday night and eventually led to his outburst two days later.
In response to the PR crap storm that was brewing over Charm City, Machado (and likely the Orioles) decided to apologize in an exclusive interview with MASNSports.com’s Roch Kubatko. Essentially, this was the video version of Machado issuing an apology. The Orioles used a reporter that works for the team’s cable network and likely had Machado prepared to answer the questions Kubatko was tossing his way.
The Baltimore Sun’s media critic David Zurawik heavily criticized the Orioles for having the interview conducted in this way. Kubatko reached out to Zurawik, an employee at a newspaper that he himself worked at for 21 years, and offered a few answers about how the interview was done.
Kubatko added, “I prepared my own questions, knowing it wasn’t a long sit-down interview. I had no idea he was going to apologize. I asked whether he was aware of Oakland’s harsh comments, whether he expected a suspension, questions anyone else would have asked him. I tried to gauge why he chose to back off his assertion yesterday that the bat slipped out of his hands.”
Kubatko said he did not know about the interview in advance.
“I was asked in the afternoon, after I arrived at the ballpark, whether I’d be available to conduct the interview if it could be set up,” he wrote. “I agreed.”
To the Orioles/MASN’s/Kubatko’s credit, I actually found the questions to be decent. Here are a few for example:
- “What was it that brought you to this point?”
- “There were some strong comments coming out of the Oakland clubhouse afterward. Were you made aware of those and what’s your reaction to that?”
- “Are you expecting a suspension?”
- “Did you get a chance to talk to your teammates since this happened?”
So the question is, do fans mind their breaking news and information coming from the team and their employees? For some, I’m sure it won’t be good enough. For me, it’s a case-by-case basis. I’ve always found Kubatko to be a fair interviewer and think the four bullet points above are enough of a reason to give him the benefit of the doubt here. His background as a non-team employed reporter also helps.
The Sun’s beat writer Eduardo A. Encina seemed to take offense to the early access Kubatko had to Machado. Here’s a Twitter exchange between he and Mark Viviano about the Orioles growing lack of transparency:
.@MarkWJZ But that makes it our job to point out that access to teams we cover continues 2 diminish, creating a growing lack of transparency
— Eduardo A. Encina (@EddieInTheYard) June 10, 2014
As Zurawik correctly points out later in his criticism, having Kubatko ask Machado the questions is a win-win for the Orioles and MASN. Not only do they guarantee a controlled atmosphere for a could-be controversial interview, but they also generate web traffic on a huge national story. As of this writing, Machado’s apology generated 13,059 views on YouTube alone. Some of the surrounding videos on the MASN Orioles YouTube page have anywhere from 18 views to 1,128, but nothing near the Machado total.
It’s worth noting that the Orioles made Machado available to the rest of the Baltimore media after their game on Monday. Many of the answers he gave Kubatko in the one-on-one were recycled in his interview with the rest of the local reporters. I suppose that speaks to the quality of the questions Kubatko asked. Although, the cynic in me wonders if he was more rehearsed by that time.
So, sure the entire thing seemed totally scripted and it likely was planned from the start by the team, but at least Machado answered the questions other reporters would have asked him had the team made him available anyway. With the way new media is trending, these sorts of “exclusives” will only become more prominent.
