I still can’t decide on the Tomase explanation. I’m sufficiently assured that Tomase knows he truly screwed the pooch on this one. I’m disappointed in it because it was so hyped by the Herald– clearly they’re tried to capitalize on all the publicity this is generating. They appear to be firm subscribers to the notion that there’s no such thing as bad publicity…except, it seems for Tomase.  

He plans to go right back on the beat, and the paper appears willing to let that happen.

A couple quick things that I don’t really understand:

While I have no regrets over going to print the day before the Super Bowl, this is a story I simply could not afford to get wrong. And I did.

I guess he could afford to get it wrong, because what punishment has taken place? What price has been paid, save the outrage of the fan base of the Patriots?

Also, while I do somewhat understand not naming the sources – it doesn’t seem like it would do any good anyway – why is Tomase being allowed to fall on the sword alone on this one? Why aren’t the editors that worked with him to put this story into the paper being named and held accountable for this error? As far as we know, there has been no punishments at all handed out for this entire episode.

There has to be some sanctions for punishment here, right?

It really seems to me that the Herald is content to sit back and enjoy the wave of increased exposure that this incident has brought them.

Some reaction from around the Internet about the explanation in the Herald today.

Dan Kennedy still has some questions after Tomase explained the process of how the story got into the paper.

Paul Flannery on the Boston Daily blog wants to know where the Herald’s editors were in all of this.

Awful Announcing is shocked that Tomase still has a job after this.

Mike Florio says that he can’t help but feel that this is all “part of a broader, and carefully calculated, P.R. effort aimed at ensuring that Tomase keeps his beat, and that various editors at the Herald keep their jobs.”

Neil Best of New York Newsday has a pretty good idea who Tomase’s source was, but he’s not talking, either.

Toni Monkovic on the New York Times Fifth Down blog asks “Who among us hasn’t screwed up?”

Michael David Smith says that Tomase didn’t really explain much of anything.

Deadspin wonders how long Tomase will be able to deal with all the comments and remarks after every single thing that he writes.

The Coffin Corner demands reprimands and punishments to be handed out.

Heck, even Jets fans think that the Herald has gone too far this week!


5 thoughts on “Where Are The Editors? Tomase Abettors Need To Be Named.

  1. Is the world so bereft of reasonably capable journalists that the likes of John Tomase have this much job security? I mean, out here in the real world his desk would already be occupied by the next up-and-comer.

    One can only conclude that the Herald likes the stir-up and thinks Tomase is good for the bottom line.


  2. The editor is just as culpable as Tomase here. That’s why he hasn’t been suspended or reprimanded IMO.


  3. The rumor wasn’t vetted properly because Tomase – like many others – very much wanted it to be true. The content of this apology should have addressed his motivation. And no reasonable human being is going to buy that the timing was a coincidence.


    1. Exactly. It’s the narrative that the want so much to be true. If the narrative is a round hole and their story is a square peg, by golly they’ll hammer it until it fits…or otherwise massage it.


  4. By the way, Felger was STILL spinning this on his little Comcast show tonight as if Tomase got everything right except for the existence of the tape…”because he was able to confirm that Walsh was on the floor of the Superdome during the Rams’ walkthrough”.

    They’ll never quit, will they.

    Um, Mike…..the league has come flat out and said that it was NOT a violation of the rules for the Pats’ video crew to be there at that time!!!

    So we’re back to what, exactly, did the Pats do wrong that day?

    Answer: NOTHING….your boy at the Herald was wrong, plain and simple. He wasn’t “a little right”, any more than a woman can be a little bit pregnant.

    And of course, then the topic turned to Martz questioning whether Walsh was there “in Patriots’ gear”, and because 2+2 must always equal 5, Felger then said, “OK, so is Martz saying that Walsh watched the practice but tried to hide his identity as a Pats’ employee by not wearing their gear?”


    Is it any wonder my most people hate the media??


Comments are closed.