Do you have a source on this or is it just speculation?

Assuming that the reporter's top priority is to get to the bottom of a story and present the unvarnished truth to the readers. :giggles:

Unfortunately, a lot of reporters prefer the spoonfed story from official sources. They like talking to Important People every day. They don't want an adversarial relationship with those people. They want to feel part of the club, and they don't mind being sales flacks for the official line as long as they keep getting their spoonfed stories and get treated like one of the gang when they come into work. Why bite the hand that feeds them? It makes their lives so much less comfortable.

Btw, since the Punto fans got all excited about his resurrection because he had a 4-game hitting streak, he's 1-for-15 with 6 walks in 5 games. Nice #2 hitter.

I agree, at least for sports coverage... though one of the reasons I chose not to continue to pursue a potential journalism career was the lack of analysis in reporting. Somewhere along the line reporters stopped calling a spade a spade. So much of reporting now (and I'm talking political reporting now of course) is "A said this, but B said that." That's fine when they are both opinions I guess... problem is that you get the same thing even when A's position is backed by facts, while B's is a documentable falsehood. I think the past 8+ years the disservice such reporting does to the public and is a large reason for the rise of the blogs - lots of people were hungry for actual substance in their news coverage. (I think the same is true, to lesser extent, in regards to sports blogs.)
Or something.

And I would hate to think they wouldn't provide at least some analysis - the access could enhance some of the analysis - not in all cases, but access to scouting reports, competitive scouts, wtaching workouts, talking to trainers, coaches, etc, can provide a rich and compelling amount of background for analysis.

and what would a freeze-out accomplish? It would prevent the reporter -- in the short run -- from getting a few quotes with which to color his/her stories. Wooo. That'll teach 'em a lesson.

sure, there are players/managers/politicians who will carry grudges against particular reporters so far as to try to deny them access to source material. But a good reporter won't let that stop him/her from doing the job.

ultimately, it's in the club's interest to provide "access" to the talent. It's free advertising, for criminy! The NFL understands this very well. Baseball could use a bit more pro-active approach to marketing.

For those with access concerned about ruffling feathers, if they don't have anything nice to say, I just wish they wouldn't say anything at all rather than saying nice things that aren't true.

That's a bit of an overstatement - especially since they both did just that and lived to tell about it. Most of these guys (beat writers) are not afraid to call a spade a spade. There going to do it in a little classier way than calling someone a 'tool or a weasel. And the impetus is not on the club as you suggest. It's the reporter's job to get to the story in any ethical way he can. You can see that even if a reporter is stonewalled, (just look at the Vikings fiasco) it's a totally short term phenomena until they revert to more civilized behavior. I'd venture to say both of the current beat writers are OK at their craft, but are nowhere as skilled as even Ruesse, as putting out stories, that are prickly enough for this readership.

Nothing I read I read or see on the field changes my opinion that the weasel is one of the dumbest, most intrenchable men in baseball. He was simply lucky to inherit a decent team in a historically putrid division.

Having a negative opinion of the manager is certainly within the bounds of reason and this manager specifically is not beyond reproach, - but I think, personally calling someone one of the dumbest people in baseball is uncalled for, and it's not likely remotely close to being true.

Everyone knows the light-hitting infielder hits second, so he can bunt over the lead-off guy. That's the way it was one when the weasel played for the Mets back in the 70s. That's the way it is today. At least on this team.

Ack. I'm in a bad mood anyway, and reading drivel like this just exacerbates the problem. As Clark W. Griswold would say, "Where's the Tylenol?"