Sports writers should continue to vote

The primary role of journalists is to act as news informers. They are responsible for communicating to citizens what is important and what they should be aware of. However, sometimes journalists can cross the line from news informer to news maker. Sports writers are one group that often becomes victims of this transformation. Sports writers often become news makers when they are obliged to vote on certain postseason awards such as the league’s Most Valuable Player award. A prime example is during last season’s American League MVP voting when Chicago Sun-Times sports writer Joe Cowley voted Derek Jeter sixth on his ballot – lower than any other voter. As a result, Cowley made national news for his bizarre ballot and received about 500 e-mails from angry Yankee fans – many of which were personal attacks such as, “hope your cancer comes back” and “hope you have a short life.” It is exactly this type of situation which has some newspapers now forbidding their sports writers from voting on such awards. However, I don’t believe this is the right move by those newspapers.

The argument by some newspapers is that they don’t want to put their sports writers in the position that Cowley found himself in. They don’t believe a reporter should be a household name because of his vote. "Voting on awards like this puts reporters in the position of making the news, and that's not our job," said Tom Jolly, sports editor of The New York Times. "Our job is to report on the news, not to make it." I agree with that statement to a point, however, people need to remember that Cowley was the exception, not the norm. Most sports writers do vote in an objective manner. The only reporters who become household names because of their vote are the ones who show such clear and unfair bias like Cowley did. Obviously, there’s always going to be a little bias for anyone, even journalists. If you’re covering a team day in and day out for months at a time, you’re bound to be more knowledgeable about someone and likely think more favorably of them if you’re following them all the time. The key for journalists to be aware of that inherent bias and to make sure you’re voting honestly and for the right reasons.

Many players have contracts that pay a bonus for MVP awards and other honors. When a sports writer's vote can have a direct impact on the salary of a player who is also a news source, that creates a conflict of interest that is unmatched in any other area of journalism. I understand the argument, but I think there’s a stronger one the other way.

If sports writers should not vote because it’s a conflict of interest, then who should? Fans? Obviously, that’s completely out of the question. Fans are more biased than anyone. Most of the fans who vote for the All-Star starters don’t care what their stats are or who actually deserves a spot. For example, in last season’s American League All-Star voting, Detroit Tigers catcher Ivan Rodriguez and his decent season (.308 – 7 HRs – 39 RBIs) was named the starter over Minnesota Twins catcher Joe Mauer, who was leading the majors with a .378 batting average. It doesn’t make much sense but it happens time and time again. Fans voting on the All-Star starters are one thing, but postseason awards are another story. Clearly, the managers and players voting is a better idea than the fans, but I still don’t believe they would be any more objective and less biased than sports writers. One thing people forget is that managers and coaches already do get to vote on one postseason award: The Gold Glove award. Managers and coaches cannot vote for anyone on their own team, but this still produces some strange results. In last season’s Gold Glove award for AL second basemen, the Royals’ Mark Grudzielanek won despite the A’s Mark Ellis setting the all-time fielding percentage record for a second baseman. If managers are so qualified to vote for postseason awards, they surely haven’t showed it with the Gold Glove award voting. If players voted, it’s hard to imagine any situation where a team with a player contending for an award, would vote for anyone but the guy on his team. Players and managers have just as much if not more of a conflict of interest when it comes to bonuses being handed out for winning awards. They are most likely going to want to see their friend and teammate take home that extra million bucks more than a journalist would. Having someone else vote would eliminate the problem for writers, but that would just cause more problems than are actually being fixed.

Postseason honors are staples of their sports. These honors are a big criterion for the Hall of Fame and they often define the players’ careers. They are an irreplaceable part of sports. To have un-qualified people voting diminishes the sport. That is bigger than something such as the appearance of a conflict of interest. Sports writers are the most qualified to vote because they are most knowledgeable and they are aware at least of their biases because they’re trained to be. There is no perfect system out there. Someone is always going to be unhappy no matter who votes or who wins. However, the one that works best is when the most qualified people vote: The journalists.