I’m unimpressed by Pablo’s credentials and then his lack of mastery of the issues. Seems like everybody is walking him through this as if somebody important found out and wanted their ten year-old to tell Mommy that Daddy was cheating on her because who gets mad at a kid?
Any serious inquiry into Torres might raise more questions than answers. I’ve learned you simply can’t just list an institution or award and not know what it came from or what issues there might be with merit. I wouldn’t even comment but I keep getting alerts up the ying.
To be fair, Pablo didn't just list his credentials, some footballguy did.
I haven't done a serious inquiry into him personally, but he's from the Tony Kornheiser/Dan LeBatard branch of the ESPN tree, and was hand-picked by Tony and Wilbon to fill in on PTI when one of them is missing. My point being that he's not some out-of-nowhere hack and has garnered the friendship and respect of so-called serious sports journalists, whatever that means.
The whole premise of his show, which didn't start with this Clippers kerfuffle, was to bring serious investigative journalism techniques to sports which, as odd as it sounds, hasn't been done before, at least to this degree. On a paparazzi level, sure, but that's not what he's doing, or not all he's doing. Similar to when Bill Simmons got suspended and ultimately did not have his contract renewed by ESPN for criticizing Roger Goodell, the big (or used-to-be-big) sports reporting platforms have a lot of unspoken (to the public) incentives not to look too closely at the sports they cover, and to a certain extent a large portion of the public doesn't want to know, or wishes they didn't. These are heroes, after all. We're more used to seeing this in politics, where unflattering reporters lose access and face other, sometimes career-threatening, repercussions. It probably happens in every sphere of media and entertainment, or any area of human activity that has a public face.
Pablo has done other "deep dives" before this one that have displayed his journalistic chops, as the now-disgraced leadership of the NFLPA can tell you (they, too, displayed Ballmeresque levels of denial and dismissal before ultimately resigning). I find his personality slightly annoying and haven't listened to every episode, but I am as positive as one can be that everything he's reported has been vetted to a degree unusual in sports, and he doesn't fling around accusations just for clicks. "Fact-based" journalism is his business model, his "shtick" if you will. It doesn't mean he's any more ethical or devoted to journalistic integrity, but his success is based on that. Know what I mean, Gene?
