Not Incognito

Surfing through the rounds of NFL pregame shows yesterday morning, I landed upon FOX where the station had landed an exclusive interview with suspended Miami Dolphins lineman Richie Incognito.

Incognito has been suspended by the team while the league investigates claims that he bullied fellow offensive lineman Jonathan Martin to the point where Martin snapped and left the team. Evidence of texts and voicemails from Incognito to Martin have surfaced and the ensuing news story has gotten plenty of hot takes (ugh) from the sports world.

Incognito had not spoken publicly on the events since his suspension. He sat down with Jay Glazer yesterday for an interview.

The heavily edited, six minute interview featured Glazer asking predictable questions for rehearsed answers from Incognito. Disclosed beforehand was Glazer's relationship with Incognito. It raises a few question. How am I as a viewer suppose to know that Glazer handed this interview objectively? Why is FOX OK with a reporter holding this kind of a relationship with someone he's reporting on?

Today, there has been backlash stemming from the interview. The Atlantic Wire says that though the network disclosed the relationship between the two "...that should not excuse the player or journalist. In a lot of newsrooms, Glazer would have been disqualified from ever speaking with Incognito on camera."

Meanwhile, Dave Zirin from The Nation took the interview behind the woodshed. In his column, Zirin called the interview "sports journalism at its worst" and a "big steaming pile of propaganda". I would encourage you to read Zirin's piece since it sums up my thoughts on this issue in a much more colorful and articulate manner.