Sports reporting has been irrevocably changed by insiders. Our 24-hour, social media-fueled society values being first over being right, and that necessitates a power dynamic in which insiders have agents on speed-dial, willing to share carefully crafted talking points over independent reporting.
It’s part of a job where insiders trade blows over scoops like a prize fight — constantly living in terror that missing a scoop will put them a step behind in the dominance race. The far too cozy relationship insiders have with agents and teams has led to them being classified in their own employment class, far away from the word “journalism.” That is even murkier now there’s significant financial stakes in their scoops, especially when the biggest names in news-breaking also have agreements with sports gambling companies.
NBA insider Shams Charania, who lists FanDuel as an employer on his LinkedIn, has been at the forefront of questions over his scoops — and this time it’s based on a tweet about Paul George ahead of the NBA Draft.
The Philadelphia 76ers’ interest in pursuing Paul George has significantly waned in recent days, and the franchise is expected to be aggressive elsewhere with its salary cap flexibility and draft capital leading into next week’s NBA Draft, sources tell @TheAthletic @Stadium.
— Shams Charania (@ShamsCharania) June 20, 2024
Only 11 days later, the Sixers signed George to a four-year, $212M deal. While it’s certainly possible the team just changed their mind, there’s strong reporting to the contrary. ESPN’s Ramona Shelburne wrote a detailed account of Philadelphia’s pursuit of George, and at no point does it contain any of the “waning interest” that Shams tweeted out. In fact, Shelburne’s story indicates that the Sixers were so desperate for George that there was intense anxiety inside the organization that someone might jump them for his services, and their quest to land the All Star was “months” in the making.
“The LA Clippers star had always been Philadelphia’s No. 1 option, but before the Sixers could meet with him, they had to wait for him to actually become a free agent. For weeks they heard rumors that the New York Knicks and Golden State Warriors would try to jump ahead of them by trading for George. For months they monitored the Clippers’ ongoing negotiations with George on an extension and wondered if they’d find a way to keep him in his hometown and continue his partnership with Kawhi Leonard.”
So, who are the “sources” that Shams spoke of when he reported that the Sixers were no longer interested? If he were a journalist we’d never ask him to divulge his sources because that’s one of the principles of journalism — but insiders have always been careful to never refer to themselves as “journalists” because of the grey area they operate in by being willing mouthpieces for those in power.
That makes it fair game to question who exactly told Shams the Sixers were cool on George? It speaks to the motivations of insider reporting, especially in light of the vast amount of money being wagered on sports betting, including futures bets on who will win the NBA title.
It’s also especially eyebrow-raising when the top reply to Shams’ tweet about the Sixers not being interested in Paul George is from FanDuel Sportsbook, bemoaning that we’ll never see Joel Embiid, Paul George, and Tyrese Maxey play together.
This report appears to have had a mammoth effect on gambling markets. As our own Liberty Ballers wrote, the futures odds on the Sixers to win the NBA Championship were impacted very heavily by the prospects of the team signing Paul George:
- Sixers odds with Paul George rumors: +1000
- Shams tweets the Sixers are “waning”: +1400
- George signs with the Sixers: +800
So, in its most simple terms: Shams, who is partnered with a betting company, tweeted out something with no tangible source, it was parroted as fact by that betting company — causing futures odds to plummet, up until the point the team actually signed George.
The worst part is that it’s not the first time this has happened. Every shred of reporting from local and national journalists indicated that the Charlotte Hornets would select Brandon Miller with the No. 2 pick ahead of the 2023 NBA Draft — but hours before Shams had a “scoop” that nobody else did.
Sources: Scoot Henderson is gaining serious momentum at No. 2 with the Charlotte Hornets in tonight’s NBA draft. Hornets have been torn over the last week between Henderson and Brandon Miller. Team has final meetings today to settle on decision.
— Shams Charania (@ShamsCharania) June 22, 2023
This led to massive shifts in betting markets, with so much money moving to Henderson as the No. 2 pick that he became the runaway favorite. After the draft it was apparent that Miller was always the Hornets’ guy, with there being very little debate over whether Henderson should be picked No. 2.
It led to major backlash from the sports betting community, who questioned whether Shams had an ulterior motive in trying to break the news, especially in light of his personal agreement with betting giant FanDuel. The company was also pressured to release a statement, saying FanDuel has no knowledge of Shams’ reports prior to him posting.
It doesn’t necessarily matter what the motivation for the tweet by Shams was when we know the effect. Whether it was manufactured to adjust betting lines or Shams was used by the Sixers to hide their intentions is immaterial, because people took his “reporting” as gospel, just as they did with the Scoot Henderson news last year.
If we look at this in the most positive light imaginable, that Shams was once again being used as a tool by a team, then it’s right to question a “first not best” style that rushes to parrot anything he’s told, whether or not it makes sense or contradicts previous reports. Even the most green reporter out of journalism school would get a tip like this and work to vet the info before sharing it, just to make sure they don’t mislead people.
Insiders continue to be happy to mislead people, however. After all, they’re very careful to ensure they don’t call themselves “journalists,” because that would open them up to annoying things like “standards” and “ethics.”