I don't know this Matt Calkins out there in the state o' Washington, but even sports columnists have their principles. And so I stand with Brother Calkins as a fellow ink-stained wretch who knows all about the indignities that come with the job.
And I'm not just talking about the hot dogs at Michigan Stadium.
I'm talking about getting a column spiked because the bosses didn't agree with it, which is what happened to sports columnist Calkins recently at the Seattle Times. It's why he's no longer a sports columnist with the Seattle Times after 11 years, because he resigned over it. Decided he wasn't takin' it, and good on him.
The column in question was about the whole Sophie Cunningham/transgender athletes flap, and Calkins did what any good columnist does: He localized it. Went to an Indiana Fever-Seattle Storm game and sought out a young woman holding a sign in support of Cunningham. Interviewed her. Found out she was a high school athlete who wasn't crazy about the idea of competing against "biological males." Listened to her story and to another female athlete's story.
Then he wrote about it, taking the position that keeping girls and boys sports separate doesn't automatically make you transphobic. It was a reasonable and consistent viewpoint for the right-leaning Calkins, even if he was addressing a largely fictitious issue ginned up by folks who do have a bug up their keisters about transgenders.
(In this former sports columnist's opinion)
Nonetheless, Calkins sought out a story and told it. Did his job, in other words.
But then the bosses got involved.
Held the column. Decided to talk it over with the other bosses. Concluded they wouldn't run it because Calkins hadn't told his editors about it beforehand.
Which was lamer than Dennis Weaver in "Gunsmoke."
It is, in fact, total BS in the Blob's informed opinion, and the worst part is the capos at the Times likely knew it when they put it out there. They needed a cover story, and that's the cover story they're stickin' to.
Here's the deal: I don't know how it works out in Seattle, but I rarely if ever told my sports editor beforehand what I was writing about from a live event. This was because it was, well, a live event, and I didn't know what was going to happen. And so never once did my sports editor say, "Well, you didn't tell me yesterday what you were writing about from this live event today, so we're not gonna run your column."
Unlike the dopes in Seattle, see, my sports editor understood how it all works.
Now, it's true that what Calkins wrote wasn't expressly about the live event in this case. But it did become news when one of the Storm's minority owners berated one of the girls he interviewed. Therefore the column, and the topic, were relevant -- even if the bosses didn't like the opinion Calkins expressed about it.
Which certainly appears to be the case here. And which certainly says nothing good about the chuckleheads atop the masthead at the Times, whose cover story no one buys and who now stand accused of letting their own editorial biases bleed over to the news side.
Dumb and dumber. Because if the bosses didn't agree with what Calkins wrote, there was an easy out: Run it on the oped page, which is where newspapers print columns that offer a different viewpoint than their own. Why just kill it and make yourselves look like hypocrites or worse?
Now there's a question a good columnist might ask.