Denver Post sports writers no longer making predictions

Posted by Betsey Reinsborough on November 3, 2009 at 3:31 PM

In an unprecedented move, The Denver Post announced Monday that its sports journalists would no longer be making predictions as to the outcome of sporting events, reports Denver Westword. According to Editor Greg Moore, it is unreasonable to expect sports writers to remain fair and balanced while being forced to give predictions of final scores. This, according to Moore, is especially true if they are based in a particular region. Picking the hometown team can make it appear as if the selection is based purely on team loyalty, while picking the challenging team denotes lack of confidence in the hometown team and could cause a rift between fans and writers.

Predicting the outcome of sports games is common practice in US newspapers, particularly for NFL games, where the final score is usually predicted as well as the victor. Most readers of the sports section are used to seeing predictions such as those made by Mike Klis, the Denver Post reporter who announced the ban while being interviewed on Mile High Sports Radio, 1510 AM, in Denver.

Moore likened the selection of the victorious team to predicting the outcome of a political election by saying, "sports writers are no different than other news-beat reporters. We would not have political reporters picking sides in a political contest." Yet are game predictions any different from publishing political polling data or newspaper endorsements? Are sports and politics even comparable in this situation? Sports writers have no affect over the outcomes of games while political journalists can sway voters with their opinions. It seems to be a hyperbolic assertion that a sports game is somehow comparable to a political election. Nevertheless, at least for the time being, the Denver Post will be free of sports prophesying.

Source: Denver Westword