PressEthic

I found myself fascinated this morning by the news that Dallas Cowboys wide receiver Terrell Owens reportedly attempted to commit suicide last night. Initial reports were based on a leaked police narrative, in which police asked Owens if he was attempting to harm himself, to which Owens reportedly said, "yes." The narrative also stated that Owens' publicist, Kim Etheredge, who made the call to the police, said that Owens stated that he was depressed.

According to the AP story on ESPN, the police narrative was altered once the report was officially released by the Dallas Police Department later in the day.

When officially released by police, about half the document was blacked out, including the phrases "attempting suicide by prescription pain medication'' and "a drug overdose,'' as well as the details of Owens having two pills pried from his mouth and Owens saying "Yes'' when asked if he intended to harm himself.

Did the media, in this case, jump the gun on the story? Should they have published that Owens had attempted to commit suicide without even speaking to him or EMS? After all, the entire story was taken from one raw police report. Would the media have felt the need to make such a big story out of this one report if it had happened to a player with a lower profile?

Then again, should the media just accept Owen's explanation that he did not attempt to commit suicide and that he is not depressed, or should questions remain about an original police report that is wildly different from the versions of Owens and Etheridge? Why, for instance, would a police narrative state that Etheridge attempted to place her fingers in Owens' mouth to prevent him from taking more pills, when Etheridge roundly refutes the claim? Or why would she deny that she said Owens was depressed, when the report clearly states that she did? I certainly am intrigued to see how this plays out, and where all of these inconsistencies came from.

With a story like this, with contrary reports on both sides, the media has a responsibility to be especially sensitive to the material, and attempt to present the information in the most objective sense possible. Especially with such a negative stigma on Owens, commonly referred to as a "cancer" by sports reporters and commentators, it will be interesting to see how the sports media reports on this story.