The Truth Shall Set You Free

In the weeks since I posted an article condemning Kevin Sawyer's story-telling about Minnesota Wild defenceman Jared Spurgeon on a TSN broadcast, I have seen both sides of the coin when it comes to the support people have in getting people in positions of power to admit wrong-doing while in those positions and the ugly side of people who let these people in positions of power off the hook. Rightfully, I made my opinion public so I cannot complain about being subjected to either side of this proverbial coin, but the elephant remains in the room that no one, including Sawyer himself, has yet to address the comments he made on January 4.

I spent some time this evening reading and digesting Mike McIntyre's article regarding Kevin Sawyer's story about Spurgeon in the Winnipeg Free Press, and, like any controversy, there are things that Mike wrote that I agree with and things that I question when it comes to how this whole issue became what it is. I want to be clear that this isn't an assault on Mr. McIntyre - he's doing exactly what the media is supposed to do in finding the answers through access I have never been granted. The unfortunate part, though, is that it does lead to more questions.

According to McIntyre's article,

"It was Spurgeon's 16th birthday. It was his teenage peers on the team, and not any adults, who hoisted him up and suspended him, fully clothed, in the foyer before practice. Everyone gathered around to sing Happy Birthday, including Sawyer and other team staff. And that was it. Many laughs were had. Spurgeon, who was the most popular kid on the team, was a willing participant and it's something he still chuckles about to this day."

This seems rather innocent, and I'm willing to accept this explanation if not for one thing: how could Kevin Sawyer, in his recounting the story on television, forget to frame his story with a fairly crucial detail like it being Spurgeon's birthday? That seems entirely implausible when one considers that his birthday is entirely why the instance happens. Had it not been Spurgeon's birthday, Kevin Sawyer wouldn't have this particular "favorite story" of the player, so I find it hard to accept that the small detail of it being Spurgeon's birthday that caused the saran-wrapping of the player is a detail that would be forgotten.

However, I'm willing to let Sawyer off the hook if this story is true, can be corroborated, and went down as described, and McIntyre has stated that "multiple sources have been clear in saying this was not a hazing, but rather a fun-filled celebration." In hearing that, I'll cut Sawyer a little slack here and apologize for my hazing accusation. I jumped to a conclusion based upon a poorly-told story, and I owe him a public apology on the same medium where I made the accusation. Kevin, I apologize for my rush to condemn you.

Unfortunately, this is where the waters get really murky because there is so much wrong with how Sawyer, TSN, and the Jets handled this incident when it comes to getting out in front of this moment. Public Relations 101 says that anytime someone makes a blunder where it calls into question a matter of one's character or integrity that one should get out in front of the story by controlling the narrative through a release or clarification. We see this happen in politics all the time, and it likely should have happened here almost immediately.

Except it didn't.

It took 13 days for someone to finally address this, and it seemed to only catch fire after Paul Friesen's article in The Winnipeg Sun four days earlier that took Sawyer, TSN, and the Jets to task for seemingly doing nothing to address Sawyer's on-air story despite the outrage and disbelief on social media (this blog included). Did Friesen's article force those involved to address the situation? I'm not privy to the conversations behind the scenes, but the timeline seems to suggest that. Further to this, why are Sawyer and TSN willing to address it now (or on Tuesday on the TSN telecast) and not four days ago when Paul Friesen asked and was met with a "no comment" from all parties involved?

All of this suggests a few things to me, and none of it is good. Why would TSN not allow Sawyer to clarify the comments when Friesen asked on two separate occasions? And when McIntyre was following up on this incident, he was "told by several sources that Sawyer hoped to address the issue earlier, but was advised to hold off" which begs the question: WHY?

Look, I'm not a fan of Kevin Sawyer's work as an analyst, but I do feel that TSN preventing him from speaking only allowed damaging attacks on his integrity and his character, and that's entirely wrong. I'll come to Kevin's defence on this - for TSN to muzzle all employees and to prevent Sawyer from clarifying and rectifying this incident suggests that there is a serious problem within TSN management. If McIntyre's reporting is correct - I see no reason why it wouldn't be - and Sawyer wanted to speak out earlier about this only to be denied by TSN, it is TSN who allowed his character assassination to go on much longer than it should have, and that's a reprehensible act by Kevin Sawyer's employer.

As McIntyre wrote,

"By declining to say anything, TSN has hung Sawyer out to dry in this case. They should have to answer for that, especially since they would be the first to jump all over someone else's wrongdoing. A touch hypocritical, wouldn't you say?"

I know McIntyre is being facetious when he says "a touch hypocritical," so let me be very clear by saying that one shouldn't be casting stones inside glass houses. If TSN doesn't like criticism in how it runs its business, maybe don't give anyone easy targets for said criticism?

For those that called TSN 1290 and tried to engage their hosts in a question-and-answer about Sawyer, I respect your efforts, but, after knowing what we now know, are we to believe that those hosts would call out their employer while live on-air over this? Further to that, in knowing how TSN squashed Kevin Sawyer's attempts to clarify his comments, why would any of them put their own jobs at risk by questioning their employer's silence on the matter?

Here's what I do know: I'll watch Tuesday night's broadcast from Raleigh between the Jets and Hurricanes with an open mind as Kevin Sawyer speaks about his story-telling for the first time since that fateful January 4 broadcast. I will allow Kevin to make his statement without prejudice as I believe that Kevin Sawyer's own words will begin to repair the damage done over what appears to be a poorly-told story. However, TSN and Bell Media still have a lot to answer for after they handled this situation about as poorly as one can.

While TSN will never answer why they forced Kevin Sawyer's silence on the matter as the public backlash towards the former NHLer grew, I am willing to give Kevin Sawyer a chance to apologize for his story about Spurgeon while clarifying the situation. I think that's what everyone who has spoken out about Sawyer's words wanted, and that's why I'm willing to hear him out when it comes to changing my mind about the story he told.

TSN, on the other hand, has lost me as a fan unless they acknowledge their wrong-doing. The burden of an apology now falls on them as they, in my view, owe a public apology to Kevin Sawyer for allowing and fostering the character assassination he endured due to their muzzling of Sawyer. And unlike TSN, I am not as arrogant as them when it comes to an apology for what I wrote 13 days ago.

Kevin Sawyer, if the details about the story you told are true, I apologize for the hazing accusation. While the story you told was missing a number of key details, your silence on the matter when it came to clarifying your words wasn't your own doing, and I'm hopeful your words on Tuesday will put this matter to rest and for all.

After all, the truth shall set you free. Keep that in mind, TSN management, for the next time you have to deal with someone's poor retelling of a story.

Until next time, keep your sticks on the ice!