clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Damian Cox Continues To Stir The Pot With Ted Leonsis

New, 6 comments

Today is the first day of Capitals rookie camp, which means one of the biggest seasons in team history is on the horizon. It's also apparently a good time for owner Ted Leonsis and Toronto Star columnist Damian Cox to renew their little feud of sorts. 

It all started when Cox threw Alex Ovechkin's deal into an article about the need for NHL contract reform, which prompted this angry response from Leonsis. Now, after Leonsis said one blogger writing about the earlier exchange was "simply uninformed," Cox decided to unleash this earth-shattering allegation. 

(Note: this is via On Frozen Blog because Cox deleted the tweet).

Throw out a lie then disappear? RT @DamoSpin: Leonsis can't even attract Wash top media people to games. So he has to hire his own bloggers.less than a minute ago via Twitter for iPhone

Cox deleted that tweet, but he wasn't done. He elaborated on his "allegation" later.

Would it be unethical for an "independent" blogger to allow an NHL owner to pay xpenses? Like, say, to the 2007 world championships?less than a minute ago via web


If you are hired by a team or have expenses covered, you are compromised and not independent. Period. There's nothing to discuss.less than a minute ago via web

Doesn't matter if you're covering for an entire city. Still should not have expenses covered. Let's see if people own up now.less than a minute ago via web


And, of course, it was this tweet, sent before all of those, that really riled up the Twittersphere.

Awww, cute, Low-rent Washington hockey bloggers having their own love-in tonight.less than a minute ago via web


You go, Damian Cox! Way to tear your enemy down with that horrible, horrible allegation. That's true journalism at it's best. Get into a war or words with the owner, post some allegation of him helping a blogger out that wanted to cover his team on Twitter, then hope the accused party comes forward. Hey, the ends justify the means, right?

In all seriousness ... even if Cox is right, so what? A blogger got his travel expenses paid for a tournament three years ago. Television broadcasters get their travel expenses paid for every single game. Sure, maybe the latter isn't a big deal because you at least know the broadcasters work for the team, but it's not like there's some big flashing text on the screen making this clear. Tons of people listen to the TV broadcaster and appreciate their coverage without worrying about whether they're actually "independent." The same would surely be true of that blog, assuming their coverage was good.

Bottom line: Cox is starting a crusade centered around an allegation that seems to matter way more to journalists than consumers. At least that's my impression.