Torii Hunter Calls Reporter A "Prick" At Press Conference

[Steven Buhr]

Whatever Berardino's intent, I'm guessing the Twins aren't thrilled that their beat reporter decided to tie LGBT discussions to the team.  They'll probably be answering somewhat politically charged questions for the foreseeable future now. 

 

Not that I normally have a problem with the beat reporters straying from the requested puppies and rainbows theme.  I wish it had been a fair fight though, Berardino should have given the team the heads up that he wouldn't be playing softball today.

With all due respect, no... 1,000 times no.

 

In no situation whatsoever should a reporter be required... or even expected... to clear their questions with the team in advance or even give that "heads up." Berardino, et al, are not, "their beat reporter," and while it's occasionally difficult to tell the difference in certain markets, that's the difference between a Mike Berardino and a Dick Bremer.

 

What dumfounds me is that it could have come as a surprise to anyone that the question would be raised. Of course it's appropriate. Hunter was expected to have several multi-year options and ended up in Minnesota on a 1 year deal. Why? Maybe it had to do with his outspokenness or maybe it didn't. But to pose that question is perfectly reasonable AND it SHOULD HAVE BEEN EXPECTED by Hunter, his agent and the Twins.

 

For someone not to have sat down with him in advance and said, "hey, these reporters usually lob softballs so this may not come up, but if it does, here's how you handlie it," demonstrates a complete fail by the people in Hunter's camp.

 

I suppose it's also possible that someone DID have that chat with him, because his first reaction was so good that it was almost unexpected. Maybe, even with prep, Torii just can't resist being a prick, himself.

[sthpstm]

The question was not about Torii's views, but rather potential effects of those views.  And Berardino didn't pursue it at all (in the form of a follow-up).

 

But He did follow up.  Torii answered the first question, Mike pushed it further. Not every video posting or article shows that Mike asked 2 questions.

What annoys me is, now the Twins aren't posting the full conference like they normally do.  I enjoy watching the full conferences.

[Major League Ready]

I was listening to Mackey & Judd on my way to a meeting and kind of expected them to back their peer.  However, they thought the line of questioning was inappropriate.  As a matter of fact, they echoed others here who suggested Berardino should have put in a request to the Twins for an interview on this specific topic and let Torii Hunter determine if he wanted to address those issues.  They had Souhan on and he also thought it went down an inappropriate path, especially in that he did not let go after Torii gave a short answer. 

 

The whole thing is sad.  Both parties acted very poorly. I do tend to side against the guy who acted with premeditation but I sure wish Torii would have just said that this was not the right forum for a political discussion and left it go. 

[nicksaviking]

With all due respect, no... 1,000 times no.

 

In no situation whatsoever should a reporter be required... or even expected... to clear their questions with the team in advance or even give that "heads up." Berardino, et al, are not, "their beat reporter," and while it's occasionally difficult to tell the difference in certain markets, that's the difference between a Mike Berardino and a Dick Bremer.

 

 

I agree, no one should have to clear their questions with the team, I never suggested they should.  I said that since these things have been devoid of tough questions since anyone can remember, Berardino's decision to ask one now probably played exactly opposite of the Twins expectations. 

 

It would be a blast if Joe Blow decided he wasn't going to ask his scripted question during a Presidential debate and asked a more inflamatory question.  But it wouldn't be fair, that's not what was expected or prepared for.  It would be BS to tell the candidate the question, but it would be fair to tell them we aren't following the script anymore and the rules have changed.

 

Maybe you're right, the Twins should just have prepared for it, but they (or at least Hunter) didn't.

[Otto von Ballpark]

For someone not to have sat down with him in advance and said, "hey, these reporters usually lob softballs so this may not come up, but if it does, here's how you handlie it," demonstrates a complete fail by the people in Hunter's camp.

I am sure he had the assistance of the Twins PR professionals -- oh wait, never mind.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Here's a solid take on the subject from another journalist: http://www.si.com/mlb/2014/12/04/torii-hunter-minnesota-twins-press-conference-mike-berardino

[PseudoSABR]

Hunter, for all his obvious faults, is not a professional answerer of press conference questions, though that is an aspect that the job requires and Hunter doesn't shy from.  It's difficult for me to impugn Hunter's baseball professionalism or his capacity mentor based on his mishandling of Berardino's question (an result, really, we'd all expect from Hunter, and a result Berardino certainly risked by asking the question). It is unfortunate that professional athletes become so insulated from the world at large that they need not be responsible for their beliefs, but it is result of the profession and the fame and wealth that comes with it, and it is commonplace.  It's really not so strange that any athlete may curdle at difficult political questions.  (In a different state, imagine an athlete being asked baout his pro-choice beliefs or whether he's Christian enough).

 

Berardino on the other hand is a professional asker of questions.   I have a hard time believing that Berardino actually believed he'd get a thoughtful response from his question given the format.  That he couched his question in rhetoric that seemingly related to free agency, for me, signals the tenuous relevance of the question in the first place.   It's disguising grandstanding in a cloak of relevance.

 

While Hunter shouldn't have called him a prick; was there really ever any thoughtful response to be had here.  This answer would never happen: (1) "Why yes Mike, my religious and political views did affect my free agency, and you know I've learned a lot about how my political views affect the public at large, as a result I find myself being more open to other people's views."  The answer that should have happened: (2) "No, Mike, my political views did not affect my free agency whatsoever, thank you for question.  

 

I don't really think Berardino really believed he'd get a thoughtful response like (1) nor would he seek a non -story answer like (2).  So what kind of response did Berardino think he'd get? Probably the same one he sought--a response that might make his non-relevant question story worthy.  Whether it was Torii being rude, or reiterating bigoted beliefs; either outcome cuts against the ethic standards in journalism, which seeks the truth and not the story.

 

This is precisely the kind of question if you're seeking a thoughtful response, that you ask in a intimate interview.  At press conference, it smells too much like gotcha journalism. 

[Linus]

I was listening to Mackey & Judd on my way to a meeting and kind of expected them to back their peer.  However, they thought the line of questioning was inappropriate.  As a matter of fact, they echoed others here who suggested Berardino should have put in a request to the Twins for an interview on this specific topic and let Torii Hunter determine if he wanted to address those issues.  They had Souhan on and he also thought it went down an inappropriate path, especially in that he did not let go after Torii gave a short answer. 

 

The whole thing is sad.  Both parties acted very poorly. I do tend to side against the guy who acted with premeditation but I sure wish Torii would have just said that this was not the right forum for a political discussion and left it go. 

Mackey & Judd's opinions mean nothing to me.  Their "journalism" is apples to oranges with a newspaper beat writer.

[maxisagod]

Around 2005, there were some general allegations that gay players were playing in baseball. And it became the national new cycle of the week. Reporters asked their teams 'would you play with a openly gay teammate'. Now, you could probably guess, that every Twins player but one declined to comment, you can guess who and you can guess what he said. That's not the point of the story, the point was after reading the whole 2 sentence The Star Tribune wrote about it, that was the 1st time I had to admit, the press in Minnesota protected Torii. Maybe it was the good quotes he gave and not wanting to piss him off. Maybe it was because beat reporters were expected to toe the line, but I was disappointed no one dared ask a follow up question. He got called out several times over his options on several matters when he moved on to LA and Detroit but never here. The closest was when in spring training the following year the press ask Cuddy if they would miss his leadership on the team and Micheal just answer "no".  

 

If the Pioneer  Press wants a puff piece on Torii they can get it from Tom Powers. I'm glad one person  will now challenge Torii at least 1/10th of what Mauer gets. 

[DutchFarmer]

Mackey & Judd's opinions mean nothing to me.  Their "journalism" is apples to oranges with a newspaper beat writer.

 

Except that Judd was a newspaper beat writer for a time...

[ashbury]

I think Berardino was trying to be delicate with his question,

This was his internal cue, IMO, that either this wasn't the time and place for the question, or else it's so important that he should just ask it (whatever his actual question was) forthrightly.  He knew something was "off" about doing it.  He split the middle, thinking he was being delicate, but it just came off awkward to me.

 

I still don't know what his question was.  "Uh, gay marriage, and Arkansas governor, and your FA market value, and stuff.  You still going to be doing that?"

[Otto von Ballpark]

But He did follow up.  Torii answered the first question, Mike pushed it further. Not every video posting or article shows that Mike asked 2 questions.

What annoys me is, now the Twins aren't posting the full conference like they normally do.  I enjoy watching the full conferences.

My bad, you are correct, there was a small follow-up in there. A little more jumbled, but still pretty minor:

 

"Just giving you a chance to answer to some of the things that have been pretty ugly at a place like Deadspin, that has a lot of readers, the marriage question, is that the kind of thing that going forward you're not going to mess with, or are you such an open honest guy that if we ask you a question you're going to answer it?"

 

And Hunter kinda answered it, then silence as they were looking for more questions around the room, and then... "prick" rant.

[lightfoot789]

I could care less if Hunter was a Republican or a Democrat or for abortion or against abortion or for gay marriages or against gay marriages.  A players personal views have nothing to do with his ability to play baseball.  If he wants to share his personal views - that's on him.  It doesn't make it news however, unless he is causing change in society.  Hunters views on life shouldn't matter to anyone.  It's his right to feel anyway he wants as long as he doesn't cause harm to others.

 

The reporter had the right to ask that question and should have had a million more opportunities to ask that question.  He choose that forum for a reason. 

*Did it have to be asked then and there? (Considering it was somewhat of a welcome home venue) 

 

*Was it the type of question he feared someone else would beat him to the punch about? (probably not)

 

*Did the reporter do himself a favor by alienating Hunter on his first day back?  How many hard questions will he get answered during the year now?  Possibly a good question but bad timing from my angle.  He would be the last person to get an interview from me if I was Hunter this season.   Not for the question he asked, but for the timing - PERIOD!!  Hunter acknowledged he understood the reporter had a job to do - but also indicated that "this press conference" was not the setting for that question.  

 

I thought prick was a mild word actually.  I could have thought of a lot of worse words to call someone (not that he needed to call anyone names).  You would have thought he talked about his mother

 

Glad he's back (Hunter)  -  At least you know how he feels about some things (baseball related).  He's lasted over 20+ years being Torii.  Mauer will last just as long and no one will really know what he thinks about teammates and their ability to play the game right.  He's not the type of guy to call someone out and thus (status quo).   Being Jeter and Mauer gets you beloved by all and keeps you safe from any harmful opinions. 

 

Who would have thought that getting in Hot Water doesn't always keep you clean.  Welcome Home Torii - Keep being you and don't be afraid to share the game of baseball with those younger guys.  You have a lot they can learn from in the course of a season.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 Have you checked his Twitter page?  You do understand how journalists can inject controversial matter into a more conventional question, right?  Wrong forum to play it cute.

Berardino hasn't printed Hunter's "prick" comments in print or on Twitter.  Yes, he has fielded a couple Twitter questions and comments about the situation.

 

I think if he was really opportunistic and grandstanding, he probably would have made a bigger deal out of the over-the-top portion of Torii's response.

[TheLeviathan]

-While Hunter shouldn't have called him a prick; was there really ever any thoughtful response to be had here.  

 

Absolutely there was:

 

"I appreciate the question Mike and I'm honestly not sure.  The topic never came up in any negotiations I had and I can't speak for the clubs that didn't contact me.  I understand that not all positions I've taken publicly are popular but it's impossible for me to say that my stance has hurt my negotiating power. I'm happy to be here with the Twins again and put an emphasis on helping this team get back to the caliber of baseball I'm accustomed to"

 

I managed that in about a minute and a half.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I still don't know what his question was.  "Uh, gay marriage, and Arkansas governor, and your FA market value, and stuff.  You still going to be doing that?"

It wasn't that confusing.  Distilling the tedious sportswriter-athlete press conference verbosity, you're left with the following:

 

Q: Did you feel any effects from your political and religious statements, and are you changing your attitude toward making those statements?

 

A: I still believe those things, I won't stop saying them, but I don't want to say them or talk about them right now.  Oh, and you're a prick.

[Otto von Ballpark]

While Hunter shouldn't have called him a prick; was there really ever any thoughtful response to be had here.

Hunter's response was more or less valid (if not very eloquent) -- at least after "some people are just messy" (was that an Odd Couple reference? ).  Particularly after the follow-up -- "No, I'm not going to talk about it."  Which is a perfectly fine answer, and addresses (indirectly) Berardino's questions.  And Berardino accepted the answer at that point.  Then the "prick" comments.

 

I have no problem with either Berardino's question or Hunter's answer to that question.  It was the seemingly unprovoked (and mildly profane) attack after that which was confusing and a little disappointing.

[PseudoSABR]

Absolutely there was:

 

"I appreciate the question Mike and I'm honestly not sure.  The topic never came up in any negotiations I had and I can't speak for the clubs that didn't contact me.  I understand that not all positions I've taken publicly are popular but it's impossible for me to say that my stance has hurt my negotiating power. I'm happy to be here with the Twins again and put an emphasis on helping this team get back to the caliber of baseball I'm accustomed to"

 

I managed that in about a minute and a half.

I guess if you really think that Hunter was capable or likely to answer as you have suggested, and that Berardino really believed he was going to get such an answer, I'm not going to convince you otherwise.   While athletes should be held to high rhetorical standard; I'm not sure it's realistic for them to respond in such a way, when both the media and the fans of insulated them from standards as a matter of course, for like always.   Again, what should happen and what realistically could happen are two different things; and for my part, I think Berardino knew which was which.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I'm starting to think Hunter should have just said "Jane, you ignorant slut."  I would have appreciated the pop culture reference.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Berardino on the other hand is a professional asker of questions.   I have a hard time believing that Berardino actually believed he'd get a thoughtful response from his question given the format.

I don't mean to rag on sportswriters, but Berardino is "just" a sportswriter.  They're not really experts at formal press conferences either.

 

For that matter, a big part of a sportswriter's daily job is to ask questions that he knows will not elicit a particularly thoughtful response. 

[Secondary User]

I don't doubt this is something that has been brought up already, but sadly I'm jumping in late and don't have the time at the moment to read through the whole conversation.

 

Torii Hunter is being sold as a leader and mentor.  He has a long history of being divisive both on and off the field.  If he wants to be a leader, and not just someone that the media refers to as a leader because he's quick to give a quote after the game (read THIS if you want to understand that better), then his divisive actions are absolutely relevant to the discussion

 

And if you want proof as to just what kind of a person Hunter actually is, notice at the end of the press conference, as everyone is breaking up, he looks at Berardino, points and says "He ruined it".  If he can't handle a press conference where a pretty standard question about his crossover into the political sphere (and he absolutely acted like a bone head), I look forward to when the team is 18-36 and see who he starts pointing his finger at then.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Hunter, for all his obvious faults, is not a professional answerer of press conference questions, though that is an aspect that the job requires and Hunter doesn't shy from.  It's difficult for me to impugn Hunter's baseball professionalism or his capacity mentor based on his mishandling of Berardino's question (an result, really, we'd all expect from Hunter, and a result Berardino certainly risked by asking the question). It is unfortunate that professional athletes become so insulated from the world at large that they need not be responsible for their beliefs, but it is result of the profession and the fame and wealth that comes with it, and it is commonplace.  It's really not so strange that any athlete may curdle at difficult political questions.  (In a different state, imagine an athlete being asked baout his pro-choice beliefs or whether he's Christian enough).

 

Berardino on the other hand is a professional asker of questions.   I have a hard time believing that Berardino actually believed he'd get a thoughtful response from his question given the format.  That he couched his question in rhetoric that seemingly related to free agency, for me, signals the tenuous relevance of the question in the first place.   It's disguising grandstanding in a cloak of relevance.

 

While Hunter shouldn't have called him a prick; was there really ever any thoughtful response to be had here.  This answer would never happen: (1) "Why yes Mike, my religious and political views did affect my free agency, and you know I've learned a lot about how my political views affect the public at large, as a result I find myself being more open to other people's views."  The answer that should have happened: (2) "No, Mike, my political views did not affect my free agency whatsoever, thank you for question.  

 

I don't really think Berardino really believed he'd get a thoughtful response like (1) nor would he seek a non -story answer like (2).  So what kind of response did Berardino think he'd get? Probably the same one he sought--a response that might make his non-relevant question story worthy.  Whether it was Torii being rude, or reiterating bigoted beliefs; either outcome cuts against the ethic standards in journalism, which seeks the truth and not the story.

 

This is precisely the kind of question if you're seeking a thoughtful response, that you ask in a intimate interview.  At press conference, it smells too much like gotcha journalism. 

 

I respect your take but disagree. Hunter's outspokenness/relatability is a feature not a bug and is part of why the Twins courted him. That's the broader context in which I read Berardino's question (haven't listened to it). Part of interviewing is performance: I'd best most of the reporters served up routine questions they already knew the answers to. "Can you still produce?" "Are you happy to be back?" "Yes." 

 

Then Berardino has the guts to ask something which for most of us would be uncomfortable but in no way out of bounds for the circumstances, even though I grant a press conference is typically meant to be a staged love fest. As people have said, there were many reasonable ways to answer that question, and Torii used one--and then went off script.

 

I don't think Berardino cared how the question would be answered, so long as someone asked it. In that respect Berardino and Hunter aren't that far apart. They're both here to mix things up a bit and challenge some stale beliefs. Now that they've had their confrontation they will probably become best of friends  

 

It's not a perfect analogy but the journalist-source relationship is something like the physician-patient relationship, in that the journalist has a professional duty to get at the truth of the matter, dealing with inconvenient facts and sometimes needing to probe and ask uncomfortable questions. Nothing unethical about it. Only Torii's old fashioned position on this pet issue could cause anything to become sensationalized (but hopefully won't). And even better if Torii sees the light and changes his beliefs.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I was listening to Mackey & Judd on my way to a meeting and kind of expected them to back their peer.  However, they thought the line of questioning was inappropriate.  As a matter of fact, they echoed others here who suggested Berardino should have put in a request to the Twins for an interview on this specific topic and let Torii Hunter determine if he wanted to address those issues.  They had Souhan on and he also thought it went down an inappropriate path, especially in that he did not let go after Torii gave a short answer.

I heard Mark Rosen say a similar thing, although he didn't seem to have a real problem with Berardino's method, but he suggested asking Torii privately if he'd like to answer such a question.

 

And I think that's absolutely the wrong way to look at this.  Torii quite clearly and deliberately made public statements, and it's fair game to ask him about those statements in public too.  And it would equally be fair game for Torii to respond "No comment."  But he shouldn't be allowed to simply avoid facing the question altogether.

 

Also, Torii's initial response seemed confused, like he thought Berardino was asking if he was a Republican.  I think that was the reason for the follow-up, after which Hunter said some equivalent of "no comment" before the pause and then the attack.

[TheLeviathan]

I guess if you really think that Hunter was capable or likely to answer as you have suggested, and that Berardino really believed he was going to get such an answer, I'm not going to convince you otherwise.   While athletes should be held to high rhetorical standard; I'm not sure it's realistic for them to respond in such a way, when both the media and the fans of insulated them from standards as a matter of course, for like always.   Again, what should happen and what realistically could happen are two different things; and for my part, I think Berardino knew which was which.

Pseudo, I'm having a hard time not seeing your response as essentially:

 

Despite having PR coaches and agents telling them what to say, we can't ask thought provoking questions to insulated athletes so anything beyond a lame softball question amounts to gotcha journalism.

 

I'm sorry, but I couldn't disagree with that more. If a Hunter is thoughtful enough to use his platform to speak his mind, he should be thoughtful enough to answer a tough question here and there.

[LJHoes]

It's absolutely hilarious to watch a bunch of anonymous commenters go on and on about how a pro athlete should have responded to someone who was basically dissing him and the team. His questions reeked of 'isn't it true that you're toxic and the only reason you signed here is because you're not viable anywhere else because you're a jerk?'

 

He saw Berardino as a prick and told him so, repeatedly. Then everyone sits around and talks about it like it matters at all. The hilarious part was it was a prick move. It was a gotcha-question meant to get a stupid response from a fiery guy. It wasn't meant to discuss the underlying bigotry in Torii. It was meant as a way for Berardino to get the last word in on his angle that Torii really didn't want to sign here. 

 

I'm not particularly happy the Twins signed Torii, because he is a prick and we've all known that for a while. This is the sort of nonsense we all knew about. I don't think that it's any sort of scandal that Torii told the reporter off. 

 

Oh and by the way, I find Torii's bigotry really disturbing. I hope that someone can find a better way to help him see the light than trying to embarass him on live TV, or casting aspersions his way from bully pulpits. Maybe he and Billy Bean need to have another sitdown. 

[Secondary User]

 

He saw Berardino as a prick and told him so, repeatedly. Then everyone sits around and talks about it like it matters at all. The hilarious part was it was a prick move. It was a gotcha-question meant to get a stupid response from a fiery guy. It wasn't meant to discuss the underlying bigotry in Torii. It was meant as a way for Berardino to get the last word in on his angle that Torii really didn't want to sign here. 

 

 

Again....Hunter is being sold as a leader, both by the organization and by his own accord.  He has a history of divisiveness.  Asking him about that divisiveness is absolutely relevant if he wants to call himself a leader. 

[Major League Ready]

Just curious?  Does anyone actually believe that hunter's politics had any impact on a team pursuing him  or what they were willing to pay?  Personally, I think it is pretty far fetched and therefore the question was disingenuous and the equivalent of internet trolling. 

[jokin]

Again....Hunter is being sold as a leader, both by the organization and by his own accord.  He has a history of divisiveness.  

 

He has a "history", to be sure... but the people being paid millions of dollars to make multi-million dollar decisions obviously disagree with your conclusion.  

[Highabove]

"The marriage question, is that the kind of thing going forward your not going to mess with,

or are you just an open honest guy that if we ask you a question your going to answer it."

 

The problem is not the question itself, it's the pompous way Berardino asked it.

[Steven Buhr]

Just curious?  Does anyone actually believe that hunter's politics had any impact on a team pursuing him  or what they were willing to pay?  Personally, I think it is pretty far fetched and therefore the question was disingenuous and the equivalent of internet trolling. 

There's no way of knowing, short of some front office person coming out and stating they avoided Hunter for that reason.

 

However, do I believe it's possible that at least one deep-pocket, contending team looking at corner OFs might have ruled Hunter out immediately based on his statements? Yes, I believe that's possible. The Giants perhaps?

 

If 1 such team takes that approach, it reduces the demand and thus has an effect on the player's market. If 1 feels that way, others located in similarly more liberal communities may also feel that Hunter and his combination of poor defense, unpopular views and lack of internal filter are not worth considering.