PR in Sports

Looking at the World of Sports from a PR Perspecitve

Posts Tagged ‘Hartford Courant

New info in Calhoun vs. Krayeske

leave a comment »

I’ve been debating on whether or not to run a follow-up post on the Jim Calhoun/Ken Krayeske issue with the story being nearly two weeks old, but it seems the 24-hour news cycle doesn’t apply here. This story has garnered national attention and is still being discussed on TV, in newspapers, on Twitter and on several sports blogs.

This week Joe Favorito from Sports Marketing and PR Roundup takes a look at the credentialing issue as well as how UConn and Jim Calhoun could have calmed the storm in the days following the press conference. Christy Hammond over at Sports PR Blog has a great interview from NECN in Boston with Coach Calhoun, and asks how the UConn staff could have handled the press conference better. Finally, the Hartford Courant has reaction from both Calhoun and Krayeske.

Last week I had the chance to exchange e-mails with Krayeske, and with this still being a hot button issue, I decided to go ahead with a follow-up post.  The issue also became clearer with news coming out about how he received his credentials.

In our exchange Krayeske indicated that he’s covered UConn sports in the past, including football and basketball and that he’s growing weary of answering questions about whether he approached Calhoun at the right time or place. He said, “I’m tired of arguing about tactics, press credentials and whether or not the question was appropriate. The questions stands.”

He cited two articles regarding the credentialing issue. One in the Waterbury Republican (The article has since been locked), in which UConn AD/Communications Kyle Muncy confirmed Krayeske was, “duplicitous in securing a media credential to the game.” For those that don’t have a dictionary handy, duplicitous means “given to or marked by deliberate deceptiveness in behavior or speech”. Muncy also indicated that Krayeske made it seem that he was requesting credentials just to take photos, not to conduct interviews.

Krayeske also cited this Hartford Courant article as “UConn SID person said I got the credential legitimately.” In the article a UConn Spokesman said Krayeske e-mailed during the week to say he was working on a UConn basketball story and needed photos to run with it. I’d hardly call that a UConn SID saying he received the credential legitimately.

In my original post I wrote that the UConn PR staff probably should have vetted Krayeske more diligently, but with what we know now, I think we need to give them a pass. Yes, they could have looked into Krayeske a little more, but these things happen and there was no indication that Krayeske was going to use the postgame press conference for his own political agenda.

But, now that we have the credential issue cleared up a bit, the question now to sports fans and PR professionals is would you have stepped in during the postgame press conference? Would you have stepped in when Calhoun was visibly agitated, and how could UConn and Calhoun have minimized the damage following the press conference? I’d love to hear your opinions.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to Ma.gnoliaAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine


Written by Brian Gleason

March 4, 2009 at 1:40 am

Calhoun Encounter with Reporter Should Have Been Prevented

with 22 comments

This past Saturday UConn defeated South Florida 64-50, but the real match-up came in the postgame press conference. A freelance journalist/political activist, Ken Krayeske, kicked off the Q/A by asking UConn Coach Jim Calhoun about his salary.

You can catch the exchange in the video above, but Krayeske went pretty hard at Calhoun regarding his approximate $1.6 million salary, and asked if Calhoun should return some of that money due to a huge budget deficit in Connecticut. Calhoun didn’t hold any punches either, telling Krayeske he suggested he “shut up”. Calhoun also let him know that his program brings in $12 million to the university annually, and that he would have been happy to speak with Krayeske one-on-one if he had actually come with some facts.

According to the Hartford Courant, a UConn spokesman said Krayeske had a photo credential and he e-mailed during the week to say he was working on a UConn basketball story and needed photos to run with it.

Before I get into how this exchange should have been prevented, I’d like to make it clear that I have not spoken to anyone at UConn, so I’m making some assumptions on their credentialing procedure. But, this exchange could have been prevented or at least minimized. My intent isn’t to slam their staff, but to use this as a learning experience. A few questions come to mind:

1) If Krayeske isn’t a regular media member that covers UConn basketball, why was he credentialed after just sending an e-mail, especially being a freelancer?

In a case like this you have to get a fax on outlet letterhead from the editor of the publication requesting the project. An e-mail from a freelancer is not enough to get a credential.

2) I know there are a lot of talented reporters out there, but it seems odd that a writer would also be the photographer taking photos for a story.

This was probably covered by the UConn PR staff, but that would have been one of the first things to raise a red flag for me.

2) Did Krayeske give any indication during the game that he was a fraud, and why was someone with a photo credential allowed to ask a question in the postgame press conference?

In my experience, someone that has secured a credential but really isn’t there to cover the game almost always tips their hand. Usually it’s right off the bat in the pregame media access. Typical signs are showing little interest in the pregame access, not covering it at all or not seeming interested in the game. I usually made a note to keep my eye on someone like that, especially if I didn’t already know them.

3) Whether or not the UConn PR staff was keeping an eye on Krayeske, they should have stepped in once the question was asked with, “Anyone have any questions related to the game?”.

This is always a tough spot for a PR person. It can be very difficult to know whether or not to end an interview or line of questioning, but this was a case where Calhoun needed to be protected. Even if you think Krayeske’s questioning was valid, the postgame press conference was not the time or place. Calhoun was right in that Krayeske’s questioning was something that should have been handled in a one-on-one setting.

Again, this isn’t to bash the UConn PR staff, it’s to learn from a situation that could have, and probably should have, been prevented. Krayeske probably shouldn’t have even received credentials, but the questioning definitely should have been stopped before it escalated.

I’d love to hear your thoughts on the situation, either from the PR side, or even regarding Krayeske’s line of questioning, as that’s generated some heated debate as well.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to Ma.gnoliaAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine

Written by Brian Gleason

February 23, 2009 at 3:20 am

%d bloggers like this: