John Daly got in trouble with the PGA Tour at Peter Jacobsen’s Fred Mayer Challenge a few years back for turning around from the range and hitting a ball straight over the heads of grandstand gallery
I wonder what would have happened to Sarazen for actually aiming at people if the powers that be now were around back then.
I saw that video of Daily hitting “over” the crowds - compared to what Sarazen does in that video, Daly looks like a saint. Daily at least launched it, but Sarazen it seems, tries to give these guys a haircut 
.
There are probably guys who get away with a lot more on the course cough Woods cough and then you have the “poor” schmocks, when they try to pull a stunt they get fined and publicly reprimanded, e.g. like Henrik Stenson and his striptease.
In the end it simply would have come down to, how much of a “buddy” he was to the executives of the PGA (did they have them back then?) or the USGA, and since he seemed pretty popular i doubt much would have happend.
Daly is/was also quite popular, but i have the impression, thats only on the fanside and Mr. Finchem probably could live very well without him.
One thing we never should forget - this whole media/blogging/news circus where everybody seems to be a journalist nowadays can make a non-story into headlines a lot more easy than back then, and if you want to bury a story in todays environment you better be prepared to spent some money and act very quickly. Back then i guess a lot of things just “slipped” because nobody noticed or if somebody noticed he might judge it as irrelevant. Today nothing is irrelevant anymore.
Well…that…was disturbing.
kafka01, I see your point. Although what happens is usually the media blames the bloggers for things and calls them ‘cowardly’ or whatever and the reality is that the media are the real culprits of the bad stuff while the bloggers may take a picture of an NFL Quarterback drunk at a party. But becasue the media has such a stronger outlet to have their voice heard, the people just hear ‘bloggers are bad’ and accept it. I remember when Matt Leinart got photographed drunk at a party and it was posted by a blog, some ESPN reporter chastised the bloggers of the world for it. One problem, ESPN plastered the photos all over SportsCenter, ESPN News and other shows.
You hear stories of how the writers used to let Babe Ruth get away with a lot of stuff. But today’s reporters are the real culprits because they are so desparate for a story, they’ll point to any misbehavior as being sacrilige. Sometimes they are right, but often times they are wrong and making a mountain out of a molehill.
3JACK
First of all 3Jack - i discovered your blog a couple weeks ago and you do a really great job and i love to read it - keep it up!
Lets stick with your example. Personally i dont see anything wrong with that, when a blogger posts a picture of a drunken quarterback. At that moment, the blogger has an opionon about it and he writes in his personal blog about it. The outreach this blogger might get is maybe 100 or thousand readers. Nothing that actually can harm this guy, unless the picture lands on his bosses desk and he gets slapped with a fine. And lets face it, a guy who gets drunk - thats nothing out of the ordinary - i would be more concerned if he never would get drunk.
The problem for this guy starts, when the story starts to multiply through diverse channels and in the end, ends up on national television or some other media channel with a huge outreach. By then the story traveled a long way, and we all know what happens during this way, it ads a piece of information here and there, be it true or not, doesnt really matter. And when it is shown on television the produces will make a story out of it, that has some “shock effect”. After that, the guy will have to deal with his team, his sponsors, public groups - he has to justify himself for something, everyone of these people that are throwing stones at him, are guilty of themselves. It might cost him his job, harm his family, and for what? For being drunk?
And that imo is not okay, and the media should have a responsibility to judge the effects of their stories they are publishing (be it ESPN or your local newspaper), and if the downsides for those involved are newsworthy. Unfortunately, all these people think about is “entertaining” their audience instead of informing. If the latter would be the focus, a lot of stories wouldnt get such a huge audience or wouldnt be published in the first place, because it just has no informational value, all it does is entertain.
I think where it gets difficult is when your personal blog becomes sort of influential and focuses on news rather than entertainment. Lets assume you would live in a small town and your blog is well known and respected within the community. Now lets assume you got hold of a picture of one of your local teachers drunk during a party. Can you still post the picture in your blog and state your opinion about it as you could have done in the first example, or do you all of sudden have the same responsibility a big media network should have, when it comes down to judging if this story is newsworthy to the community. All of a sudden you are in a journalistic role but you arent trained for it. And thats where imo “hobby journalists” make quite some mistakes or simply underestimate the consequences of their doing.