If an MLB hitting slump happens without coverage from The Athletic, does it still happen?
The easiest answer there is “Yes,” but the tree-and-forest debate referenced here (which is more complex than how it’s often portrayed) actually has some relevance to media coverage. And the latest case where this popped up is with a piece Tuesday from Sam Blum of The Athletic on the Baltimore Orioles’ highly-hyped callup Jackson Holliday, a second baseman who has started his MLB career 1-for-30 at the plate. Holliday’s stats are a matter of record, and took place regardless of if they were featured in a piece, but many were seemingly annoyed at Blum for writing about them.
Here’s some of that:
Can't believe he's had a terrible [checks calendar] ten days, yikes https://t.co/f4gEcAOpmr
— Razzball (@Razzball) April 23, 2024
the kid has been here less than 2 weeks like dear god https://t.co/IQnzchDmOS
— nerdydodger (@nerdyDodger) April 23, 2024
This level of scrutiny is unhealthy https://t.co/wMgjPUXcHN
— kat (@HelenRuthsGhost) April 23, 2024
https://twitter.com/lucasvoorheis/status/1782811754810245346
The thing is, though, both that tweet and the actual piece are anything but negative. Blum’s tweet includes “how he’ll break out of this.” And the story itself (headlined “Orioles phenom Jackson Holliday breaks down his 1-for-30 start to MLB career”) is full of lines like “For now, the Orioles will be patient,” as well as lots of quotes from Holliday himself and Orioles’ coaches on the adjustments required at the major-league level. Here are some of those:
“Whenever you’re struggling a little bit, you just start searching,” Holliday told The Athletic on Monday. “And start creating little habits. I’m just making some adjustments, because you got to. It’s a lot more difficult than Triple A.
“I don’t think there’s very many people in the big leagues who haven’t struggled. It just happens to be at the beginning.”
…“It’s not easy on this stage to not get off to the start that you want to,” said Orioles manager Brandon Hyde. “Especially if you’re 20 and you have one year of professional experience. You just try to put your arm around him. Try to make sure that he’s OK mentally. He’s just trying to do a little too much. He’s trying to get a hit. He’s trying to produce.
“It’s about being process oriented. As hard as that can possibly be when you look up at the scoreboard and see what your batting average is.”
…“There’s a process that you go through in the big leagues,” [Orioles hitting coach Ryan] Fuller said. “It’s the jungle. And no matter what you have done in the minor leagues, when you come up here, there’s external pressure. You’ve got cameras in your face at all times. It’s just a higher level. He’s going to be fine. He’s here for a reason.”
This refers to the metaphysical discussion of trees, unobserved forests, and things of that nature. The scientific answer to that debate (which wasn’t actually proposed by George Berkeley but is related to his work) is a “yes” in terms of the vibration of the air generated from the tree’s impact but a “no” in terms of at least some definitions of “sound” as the translation of vibrations into auditory information. (Whether that is an appropriate definition of “sound” or whether unobserved sound can exist is somewhat debated, especially in metaphysics.) And that has implications here.
As mentioned off the top, Holliday’s numbers to date are a fact regardless of whether anyone writes about them or not. But there is a potential point for critics in terms of how they’re covered. That’s equivalent to the “wave” to “sound” discussion with trees and forests and comes into a larger question of media interpretation.
The number of indisputable facts in the world is limited. Even just a listing of facts can raise questions, such as how those facts were obtained, what facts were included, and what facts were omitted. The situation gets worse when facts are packaged in a wider media piece; even the most “neutral,” “view from nowhere” piece (which has its own critics as an approach) is saying something with its presentation of that raw data. That’s the translation of waves to sound.
Critics of Blum’s piece would have had a point if the piece had treated Holliday’s struggles to date as a large problem or as likely predictive of his MLB future. As many noted, there’s a long list of MLB players who didn’t hit well initially and went on to be stars. But that really wasn’t the thing here. This was perhaps the most favorable way imaginable to handle Holliday’s struggles (well, apart from the author himself opining that they’re no problem, but that’s not what a reported piece is), presenting on-the-record comments from him, his manager, and his hitting coach, all of who expressed a belief that he’ll figure it out.
Indeed, if that was the extent of this piece, it could have taken criticism from the other direction for being unneeded and obvious puffery. But the specific comments here from Holliday, Hyde, and Fuller on how they’re handling this are notable to have on the record. And that speaks to the value of this piece. Amongst the criticism, there were also plenty of positive comments for Blum’s work here, with some specifically citing how they had been wanting to hear from these figures on this front.
Really insightful article with great comments from Holliday, not sure why some are acting like this was a hit piece or that the top prospect in baseball starting out 1-for-30 isn’t fair to write about https://t.co/0Qqw92znM9
— Jon Becker (@jonbecker_) April 23, 2024
good stuff! I had wanted to hear what the team and jackson were saying about it https://t.co/po12fhUq22
— king turd up here on shit mountain (@wildebeast913) April 23, 2024
Good piece and a good look at how he’s handling it https://t.co/3bbSEoMlLP
— Robert Orr (@NotTheBobbyOrr) April 23, 2024
Very good story. Fascinated by the idea that we aren't supposed to talk about how the consensus top prospect in baseball with a consensus 70 or 80 hit tool is currently running a sub-70 percent in-zone contact rate. Simply analyzing and discussing baseball is now problematic? https://t.co/yIQKsSigRJ
— Jarrett Seidler (@jaseidler) April 23, 2024
This is a very good article and the response to it is a very good reminder that most people don't actually understand journalism. A reporter's job is not to write flowery love letters and baby professional athletes. https://t.co/mtoLIbqNdr
— Kate Feldman (@kateefeldman) April 23, 2024
The thing is, criticism of a piece on a top prospect in a career-starting hitting slump isn’t inherently wrong. If that actually was a “hit piece” or contained significant suggestions that Holliday’s career was doomed because of a 1-for-30 MLB start, the critics would have a point; that’s translating the waves to sound in a questionable way.
But that’s not what this piece was at all. Instead, it provided valuable space for Holliday, Hyde, and Fuller to share their perspectives on what’s going on here (which is already being discussed in many venues, including in the opening anecdote of Holliday watching talk about his struggles on MLB Network in the clubhouse). Their side of the story is newsworthy, and Blum presented it well. So it’s not quite clear why so many thought it was unreasonable to cover this in this fashion.