Did The Globe And Mail Pull Dowbiggin’s Article About Brunt?

I have to admit that with the purchase of an Ipad and the awesome app Zite my RSS reading suffers. This evening I opened up my reader for the first time since Friday to find over 2000 article to read. I skimmed the headlines of my list and found a most interesting title:


The article was written by Bruce Dowbiggin, the sports media writer for the Globe and Mail. It shows the article as being published at 11-05-22 7:55 PM. The byline is:

“Did the Globe jump the gun on its exclusive about the Atlanta Thrashers move to Winnipeg?”

When I open the link, the story is gone.

A few links through a google search show the following bits from the story:

“Writing rumours or writing about progress is one thing,” the self-styled hockey rumour monger blogged. “Writing something as being done is entirely different.” Bruce Arthur of the National Post struck a resigned tone in his tweet. “I’d point out the… ”

“We’re not at the point where Dustin Byfuglien buys TV time to say, “I’m taking my talents to Portage and Main.” But the big shooters in the Canadian sports …”

Anyways, did any of you happen to read the article?

It would be very interesting to see what the Globe and Mail critic had to say about it’s very own story.

As I told you the other day, this is a really simple issue to me. Irrespective of how Brunt, who’s work I really like and I personally respect, explained the story on the radio or on tv, his article in the globe said “done deal”. Done deal isn’t open to interpretation. It means that everything is complete. Finished. The Globe wrote a story the next day saying that negotiations were on going. That means the deal wasn’t done. Simply put, if Brunt’s article had said an agreement in principle, or an agreement will get done, well, that’s different. Until the ink is on the paper, a deal isn’t done.

This has nothing to do with a press conference. Whether or not that happens tomorrow is immaterial in my mind. That wasn’t the story, at least not to me. The story was that it was done.

To answer the question from the pulled story, a deal is done when the lawyers have agreed and the principles have signed the documents. That’s it. If that hadn’t happened when Brunt’s article said done deal, then it wasn’t a done deal.


I note that Jeff Blair, also of the Globe and Mail had a very interesting story after the Brunt story ran:

“So it’s understandable that with an agreement in principle to rescue the Atlanta Thrashers and bring them to Winnipeg, as much time is being spent worrying about revenue streams in the 15,000-seat MTS Centre as celebrating the return of a piece of our birthright. What’s the big deal? You could have accommodated the average home crowd of eight NHL teams this season at the MTS Centre.”

An agreement in principle- AH there’s something I can live with.

More later



Still no one has sent in the article, someone out there must have it!

About the Author
Notify of

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
mike (in boston)
mike (in boston)
May 24, 2011 7:09 am

This has nothing to do with a press conference. Whether or not that happens tomorrow is immaterial in my mind. That wasn’t the story, at least not to me. The story was that it was done.

to my mind these are two parts of the same thing: you only have a press conference when you have a deal to announce. the fact that there is no press conference is further evidence that the deal is not yet done.

Gerry (Burlington)
Gerry (Burlington)
May 24, 2011 7:44 am

Very Interesting, in reading Bruce’s article last night, it was extremely limited in content. And while I am not a fan of Bruce, he does normally have a couple of topics in his articles. Yesterday was a very vague story with little evidence of Hughson being a homer, which is really nothing new to talk about. And then a real stretch of a story regarding Cherry/Pound/Oxy/Booze. If indeed the meat of his story was ripped out by the Globe that seems very believable. Why else would he not even put a brief one liner in about it. It is an impossible story to omit as a sports media critic. Hopefully somebody has the full story from viewing it and can get it out.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x