Pirates fans' overreaction to team's sneaky Carmen Mlodzinski PR move needs to end

The Pittsburgh Pirates absolutely tried to control the narrative surrounding Carmen Mlodzinski's brief stint on the restricted list. That much is obvious.

They reinstated him after just one game, then published an exclusive interview with him through their own team-employed writer before allowing independent reporters to ask questions. The timing wasn't accidental, and the goal wasn't subtle. They wanted Mlodzinski's side of the story out there before the inevitable media scrum in Houston.

That's public relations. It's also not remotely the scandal some people are making it out to be.

The reaction from portions of both the media and fanbase has been wildly disproportionate to what actually happened. Some have gone as far as accusing the Pirates of creating "state-run media." Others have suggested the organization lied, manipulated access, or crossed some unprecedented ethical line.

*Deep breath.* OK. Look...

Was it a puff piece? Sure. Was it designed to soften the narrative surrounding Mlodzinski's refusal to pitch out of the bullpen and subsequent placement on the restricted list? Almost certainly. Was it frustrating for reporters who have spent days covering this story only to watch the team's own employee get first access? Of course.

But none of that makes it unusual. In fact, it's incredibly normal.

Pirates' sneaky PR move with Carmen Mlodzinski prompted overreaction from fans and media

Exclusive access has existed for as long as professional sports have existed. Teams provide favored outlets with interviews. Networks negotiate exclusive rights. Players appear on team-controlled podcasts and radio programs. Front offices leak information strategically. Organizations release documentaries, behind-the-scenes content and feature stories specifically designed to shape public perception.

This isn't a new development. It's not unique to the Pirates. It's not even unique to baseball.

I've worked on both sides of this equation. I've been an independent reporter covering teams, and I've worked in team-controlled media environments. The reality is that one of the primary reasons in-house media departments exist is to tell the organization's version of events.

Independent reporters hate it. They always have, and understandably so. Their job is often to challenge narratives, ask uncomfortable questions, and provide context that team-controlled outlets may not. Both sides serve a purpose.

The problem is that some critics are acting as though the Pirates somehow violated a sacred code. But did they, really?

One of the biggest accusations being thrown around is that the Pirates lied about making Mlodzinski available to reporters. But where's the lie? Just because Mlodzinski spoke with Jason Mackey first doesn't automatically mean he won't still speak with independent media in Houston.

If the Pirates suddenly canceled all media availability and refused to let anyone else ask questions, then there would be a legitimate complaint. But that hasn't happened (not yet, anyway). What actually happened is that the Pirates got their preferred version of the story out first.

Again, is it sneaky? Sure. Underhanded? Maybe. Unprecedented? Not even close.

And from a fan perspective, this entire controversy feels even more overblown. Fans shouldn't be relying on any one, singular source of information anyway. That's true whether the source is team media, a newspaper, a podcast, a blogger or a national insider.

Every source comes with biases, incentives and limitations. Team media will naturally present the organization's perspective. Independent reporters may focus more heavily on conflict and controversy because those are legitimate parts of the story. National reporters often parachute in on certain stories without the same level of context.

The responsibility ultimately falls on fans to consume multiple sources and decide for themselves what is fact, what is opinion, and what is public relations spin. That's how sports media has always worked.

It's fair to criticize the Pirates for trying to get ahead of an uncomfortable story. But the outrage suggesting this is some unprecedented attack on journalism is hard to take seriously.

What happened here wasn't a constitutional crisis. It wasn't "state-run media." It wasn't evidence that the Pirates have suddenly destroyed the relationship between teams and reporters. It was a baseball team controlling the message whenever possible, and independent reporters getting annoyed when they're not the ones delivering it.

Neither side is particularly shocking. Neither side is entirely wrong. And neither side should be surprising to anyone who has spent more than five minutes around professional sports.

Add us as a preferred source on Google

Follow