- Joined
- May 8, 2002
- Posts
- 1,195,089
- Reaction score
- 59
You must be registered for see images attach
Credit: Aaron Doster-Imagn Images / PebbleCaddie via Wikipedia
Last week, Phil Mickelson’s transition from golf’s golden boy to disgraced and disgruntled former legend seemed to reach its natural conclusion. Reporter Alan Shipnuck, author of the definitive, unauthorized biography of Mickelson, published a detailed story for the golf publication Skratch outlining Mickelson’s history of transgressions, including alleged sexual harassment that got him kicked out of a private golf club earlier this year, and infidelity towards his wife, Amy Mickelson.
Now, Phil Mickelson, through a spokesperson, is fighting back against Shipnuck’s report, calling it a “drive-by shooting heavy on implication but unsupported by any on-the-record sources.”
In a more than 700-word statement obtained by David Rumsey in Front Office Sports, Mickelson’s spokesperson attacks Shipnuck directly, claiming the reporter used details provided by anonymous sources to imply certain things about Mickelson without ever firmly reporting the implications as fact.
“[The report] relies on implication and anonymous sourcing to leave readers with an impression the reporting itself never establishes,” the statement read. “The article never says Phil Mickelson was kicked out of a golf club because it can’t. Instead, it is written to leave readers with that impression without ever having to report it as fact.”
Of course, such narrow framing in a piece of this nature is normal. Publications are reluctant to report details as fact unless there is indisputable evidence to support it. For a piece like Shipnuck’s, which relies on conversations with sources close to Mickelson, the reporter cannot always verify without a shadow of a doubt if something is true. Instead, it’s the reporters job to use his/her editorial judgment, corroborate with multiple sources, and present the most accurate version of the story based on the information available.
Particularly in a case like the Mickelson story where hard evidence is unlikely to surface absent some sort of video of the incident in question or paperwork from the club acknowledging something happened, using firsthand accounts to verify details is standard operating procedure. But that’s why Shipunck attributes those details to sources, rather than presenting them as fact. There is nothing abnormal about Shipnuck’s process here, and readers are able to distinguish where information is coming from and can make their own judgments on the veracity of that information.
Mickelson’s spokesperson later goes on to suggest that Skratch should have disclosed its ownership arrangement with the PGA Tour, which holds a minority stake in the publication.
“Readers deserve to know that Skratch was not founded as an independent golf publication. It was created by the PGA Tour, operated as a PGA Tour-owned media brand for nearly a decade, and in 2024 was contributed by the PGA Tour to Pro Shop, a new media company in which the PGA Tour retained a minority ownership stake and became a strategic partner.
“None of those relationships mean Skratch cannot report independently. They do, however, create a corporate relationship that reasonable readers may consider relevant when evaluating an extensive investigation into Phil Mickelson, one of the most consequential players ever to leave the PGA Tour for LIV Golf,” the statement read.
To the spokesperson’s point, this is relevant information that should have been disclosed considering Mickelson’s fraught relationship with the PGA Tour. However, Shipnuck did not join Skratch until 2025, a year after the publication formally left the auspices of the PGA Tour, so it’s fair to say he’s not particularly encumbered by that prior ownership arrangement. Skratch, of course, also has a clear body of work of independent journalism, as Mickelson’s spokesperson acknowledges.
Overall, the statement issued by Mickelson’s spokesperson reads as a desperate attempt to muddy the waters when Shipnuck’s story presented a clear and damning picture of the once-revered golfer. The pair has quite the history of squabbling given Shipnuck’s aggressive reporting on Mickelson over the years, and this simply marks the latest chapter.
The post Phil Mickelson rep rips Alan Shipnuck after bombshell infidelity report appeared first on Awful Announcing.
Continue reading...
