You’ve already heard about Detroit News’ Pistons beat writer Chris McCosky’s rant on the blogging community.

McC’s argument is, in short: “bloggers just aren’t journalists.”

Well, uhm, Chris. Some are. Others too. And… wait a minute. Almost every newspaper I go to either desires, or already has, its beat writers blog. And of course, Major League Baseball has blogs. So does the NBA. And an NHL team invited bloggers in like they were the press.

Well, there goes McC’s thesis statement. Gosh, I hope McC isn’t so sloppy and sweeping with his generalizations when he writes about the Pistons, because I actually do read most of his articles. I’d like to think some of the “training” he has goes towards his beat writing job, because apparently none of it went toward the “blogging” portion of his day. He seems to have forgotten one point when he set out to attack blogs: do not impeach your own credibility when you blog. What you say in your blog will affect how others see you. And suddenly, McC has lost a lot of his believability with inaccurate statements, possibly flat out lies.

You see, the reason the Tigers blogosphere is so mad is McC’s blatant attack on our integrity with absolutely no evidence to back it up.

Bloggers are having a field day speculating on how Joel Zumaya really injured his shoulder. Nobody believes a heavy box fell on him. So the Internet is rife with stories about how he fell off his dirt bike.

Now unless one of these bloggers knows Zumaya, or has seen him or knows somebody who saw him crash his bike, they don’t know anything.

But because there is no accountability, because there are no repercussions for being wrong, because they will never have to look Zumaya in the face, who cares? Make up whatever you want.

This shocked me. I know I didn’t blog about a dirt bike. I know Bilfer didn’t at Detroit Tigers Weblog. I know Lee didn’t at Tiger Tales. I know Ian only mentioned there were some doubters of Zumaya’s story. And I know Samara illustrated Zumaya’s shoulder injury, complete with how it happen. She didn’t draw him on a dirt bike. She drew him under a box. And I don’t mean to brag. But we’re some of the top Tigers bloggers, biggest readership, recognized in the main stream. If there is a totally different Tigers blogosphere out there Chris is reading, we don’t know about them. I clicked on as many Detroit Independent Baseball Scribes links as I could find. No dirt bike. Hmm. Bloggers are having a field day, hey Chris?

Curious, I sent Chris an e-mail asking him what links he’s been looking at so I could share them. Bloggerland has a way of dealing with B.S.: we call it out. Sadly, Chris has not yet responded in 24 hours. I will update this post if he does.

Chris insults the Pistons blogosphere by saying it rips him off or insults the beat writers gathering the very information they use. I read Detroit Bad Boys regularly and Need4Sheed quite a bit. They don’t insult Chris. They don’t “hear” things. They credit Chris, and Krista Jahnke, and A Sherrod Blakely, and other sources. But you don’t have to take my word for it. You can go to those sites, look around, read past posts and judge for yourself.

Chris says we don’t do reporting. Blatantly wrong. We may not report roster before they happen (wait, neither do the Detroit papers!) or player reactions, we still report information not found in your daily newpaper. That’s fine. You know what a blog is suited for? Analysis. And the Fourth Estate has no shiny key unlocking the Great Tower of Analysis. Anyone who understands the sport and has the tools can do that. If they do it poorly, no one will read them. If they do it well, they’ll gain respect of readers and fellow bloggers. Online, the cream rises. That is not true of your daily newspaper.

It’s not only McC who doesn’t like bloggers though. You want an eye opener? Go to the Sports Journalists forum. There’s a good chance someone from a newspaper you read is writing incognito there. Why incognito? First, you might discover, they don’t really like you all that much. (They don’t like bloggers either, naturally.) Second, their bosses might discover, they don’t really like them either. And with constant job cuts and layoffs in the fast-dying industry, it can become rather a bitter place at times. I read it from time to time, but these really aren’t the folks I’d choose to hang out with, I gotta tell you. And I am a paid journalist. (Not so much trained, but it’s up to my bosses and readers to figure out if I know what I’m doing, and I like to think, yeah, I do). Back on track, there’s a post about McC’s rant. Read the reaction. It’s mixed, but there are some folks who call him out. Read the other posts. Real life journalists caught making things up? I thought that only happens in blogs and McC’s rant.

The newspaper world is changing. The suits know it. The front line troops know it. You don’t have to like it, but you do have to deal with it maturely. That just doesn’t seem to be the case here. And it’s a shame. A journalist relies on credibility, and McCosky just lost a chunk with me.

Addition: Ian posted a thoughtful response to McCosky at Bless You Boys.

Monday addition: Lee finds the positive. Big Al gathers as many posts as he can find. McCosky hasn’t written back, and I’ve written to the sports editor, expressing disappointment the factual inaccuracies were allowed in print. Here’s the Detroit News contact info should you wish to weigh in.

Monday addition 4:20 p.m.: Apparently McCosky responded on his… blog … to the criticism. Take a look. Naturally, he sidesteps a major talking point of the blogs: What he wrote was not factual. Instead he chose to pick up the cross of the traditional media. Whatever. Until he backs his Zumaya comments with facts, he has no credibility with me. I’d rather read Krista Jahnke, A. Sherrod Blakely, Hoopsworld, Detroit Bad Boys and Need4Sheed anyway.

Chris, however, offers this nugget:

And to those out there who are trying to run a credible, information-driven site, those who give credit to the reporters whose information and stories you refer to and really care about presenting a fair and accurate service, I apologize if you feel I lumped you into the same mix as the irresponsible sites. That was not the intent.

Feel? No. That’s exactly what you did. In print. Hopefully you can clarify this point in print, too, Chris.