Toronto Maple Leafs' goaltender James Reimer has been out for over a month after a goal-mouth collision with Montreal Canadiens forward Brian Gionta where it appeared that the goalie might have suffered a head injury. Concussions are one of the scariest injuries that can happen to professional athletes due to the uncertainty that surrounds the recovery from the head trauma. The debilitating nature of the injury in hockey has been pushed to the forefront due to Sidney Crosby's struggle to recover from the multiple concussions he suffered last season. For their part, Reimer's team, the Toronto Maple Leafs, have been less than forthcoming with regards to discussing the injury suffered to their star goaltender (in general, the team does not disclose the nature of any player's injury). In order to get the inside scoop on the goalie's injury, Toronto Star reporter Dave Feschuk decided to call Reimer's mother, Marlene which has resulted in many people questioning the reporter's tactic.
This wasn't a story about getting background information or talking to a guy's mom; it's the second time the same reporter has used a family member to find out the specificity of an injury. It puts a player's career at risk when you do that, which is why we don't talk about injuries. Other players can target people. It's the second time that reporter has gone with altruistic reasons in order to find the specificity of an injury. That's it. -Maple Leafs coach Ron Wilson
From the phone call, Feschuk received the information that almost all fans already guessed and feared as according to Reimer's mother, the Leafs goalie had indeed been concussed. Granted Marlene Reimer did not have to answer the reporter's questions about her son and publicly at least, the Maple Leafs goalie did not seem to have an issue with his mother being questioned but does that make Feschuk less (or possibly even more) of a reporter having to resort to calling a player's family member? Did Feschuk really resort to a "weasely move" as hockey commentator Mike Milbury suggested? By calling Reimer's family, did Feschuk cross the line of decency by invading Reimer's privacy that most credible reporters at least try to straddle? On the other hand, is losing any semblance of a private life just a part of being famous (especially a hockey player in Toronto) that should be accepted and expected by somebody like Reimer?
Personally, I might be in the minority but if I was in Reimer's position I would not be impressed with a reporter bugging my family and maybe even upset that my mom did not offer a "no comment" to Feschuk's questions. However, if I was Reimer I also would not be happy that the Toronto Maple Leafs have been so secretive with the injury. Of course, part of the job for any reporter is to find the facts and when the logical source of this information (the Toronto Maple Leafs in this case) is unhelpful then doesn't a journalist like Feschuk have to try to think outside of the box to give fans the deeper understanding of the injury that they so desperately want? I kind of think that the article was written to appease Maple Leaf fans who were getting sick of not hearing anything new about Reimer's injury. It follows is it our fault that this happened because as fans we want to know all of the specific details regarding an athlete's injury?
Feschuk was a journalist trying to get to the bottom of a story. Feschuk did not tap the Reimer household's phone lines or snoop around in their garbage cans so it could be argued that speaking to Marlene Reimer was not necessarily an ambush. However, his questionable tactics has people wondering if he took advantage of a vulnerable parent. Feschuk's controversial methods for uncovering information may have been disgusting to some but they were not revolutionary as these techniques have been used and will continue to be used by the media for a long time. The question does remain whether the media should be so bold to use these methods at all.
