Clarification needed

Wanted to clear the air on something, because it’s come to my attention that I was off base on something regarding my blog on Monday. Seems that I misinterpreted a column by Ray Ratto in the Chronicle over the weekend regarding the Barry Bonds to the A’s hysteria. I wrote that Ratto gave the impression that he didn’t believe his own reporter’s story (in fairness to him, I’ve since amended the blog), and for that, I was wrong. That was my knee-jerk reaction to what I read, and judging from other comments I’ve heard and read regarding that column, I wasn’t alone.

Nevertheless, I should not have doubted that Ray stands by the reporting of Susan Slusser. What it seems he objected to is whether the A’s are actually going to sign Bonds. By leaving a different impression, I cast a poor light on him. Can’t say much more than that other than to offer my apology .  

As for why such a story _ which essentially was based entirely on speculation and hid behind an anonymous quote _ received such huge play, that’s not a hard one. Sensational stories like that sell, no matter how flimsy they may seem to somebody schooled in journalistic integrity.

 It is interesting to note that the Bonds-to-A’s story is nowhere to be found on the A’s link on sfgate.com. Plenty of reader comments though.