Dianna Russini's return includes no specifics about multiple controversies

As expected, Dianna Russini made her return to sports media on Wednesday, with a one-hour show platformed by an illegal offshore sports book.It’s hardly a prime gig, but her “crisis publicist” managed to create plenty of hype — and to finagle a puff piece with People.com that included no questions about the circumstances that prompted Russini’s resignation from The Athletic.In September, the New York Post reported that Russini would “share her side of the scandal upon taking her next job.” She hasn’t, and she didn’t in the debut episode of her new show.Technical difficulties delayed the release of the first episode, which was supposed to be live but seemed to be entirely pre-recorded. (The company blamed the glitch on a “record-breaking audience.” Comparable to what?)Once the episode finally appeared, it featured three guests (none of whom are current players or coaches), preceded by a segment in which she addressed the future of Ravens quarterback Lamar Jackson. Which, from an editorial standpoint, is hardly the top story in the NFL on the day after the trade deadline. There was nothing new or particularly insightful about Jackson. It was a summary of the facts that anyone who has been paying attention to the situation already knew, with a not-groundbreaking assertion that the Ravens want to keep him beyond 2026.More significantly, the wooly mammoth in the mud room was not addressed. The overriding message was that she went away for a while, she went through some things, and now she’s back. For anyone who doesn’t know the story, she said nothing that would even begin to shed light on it.If it’s going to be an opinions-and-interviews show, that’s fine. If she’s going to include the reporting of facts about the NFL, the credibility question can’t be ignored. And this isn’t about the relationship (or whatever it was) with Patriots coach Mike Vrabel. It’s about how she responded to it.She issued a strident denial when the Post published the photos of the two of them at a resort in Arizona. One week later, she abruptly resigned from her position at The Athletic, complaining that “commentators in various media have engaged in self-feeding speculation that is simply unmoored from the facts.”In the months since making that assertion, she hasn’t shared her own version of the facts. In her kid-gloves interview with People.com, Russini said that the “lies became so out of control.” Without identifying even one of the alleged lies.Her nothing-to-see-here position was undermined by Vrabel himself, who abandoned his initial position that the initial photos “show a completely innocent interaction and any suggestion otherwise is laughable.” Then came another group of photos, from March 2020, which had a distinct know-it-when-you-see-it vibe as to the specific nature of the relationship. That prompted Vrabel to step away from the team for the all-important third day of the draft, in order to attend counseling with his family.So, to date, Russini’s official position is that it was all a big nothing. Vrabel’s words and actions make it clear that it was something, whatever it was. (That boat-trip video didn’t help much, either.)Beyond the fact that The Athletic concluded, following an internal investigation, that “Russini’s relationship with Vrabel was in clear violation of The Athletic’s standards,” the situation creates clear questions of credibility. Put simply, and bluntly, can the audience believe what she says?That leads to the other issue, which has been largely overlooked in connection with her return to sports media — if a one-hour show hosted by an illegal offshore sports book even counts as that. In February, she told the story of being pulled over for texting while driving. She claimed that she FaceTimed a current head coach to get her out of the ticket. And, based on the bodycam footage released by the local authorities, that contention was flat-out false.Forget the relationship with Vrabel. All insiders have compromised their journalistic integrity, in one way or another. The interests of the audience often take a back seat to the broader chess match of getting and staying in position to get “scoops” (which usually come in the form of a five-minute heads-up before a transaction is announced). Punches are pulled. Relevant stories are overlooked or downplayed. Favors are done for sources.It’s one thing to be compromised. It’s another thing to have real issues when it comes to telling the truth. Because the fundamental premise of anyone who is engaged in reporting of any kind is that they are at all times telling the truth. Even in post-truth America, it’s a standard that should never be relaxed.Russini’s credibility has been damaged by her denials regarding the relationship (whatever it was) with Vrabel, and by Vrabel’s actions that undercut her denials. Moreover, the casual, nonchalant spinning of a phony yarn about FaceTiming a coach to get out of a ticket makes it even harder to believe anything she says.That’s why I said last Saturday on #PFTPM that we’ll be ignoring any of her reports until her credibility is somehow restored, if that’s even possible at this point. In this business, it would be very easy to make assertions and couch them as news from an unnamed source. When someone has not one but two concrete instances of clear issues when it comes to telling the truth, it would be irresponsible for us to blindly accept any reports from that reporter and to use them here.It’s that simple. People may not like some of the things we report, but the goal at all times is to be fully and completely honest with the audience. Part of that duty of honesty includes being brutally honest that the word of someone who has, in multiple ways, damaged her own credibility simply can’t be trusted here.