The Athletic Looking Into Russini: New Evidence Gives Clue to Why It’s Taking So Long

Dianna Russini was recently busted for another lie. This one involved her recounting a time when she was pulled over for using her phone while driving, and then FaceTiming the officer’s favorite coach to get out of the ticket. As it turns out, that story was untrue. The truth is that she name dropped NFL Coaches and was let off with a warning. Based on the body camera footage, there’s no reason to believe that her efforts had anything to do with the officer letting her go with a warning.

Russini gave the fake version of the story on an Apple Podcast during Super Bowl week. The story, that frankly not a lot of people had given much thought to, resurfaced when The New York Times used it as an example of Russini’s inappropriate abuse of her position in an article they published last week. The recent discovery that the story was untrue gives us an indication as to why it might be taking so long for The Athletic, a subsidiary of The New York Times, to complete their investigation into the former journalist’s work.

First of all, in a field that relies on trust, it’s hard to uncover what someone actually knows when they can simply say “sources told me.” Journalists are supposed to have the integrity to never abuse that trust. Some can’t handle that.

Second of all, Russini lies. A lot. In her resignation letter she said that the speculation about her was “unmoored from the facts.” A lot of evidence supporting those facts has surfaced since then.

The photos of her and Vrabel appearing to kiss in New York in 2020. Her admission on Pardon My Take that she told Josh Allen she was voting for him for MVP before actually casting her vote for Lamar Jackson. The quickly deleted post about Jets’ Offensive Tackle Morgan Moses being expected to test free agency with a Patriots graphic - the team he ultimately signed with.

The point that I’m taking forever to get to - With Russini caught in so many lies, The Athletic could simply be overwhelmed with the amount of content to go through. And once they’ve uncovered all the lies, or what they believe to be all of them, then what?

Many of the skeletons will likely expose tampering in the NFL amongst several teams. Does The Athletic want to be at odds with the NFL? If they want to walk the walk of the standards laid out by The New York Times, then that shouldn’t be a factor. Let’s not forget that The Athletic/New York Times lives behind a paywall. Are their consumers getting the premium reporting they’re paying for if the outlet hides anything incriminating? (I’m not accusing them of doing so. I’m one of their satisfied customers! For now…)

The Athletic has a potential out, though I don’t recommend it. If Russini’s reporting truly is as compromised as I believe it to be, they could simply add a warning next to all of her previous reports. A red mark next to her name that reads “Discredited Journalist”. Or perhaps a blurb in front of each piece that warns “This content is intended to be comedic informative. The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of our peers, bosses, or ESPN…I mean, The Athletic. P.s. Don’t sue us.” (Shoutout, Pat McAfee Show)

Bottom line, The Athletic’s investigation, from the outside looking in, is akin to dismantling an atomic bomb. Might be better to just drop the thing and run.

Written by Seattle Mike