Wilbon, Stephen A. and the Word 'Journalist'

Wilbon's test happens after the column runs

Wilbon's case comes from repetition. ESPN's official biography says he joined The Washington Post in 1980 after two summer internships, became a columnist in 1990 and left the paper in December 2010 after 31 years. The Shirley Povich Center records the breadth beneath those dates: college sports, Major League Baseball, the NFL and the NBA before the column.

He remembers reporting as a physical loop. Press row. Practice. A critical column. Then the cage, where the player named in print can look back at its author. In Awful Announcing's account of the interview, Wilbon did not claim that television opinions are worthless. He claimed they are a different occupation because that loop is usually broken.

That is a strong standard. It is also narrower than a dictionary. The Society of Professional Journalists' ethics code describes duties such as verifying information, providing context, seeking subjects' responses and correcting mistakes. It does not turn one workplace ritual into a license. Still, Wilbon's cage is a wonderfully concrete test because it makes accountability uncomfortable on purpose.

Smith's answer separates the trade from the assignment

Smith conceded the literal point. According to the full report on his response, he said he is not in locker rooms answering to subjects after every story or angle. His explanation was logistical: he produces 22 hours of live content each week, more than 900 hours in a year. He called himself a journalist by trade and nature, while also naming his present roles as pundit, commentator and radio host.

He also offered evidence of continuity. Smith said he makes calls, cultivates sources and receives information from people who know the stories he discusses. ESPN's own Smith biography supports the career history behind that claim: reporting jobs at the Winston-Salem Journal, Greensboro News and Record and New York Daily News, followed by 16 years as a general sports columnist at The Philadelphia Inquirer.

The biography also labels his current ESPN position with striking precision: featured commentator and executive producer of First Take. Wilbon's ESPN title is co-host of Pardon the Interruption and NBA studio analyst. Their employer has already solved the narrow labeling problem. Neither official title says reporter.

A show can contain reporting without becoming a reported story

Here is where Wilbon has the better noun and Smith has the better verb. Smith plainly still reports in the everyday sense when he calls sources and checks information. Yet First Take is built to debate and interpret, not to present an independently reported account with visible sourcing and responses from every subject. Calling its host a commentator describes the audience's product more accurately. It does not erase the reporting that informs him.

That distinction matters because authority should be inspectable. A viewer deserves to know whether a claim came from firsthand reporting, a source conversation, game observation or opinion. One grand identity cannot do all that labeling. Specific verbs can. Smith reported. Smith argued. Smith heard from a source. Those phrases are less glamorous and far more useful.

Smith's scale helps explain why the category feels fuzzy. The Associated Press reported in March 2025 that he would remain First Take's featured personality and executive producer, with roles across additional ESPN coverage and his own productions. The job is deliberately broader than a beat. Breadth brings reach; it also makes the origin of each assertion more important to identify.

PTI offers a cheerful clue

Wilbon has spent nearly 25 years hosting a program that openly mixes information and opinion. ESPN says PTI debuted on October 22, 2001, and will continue beyond its 25th anniversary under multiyear extensions for Wilbon and Tony Kornheiser. Its signature features include a daily segment called Errors and Omissions. That title is funny because it admits what most debate programs try to outrun: talk quickly enough and you will occasionally owe the audience a correction.

The same week Wilbon questioned Smith's label, he also examined whether ESPN's transaction-focused insiders still fit his definition. Awful Announcing's separate report shows him wrestling rather than declaring: he said their work uses journalistic skills and stopped short of saying transactions negate journalism. That hesitation improves his larger point. Categories should follow the work, not punish the worker.

Their disagreement performed its own answer

Wilbon made a public criticism. Smith heard it, answered it and granted that Wilbon had earned the right to make it. Then readers could inspect both sets of reasons. Nobody vanished behind a slogan. The exchange became accountable almost despite itself.

Call Wilbon and Smith commentators now. Credit both as journalists by training and career. Then ask the question Wilbon's batting-cage image leaves behind: after the take travels, who shows up next?