[Nevadaref]

This newsreporter clearly wrote with a sympathy for the players on team. Nowhere in the article does he mention sportsmanship or praise the league officials for attempting to put a stop to these type of fights at the HS events.
The most important quote in the whole article is passed over without so much as a word from the writer:
"This is a very unfortunate situation," Hughes said. "A precedent has been set in the past that this type of behavior will not be tolerated in Nevada high school sports. While these decisions are very difficult, it must be emphasized that we expect our athletes to be good citizens who respect each other both on and off the field."

As evidence of his siding with the HS team, despite admitting that "Hughes spent the past two days reviewing TV news films of the fight and meeting with school district administrators in Las Vegas to determine what penalties would be issued," look at the words chosen to describe the decision to declare a forfeit:
1. they received a much worse penalty.
2. Hughes decided that the brawl warranted the harshest of responses.
3. the threat of further disciplinary action looming

This author clearly wanted to convey the decision as something dark and terrible. Rather than simply reporting the event, his personal opinion of the NIAA's decision comes out in the article, and it is obviously a negative one.

Then there is the inclusion of obligatory sensational comments:

1. The suit also requests more than $40,000 in damages, because the suspension during a playoffs stopped college scouts from evaluating Peeples for potential recruitment and scholarships. (Oh, please!)

2. "It's been a baffling experience," Snyder said. "I haven't seen anything so bizarre in my life."

3. "It's unbelievable,"

4. why do you blame all of us?

5. "They started it," said Peeples, who ran for nearly 300 yards in the victory.
I particulary love this one. It's so childish that any decent reporter wouldn't have even bothered to include it. Notice how all of the blame is shifted to the NIAA officials and deflected from the student athletes. Does the writer criticize the behavior of the players anywhere in the story? Nope.

Finally, the article ends with the tear-jerking closing line:

"The threat meant little to the Shields."


Canuckrefguy,
I think that "shallow and ignorant" applies far more to this piece of work than my generalization, which probably contains more truth than most would want to admit.

As for your friend, I believe that he is honest and a good person because you say so, but if he were to write something like this and pass it off as reporting, I would criticize him as well.