Obviously the story of the day is Sammy Sosa. Earlier, Bob cataloged the non-surprise to the Sosa news. At NBC Sports proper, Mike Celzic writes that rather than burn Sosa at the stake, our focus should be on Bud Selig and Don Fehr.
My view: I share the lack of surprise Bob mentions and the lack of ire at Sammy Sosa for many of the reasons Mike mentions. But to me, the real issue here is the fact that list of the 2003 test results -- which was intended to be first confidential and then was supposed to be destroyed -- is being leaked. The MLBPA and/or Major League Baseball screwed up royal in allowing that list to survive when they had agreed that it would not. The people who subjected themselves to the drug testing that formed its basis (a) did so in order to move the ball forward on drug testing in baseball; and (b) had an expectation that their identities would remain confidential. That expectation has now been spectacularly confounded, and the practical result of it is that anyone who cares about their privacy is now being sent the message that they should not, under any circumstances, participate in their employers' drug testing program, however confidential it is supposed to be. You never know: your name could wind up in the newspapers! Your mileage may vary, but I don't think the avoidance of workplace drug testing is something anyone wants to encourage. As a result of all of this, it's my view that the list should be ordered destroyed, though I suspect that in the Internet age, such an order would be meaningless. Information wants to be free, and enough people have it now that I suspect it all will be some day.
The greater wrong in my mind is the fact of the leaks themselves. I'm a lawyer by trade, and it shocks me that fellow officers of the court are divulging this sort of information to the media. This is evidence that was seized in an ongoing criminal case that is subject to court order putatively preventing its release. The act of leaking this stuff is, at the very least, a violation of that court order and a violation of legal ethics. Depending on the exact language of the order, it could be a criminal act. I don't know about you, but that causes me far more concern than whether Sammy Sosa took steroids six years ago.