I think this is a very concise summary from CNN (breaking news e-mail)

[lesliepear]

-- MLB steroid report: Use widespread, includes biggest stars

I'm not sure what I think about it yet.

Comments

[alice-q.livejournal.com]

What I think about it is that it's a witch hunt, pure and simple. Baseball, for years and years, not only looked the other way but actually rewarded players who used artificial substances. And now, retroactively, we're going to call the players cheaters and absolve the holier-than-thou owners? Mitchell, in his press conference (there are advantages to being off work due to snow) was quite clear that the focus now should be on better testing and education going forward and not on investigating every name that's ever been mentioned. But I fear that the public focus is going to be on the names. And, worse, a fake list was circulating on newsgroups and bulletin boards earlier today, easily recognizeable by a typo in one of the player's names. So anyone who's on the fake list but not mentioned in the Mitchell report is likely to be tarred with the same brush.

ETA Not all of the players named were named for steroids. Some were implicated in use of Human Growth Hormone, and there might have been other substances as well. Furthermore, the terms of the report don't differentiate one-time use from chronic use.

[nsingman.livejournal.com]

There's no doubt that much of the high dudgeon has a rather hollow ring. You're absolutely right that baseball looked the other way as fan support returned after its nadir following the '94 strike. However, I don't think that it's simply a witch hunt. While the owners ought not to be absolved, many of those players clearly were cheaters who lied about what they were doing and violated the spirit (if not always the letter) of the rules and the game.

In any event, the ones who took steroids have likely sentenced themselves to some rather profound health problems down the road - and maybe not too far down the road. I also have no problem with players and owners being slammed in the court of public opinion, and I hope what happened to McGwire (rejection in his first Hall of Fame vote) is repeated many times.

[alice-q.livejournal.com]

I also have no problem with players and owners being slammed in the court of public opinion, and I hope what happened to McGwire (rejection in his first Hall of Fame vote) is repeated many times.

Judge the ones who did, sure, if you know for sure that they did, based on their own admissions or clear documentary evidence. But, what about the ones where there's suspicion but no smoking gun. And, for what it's worth, right now there's more compelling evidence against Paul Lo Duca than against Mark McGwire.