JOURNALISM AT ITS BEST AGAIN... BONDS ALL-STAR STORY

How could San Francisco Chronicle writer, Henry Schulman, incorrectly report that Barry Bonds was being compensated for his participation in the All-Star Game Home Run Derby? Bad source? Good source, bad information? Heard an unconfirmed rumor and went with it?

Or is this more of a "why"? Why would Henry Schulman make up a story painting Barry Bonds in a negative manner? Or why would Henry Schulman go with unconfirmed rumor or information painting Barry Bonds in a negative manner? Does he not like Bonds, who isn't a favorite among reporters? Does he want a different angle on the story to highlight himself? Whatever the case is Henry Schulman should be ashamed, but a personality that drives such as act probably isn't regretful or apologetic of his actions.

Bonds clears it up here.