Harvey Araton leaves sports

[21]

According to the Observer, Harvey is leaving the Times' sports section to do general features for more ad-productive sections.

Hearing this was not really by choice, but who knows.  The Observer says the change was directed 'by the masthead.'

Sad to see Harvey leaving sports...a great reporter and great guy.

http://www.observer.com/2009/media/times-harvey-araton-leaves-sports-desk-new-features-desk

[cranberry]

Not his choice. I don't know Harvey at all but I heard about this move about a month ago from one of his colleagues. Interesting the story mentions Vic Zeigal, who was tossed aside by the News around the same time. Vic had a lot of mileage but I remember reading him in the Post as a kid. Plus, anyone mentioned in Ball Four shouldn't be done that way.

[AD]

this is brutal. harvey is, by far, the best thing in that sports section. the end of the big city sports columnist, an american archtype? with this i think we hear that bell tolling....

[WriteThinking]

This is a bad thing for the sports section, to be sure.

Could actually turn out to be a good thing for Harvey, though.

[Mediator]

This was totally not his choice and has been in the works since the spring. The Times now has two sports columnists in Vescey and Rhoden. I used to love reading Sports of the Times on the sports front. Usually a considered read. In the days of Tweets perhaps it seemed too ponderous.

[AD]

so in this age where everyone is an opinionator, does that mean that opinion columns have lost/are losing their power?

[Michael_ Gee]

One more step of the Times towards total disaster. I don't know who's running their sports section, but it's a daily cavalcade of stuff American fans don't give a shit about, steroid scandals, the Tour de France, WNBA, etc.
     Sports cost money, money the Times needs to keep losers like Alessandra Stanley employed and the Sulzberger family attached to its self-esteem.
     Harvey is my friend, but he was also surely their best columnist.
     I wouldn't be surprised if they make a run to get Roberts back. She's their style.

[21]

so in this age where everyone is an opinionator, does that mean that opinion columns have lost/are losing their power?

Weird, I was just typing the same thing, now I have to start over.

Harvey is a career NY sportswriter, why would you pull his commentary out of your paper, unless the advertisers have completely abandoned your sports section?  

[cranberry]

so in this age where everyone is an opinionator, does that mean that opinion columns have lost/are losing their power?

I've been saying this for three years. The only thing that separates a journalist and a blogger is reporting. If you want to have value, be a good reporter. People who do the legwork, ask the right questions and have the connections (think Ken Rosenthal or Buster Olney) are the most valuable people in the industry. Columnists are the easiest (and produce the most savings) of job cuts in many cases.

FYI, I spent $2 on a NYTimes at the train station this morning because I was late and they had run out of the Daily News (50 cents plus 50 cents tip) and I felt like a fool for the purchase. My home subscription is down to just the weekends.

[funky_mountain]

i will miss harvey's nba/basketball work.

i'm not trying to be a smart guy but how many days a week does the times' sports pages lead a section? how much advertising does the sports section pull in anyway?

and michael_gee, i understand what you're saying but hasn't the times' sports section catered to a different audience for the past 20-25 years (and maybe longer) anyway.

with that said, i enjoy what howard beck does on the nba, pete thamel on colleges, judy battista on the nfl and whatever john branch happens to dig up. i know others enjoy tyler kepner on the yankees and jack curry on baseball (not that i don't, i just don't read their stuff often).

i'd have to agree that the times is placing less emphasis on sports columns. who replaced roberts? vecsey? berkow?

ad, a columnist who can report, write and be persuasive is still valuable.

[Mediator]

That's why Ian O'Connor and Harvey are good reads. Unfortunately, there are too many who hold the job and consider the TV set as good a spot to report as attending the event live. Or even worse, young sports writers who aspire to pontificate from the living room and don't see how much work actually goes into a column.  

[Michael_ Gee]

There are a lot of talented writers on the Times' sports staff. Their pro football coverage has been excellent for years. But nobody covers the Tour de France as front-page news every day because they have a different set of readers-they do it to put on airs and show how cosmopolitan they are.

[AD]

it's intriguing. five years ago i'd have said that the internet would empower columnists, because everybody knows the news almost instantaneously, and surely by the next morning. figured by now we'd see sort of what the san francisco chronicle was doing 15, 20 years ago: columnists, opinion, even columny game stories -- pure take, out the wazoo. instead, it looks like 'take' is losing its power -- if only because anyone can have one -- and what others have said here makes sense. it's the reporting, stupid, always was, and will be still. are we coming full circle then? sorry about all questions, but it just feels like there's a turn coming. and, with everyone else, i love a columnist like ian who reports. tell me something new.

[Editude]

Still believe what a former boss told me: Your lead columnist should be your best reporter. Stray thoughts from the recliner? That is not added value, but a reasoned opinion built around gathered information and distilled analysis is.

[Boom_70]

What are "general features for more ad-productive sections"?  Would it be something like Travel or Auto?


Seems like the Times has been planning on getting rid of general sports columnists for a while. I noticed a few months ago that they eliminated the click on for "Columnists" on the Times Sports home page.

Congratulations to Tom Jolley.

[WriteThinking]

it's the reporting, stupid, always was, and will be still.

This is the money line for this entire industry -- always has been, and always will be.

Now, if only everyone -- both in the public and in the business -- could just fully realize, understand and appreciate this...

[WaylonJennings]

Still believe what a former boss told me: Your lead columnist should be your best reporter.

Sounds good in theory, but the problem is you can have some ego clashes and stepping on of toes if columnists try too much to get involved in the beat writer's work. It's a delicate balance.

[Joe Williams]

I can't see how that's a better sports section without Harvey in it.

Yet they want to charge more now?

[21]

I can't see how that's a better sports section without Harvey in it.

It's not. But now that they slashed the freelance budget, they need someone to write all those pieces. So they cherry-picked the rest of the paper for established writers who could write features. I don't think Harvey was the only one relocated.

[Ben_Hecht]

Begs the question: Why wasn't Rhoden drafted?

[21]

Somehow I don't see Bill Rhoden in the Style section.

[Ben_Hecht]

So because Rhoden is a one-trick pony, Araton gets punished.

That ain't right.

[derwood]

What are "general features for more ad-productive sections"?  Would it be something like Travel or Auto?


Seems like the Times has been planning on getting rid of general sports columnists for a while. I noticed a few months ago that they eliminated the click on for "Columnists" on the Times Sports home page.

Congratulations to Tom Jolley.

Auto section is almost gone, worse than sports.  

[Drip]

so in this age where everyone is an opinionator, does that mean that opinion columns have lost/are losing their power?

Yes. Personally, I don't need someone who watched the same game I did tell me what I saw. I think I'm formulate my opinion. I'd love to see political commentators go out the same way. I don't need some clown watching a debate tell me what they thought of it.
Harvey is good people and he's going to be fine. Rhoden and Mr.  Vescey couldn't make the switch professionally as easily as Harvey can.

[Johnny Dangerously]

If you think your opinion of what you saw is always right, then there's no need to read anything. Ever. In fact, why read at all? Why interact with people at all? They have nothing to teach you. You know everything, right?

Good lord.

Opinion columns do more than tell you what you saw. They tell you what the columnist saw, or what one of the principals saw, or a different perspective than your own, perhaps, which could open up a whole world for an open-minded person.