Asking fellow reporters for their thoughts about a team

Just curious: why are so many of you OK with quoting a TV type but not a writer?

 

People do this all the time...

People who work at 10,000 circ weekly papers and can't get anybody of substance on the record.

Don't do it. Don't even think about doing it.

 

I've seen some otherwise very respectable writers do this and I've always thought it was lazy reporting. In fact, I've told them so.

I wouldn't do this. Better yet, I would be pissed if someone quoted me about a team I covered.

The idea that reporters can talk with each other is fine. But the purpose should be for background. Once pointed in the right direction, you then are armed with the info to ask intelligent questions of real sources.

As with most everything in life, though, there are exceptions. However, the vague example that prompted this topic doesn't seem to come close to justifying its use.

Just my three cents.

 

I believe that I've come across a solution to this dilemma.

When I need quotes about a team, but cannot find anyone with the general background that is willing to talk, I steal a sweat sock from the locker room.

Then, I put it over my hand and ask it any question I please.

In the story, I identify the sock as a "source close to the team."

 

In the instances I cited, the TV guys either played or coached in the league. That would be the basis of their expertise. To me, network analysts occupy a slightly different spot ... not quite fellow journalists. But maybe others feel differently.

 

The Seattle Times quoted a Baltimore Sun Orioles beat guy when writing their "Is Erik Bedard a dick?" story...

 

I talk to other beat guys all the time (especially for big out-of-conference games), but I can't imagine quoting them. And I hope they'd never quote me. It's just background knowledge, and maybe some notebook quote-swapping.

Last football season, I made a quip that caused one of the other team's beat guys to laugh for about an hour. He anonymously attributed the quote on his blog, and I didn't care. For a blog, it was funny, and the team I cover has enough beat guys that no one could ever track it back to me.

I can't imagine anyone using me as a serious quote. Then again, we're all doing radio interviews all the time, now, anyway. Still, I wouldn't do it.

 

That might be the kind of instance where you could do it -- if part of the piece deals with how he interacts with the media.

 

When I would get on the radio (I've even done a little color work) it would be directly from me, not some dude quoting me in place of someone who is actually part of his story. It's not the same thing. Not to mention that it was exposure for the newspaper.

 

Man, I've got at least 10-15 "Joe Dickhead is a dick" stories just begging to be written. Trouble is, I'd have to quote reporters from my own beat.

 

I wasn't trying to imply that it was the same thing.

In fact, I think radio and TV are blurring the line between reporter and columnist at an alarming rate. It sickens me when reporters think going on TV gives them the right to only tell one side of a story. More and more people are doing this, and it sucks. I try to say things like, "Well, you could say this, but you could also say this..." If something seems obvious, then I might say it, but I've been wrong about things that seemed obvious to everyone, too.

 

Now that's quality journalism.