Columnistosaurus

From where I sit and read, I just wish more people who wrote columns stopped trying to ape the disposable tirades of talk radio/talk TV.

 

Isn't part of the problem that the Internet has exposed general interest columnists for their, well, very general interest?

Used to be, you'd pick up the paper to see what the local columnist had to say about the big game or the big trade. Maybe you still do, but back then you had no other options. Now, while that same columnist is presented as an expert on every team in town -- and maybe presented on TV or radio as an expert on every team in every town -- you can hop all over the web for analysis and commentary from sport-specific experts.

Not to say that some local columnists don't have the ability and contacts to do a great analysis in one sport, or two. But, really, would you want to read that columnist on a baseball trade before you read Buster Olney?

 

The well-read lawyer who blogs about sports has never met any of the people he's writing about, has never talked to them about what they're trying to accomplish and whether or why it worked, in many cases is not even seeing the event from inside the arena. What the well-read lawyer knows is what he thinks he knows, which is essentially about as insightful as what I could tell him about the law from having watched "The Good Wife."

 

Readers don't care about any of that. They don't value the insight of the (supposedly detached) newspaper man any more than the rants of the blogger they find entertaining, who roots for the same teams they do.

This is not a new idea. I'm surprised anyone still thinks "real" reporters have some kind of advantage as far as news consumers are concerned.

 

And counterpoint ...

http://theclassical.org/theclog/life-on-mars-woody-paige-at-his-bestworst

 

I'm surprised "real" reporters still think that they have some kind of advantage over the best bloggers--fans or not--when it comes to providing certain types of insight and analysis. Your dismissive attitude toward bloggers "rants" suggests you know very little about the high quality of product many of them put out. Those that succeed actually treat their readers with a some respect, rather than look down upon them, as you apparently do.

Twoback, your analogy is not even close to being correct. A well-read lawyer--who watches baseball every night and reads about it everyday--would be similar to a non-lawyer that watched court cases (not a TV show) and read court briefs.

 

I'm not sure you read my posts correctly.

 

Yeah, alphabets, you and him both agree anybody can be a columnist.

 

Dave Kindred is, to quote Walter Wellesley Smith, "as right as two martinis at lunch." We need more Kindreds, more Smiths, not fewer. The gifted columnist, ideally one who was at the arena or ballpark to smell the cabbage in the hallway Stanley Woodword implored Smith to write about, will always have the advantage over someone with pedestrian views and writing ability to match, even if he or she is stuck in the office, or den. The blogger era has produced a few so far -- Geoff Shackelford on golf is a must-read in the business, if not for every fan -- but has a way to go to catch up. (No, I'm not him, but he had 6.5 million page views last year.)

 

Yup.

Ultimately, readers decide. Any old-fashioned notions regarding the importance of the newspaper columnist are almost laughable at this point.

Some have moved online, yes. But in many cases, readers have decided that other options are just fine as far as they're concerned.

I agree, except my interpretation is that I find the notion of "two martinis at lunch" to be anathema.

As with many of his pieces for the NSJC (which, as I've stated, I still would love to see succeed, even if their approach is not quite what I had hoped) Kindred is stuck in a long-vanished newspaper world.

 

So any writer is just as good as any other writer? No special skills needed, just a take? I know you don't like newspapers in the first place, but I really don't think anyone is just as talented as anyone else.

 

I did not post a single thing you mention here. Was this meant for someone else?