ESPN.com, coming to a metro near you...

Newspapers are going to continue their self-inflicted death spiral with or without ESPN, Shockey.

 

that may well be. i could do without they're help, though.

 

The thing is, though, name-only, brand-name competition is, well, the name of the game in the media and in society today, and it is probably all ESPN needs.

That's why newspapers seek out celebrity bloggers, put "name" people in headlines, and play up certain people over others, even when it comes to reporters themselves.

People are drawn to celebrities, and in this business, that is, essentially, what ESPN is: a big name, the media industry's version of a big-box store. Like Wal-Mart, operating with the same broad-based and bad-for-local-business principles.

It probably won't matter whether ESPN's work is actually better, or not, than that of the regional newspapers, or even the national ones, in these markets.

People will read and click on the site, anyway. That's what they already do for most of the sports news even outside of their areas, so imagine how excited they're likely to be that the big-name entity is interested in their home city and home team and home-area sports, and covering them more than it used to do?

Shockey is right. This will not be good, at all, for the newspapers, or most of the sports writers, in these areas.

 

I'm all for an ESPN bash, but this is one time I don't think it's fair to label it as the WalMart of the sports news industry.

The Mom and Pop joints that WalMart prices out of existence aren't purposely trying to kill themselves.

 

Considering that number of out of town owners of papers, I don't see much difference between sending the money to Denver, Virginia or Bristol. These aren't local mom and pops ESPN is competing against, they are corporations, the New York Times, Tribune Co. etc.
I remember watching the news as a kid wondering why local station didn't make the whole newscast about sports instead of only giving it a few minutes at the end. SportsCenter not only gives you all the scores and highlights, but news from everywhere.

 

I don't think ESPN's local sites have to be a threat to newspapers. But I say that because I believe in something this industry seems to have forgotten: Content is valuable.

I grew up in a city I don't live in anymore, but I still am a big fan of the teams there. My biggest link to them (aside from subscribing to out-of-market TV packages) is the local paper's Web site. That's where I go, because I've been reading those beat writers and those columnists for years. I don't spend much time on ESPN or CBSSports or Yahoo Sports or SI.com.

Now, if ESPN stole some of those guys away for a local site, I'd follow them. But I'm not going to just go read my local ESPN site if I don't recognize the writers. My feeling on that is probably skewed because I'm in the business. Maybe Average Joe Fan doesn't give a rat's ass who the writers are. But I'm not so sure about that. Content is valuable. The people producing content are valuable. Content is the brand, and it has to be protected. If papers decide to value their people, stay staffed up and compete, they'll be fine. If they're not determined to do that -- and there's plenty of evidence that they're not -- then local ESPN sites will be one more nail in the coffin.

 

When ESPN started publishing stories by college football bloggers it did not make me read their site more than my local newspaper. I would read them both.

 

Two points on this:

1. ESPN has hired some name-brand people from papers to work on the site (Mike Riess from the Globe now does Patriots for ESPNBoston.com; I know that the editor of their Dallas site is coming over from the Dallas Morning News), so they are playing into that logic of loyal readers following the beat guys (But I'm not sure how that worked out for Tom Curran when he left Providence for NBCSports.com).

2. Are they really "stealing" the talent? It's a smart business move to hire talented people away from their current employer, but shouldn't the onus fall on the employer to try and keep that reporter if he/she has a solid following and is, as people on this board like to say, is an "f'ing stud"?

 

"Stealing" guys doesn't have to be a pejorative. You're right, OceanL, the onus is on their current employers to entice them to stay. But if you weigh the life expectancy of your average metro newspaper vs. ESPN, this can be a no-brainer in favor of the WWL. Factor in the ax hanging over so many solid sportswriters' heads in their current jobs and there really is no decision to make.

 

Maybe ESPN can be a "no-brainer." But what 21 wrote a few posts up, if true, changes that dynamic, no?

 

Rumors around here are that ESPNBoston is going to be incorporating some original content on high school and college stuff, and since there isn't much D1 college around Boston I'm really interested to see how that goes.

If they incorporate some stuff from InsideCollegeHockey.com that will play huge in Boston, and with the others maybe they can use their recruiting sites the way Yahoo partners with rivals.

Either way, I'm curious to see if they seriously attack high school stuff, and who (if anyone) they hire to do that.

 

You mean to say that Mom and Pop joints don't give their shit away for free?