1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

female reporters and the dot.coms

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by thirsty, Feb 21, 2008.

  1. Simon_Cowbell

    Simon_Cowbell Active Member

    There are many writers who are "excellent"

    No one over there makes my toes tingle.
     
  2. cranberry

    cranberry Well-Known Member

    Great points here. But the valuable hires for a sports Web site are the true "insiders" -- people who in the loop on everything and routinely break news -- like a Rosenthal in baseball, for one example. Generalists and columnists are going to take a back seat on the Web, at least at this point, because everyone has an opinion or a point of view and they're already in abundant supply. The Web is about niches and sub-niches which creates a huge demand for experts and specialists.

    I like the staff Morgan is putting together at Yahoo!, by the way.
     
  3. 86Mets

    86Mets New Member

    Cranberry sounds like a guy running an online sports enterprise. Go get your insiders. Niche it up, baby!
    What scares me, or should I say DEPRESSES me, is that technology and commerce are driving our editorial/content choices.
    Yeah, it's always been a gigantic part of the equation, but in this case, online sports sites are really just getting started to grasp their power/financial vigor as media sites.
    As ESPN and Yahoo and AOL sports and whoever else is putting sports "journalism" online, what they're striving for are user hits. This is called amortizing eyeballs, which means the sites' leaders (like Dave Morgan as per Yahoo bosses) are all about parsing sports down to its smallest little niches in order to attract more user hits.
    The Web 2.0 is a fascinating place, but at some point, it will serve to fracture readers down to disenfranchised little groups who all gather together in their little chat rooms or portals, wondering who will be the starting point guard for Duke in 2017.
    At least newspapers, pity them at the moment, had a feel for real community, a city or region, not this so-called virtual/bogus community that is taking place on the Web. The Web is a powerful place for people to share and gather info, no doubt. It is bold and startling and endless, but in terms of the BUSINESS model being used by Yahoo or ESPN or AOL, it's all about eyeballs for advertising dollars, which is why these sites need "experts" to report on the freshman defensive end's broken ankle.
    Here's to the ghost of Red Smith.
     
  4. Batman

    Batman Well-Known Member

    Who gives a shit? What was she doing out of the kitchen?
    [/ducking]
     
  5. Joe Williams

    Joe Williams Well-Known Member

    I'm with 86Mets. It's forest vs. trees stuff. Everything is so fragmented into niches. I know a lot of people who are generalist sports fans, who care about the big issues and a few favorite teams and pay attention to several sports without becoming wonks on any of them. In the old days, major newspapers scratched their itch by having high-quality columnists and takeout writers who kept things interesting across the landscape of sports.

    Now what we mostly see are specialists and numbers crunchers and writers trying to outshout someone else while they're creating their own statistical categories to measure the immeasurable and maybe sell a book about it. Now we're asking the general sports fan to bookmark five or six sites in search of the same informatino -- and actually, not the same information at all -- that he used to get from one-stop shopping in a major metro sports section. Except the newspapers are filling up with high school stuff, have abandoned the interesting long features and "trend" stories and are telling us to read this columnist or that columnist because of their gender or race, not because of their style or wisdom.

    Following sports on the Internet feels like listening to a big band, but one instrument at a time. It isn't hardly the same.
     
  6. 86Mets

    86Mets New Member

    Can I just say that I am now personally very much in love with Joe Williams.
    As I said earlier: Just because technology and commerce are leading online sports sites (who are setting sports coverage trends) by the short hairs, forgetting the forest for the trees, we are all subjugated to coverage that, basically, is all about ankle sprains and other "insider" matters.
    Why are HARDCORE fans of particular sports MORE important than survey and insight over the wider landscape of sports?
    Joe Williams, bless you. ;)
     
  7. Sam Mills 51

    Sam Mills 51 Well-Known Member

    Because we've all been told we must specialize in something. I don't think that's the way to go with sports journalism, but no one put me in charge, either.

    The specialists have some valuable knowledge, but they're the bricks in the wall. We need the mortar, too, and that's where the GA and enterprise and trend pieces come into play. It makes for a much better section, but the beancounters see nothing but wasted resources. Sad.
     
  8. Diabeetus

    Diabeetus Active Member

    I've always done my best to learn every sport out there to have the versatility, but isn't there some sport you guys would focus on if given the choice?
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page