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!

Gary Smith probably doesn't read you

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Joe Williams, Apr 25, 2008.

  1. broadway joe

    broadway joe Guest

    Any story is fair game as long as the writer brings something significantly new to it. I haven't read the Smith piece so I don't know if he does that, but the fact that the Fugees have been written about extensively before shouldn't preclude him from doing the story.
     
  2. Joe Williams

    Joe Williams Well-Known Member

    Guess it was your lack of blue font that confused me. Or linking the "accused of" wording to the borrowing of the idea, rather than the presumption (which we all had made already) that Smith might in fact sneak a peek at a sports section or Web site from time to time. A writer who spends a significant portion of his time writing about sports-related topics but says, "I don't read the sports pages" is as bad as a coach or manager who claims not to read us but then knows of every rip, dig or statistical argument made in print against him.
     
  3. STLIrish

    STLIrish Active Member

    Perhaps St. John's Fugees story ran in the A section? ;)
     
  4. Piotr Rasputin

    Piotr Rasputin New Member

    I hate to besmirch the name of dude who wrote "The Deadly Dive" . ..

    But this is spot-on. When I saw that, my jaw dropped. I read the first graph, and realized I didn't care to finish the story. I'll instead seek out the original.
     
  5. Small Town Guy

    Small Town Guy Well-Known Member

    The Clutter murders were a front-page story in the New York Times too. Should Capote have avoided that story? I haven't read it yet either, though, so can't judge Smith's yet. But think about some of his classic stories. He wasn't the first to write about Jim Valvano having cancer, or the death of the Indians pitchers. Certainly those were famous situations where you expect more to be written about the subject, but I don't think there should be a limit on how many times lesser-known subjects can be written about, as long as there's a fresh angle or even a different style of writing.
     
  6. Double Down

    Double Down Well-Known Member

    Nope, sorry. I expect a little more from the man who is "America's Best Sportswriter." St. John found this story, spent like five months following the kids, wrote a huge story that ran on 1A of the NYT, not some tiny podunk paper. He sold the movie right and book rights to the piece. I think, as a matter of professional pride, Smith should be doing better than copying stuff the NYT has already done. St. John's piece was one of the most recognizable pieces of sports journalism this year. I just think if you're going to write five or six stories a year, you can do better than saying, "Well, this story was pretty good, but it really deserves my 4,000 word, second-person take."
     
  7. friend of the friendless

    friend of the friendless Active Member

    Mr Guy,

    Evidently, Smith's assigning editor saw this thing about Jim Valvano in the sports section and tugged on the sleeve of Gary Smith who had his nose in the New York Review of Books. I don't care about his sources for story ideas. I've been a huge fan over the years. But the I-never-read-sports thing, very disappointing.

    YD&OHS, etc
     
  8. broadway joe

    broadway joe Guest

    You can't fairly criticize Smith for writing the story until you've read it. If anything, given his well-deserved reputation, seeing his byline on a tale that's already been told would indicate to me that he must have found something new to say. And even though St. John's story was on 1A of the NYT, there are millions of readers who had never heard of the Fugees. It's not as though one take on a story, no matter how well done, takes it out of play for all other writers.
     
  9. Aren't we all taking this a little personally here. There's a chance SI's editors could have said "Hey Gary, maybe you could go and do a story on these guys." Wouldn't be the first time that's ever happened in the history of journalism.

    I was thinking about this the other day. You're on a beat that's covered by multiple outlets. There's great feature A out there. Does that mean the first outlet that does feature A precludes second outlet from doing it later in the week, season, year, whatever? I don't think so.

    I'm not ready to kill Smith for saying he doesn't read sports writing. He really doesn't write like most sports writers, so why shouldn't I believe him?
     
  10. Piotr Rasputin

    Piotr Rasputin New Member

    [​IMG]
     
  11. broadway joe

    broadway joe Guest

    Yes, because all sports fans make it a point to read the front section of the New York Times online.
     
  12. Smash Williams

    Smash Williams Well-Known Member

    The stories have the same basic content, but take a very different approach.

    Smith's is more a character study (and a damn good one) of the coach/program founder through the story of the founding and early years of the team. The NYT story was a more an overview (and a damn good one) of the scope of the program and its impact on the kids. Smith mentions the NYT piece in his story and writes briefly about the effect.

    No matter where Smith got it from (and the NYT story mentioned one of the kids had been on Oprah, so the story was been out there before the NYT got it), it was a great story.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page