Good or bad idea?

Some sports writers for a newspaper in Kearney have an interesting competition going. They compete against one another in sports and then post a video of their competition on the web.

Looks like they're having pretty good success with it, too.

Are web shows like this worth a journalists time and are they worth a newspaper's expense?

Here's a link to one of the shows (I believe they've done 5 so far). I find them rather funny especially them running the 100-yard dash in this one.

http://hubvideo.kearneyhub.com/?p=3262

 

I'm 5-8, 220 and 46 years old. The SE in the neighboring town is about 6-2 and about 23 years old.

Not. a. good. idea.

Maybe in sambo, but other than that, forgettaboutit.

 

Hell, they got a sponsor. Why not?

I was planning on doing a 500-meter swim against the defending state champion at one of our local high schools when I was covering preps. I ended up leaving the beat before I could do it.

In hindsight, it would've gotten ugly. She would've finished in 5 minutes and I would've been dead after about 50 yards. It might have been a funny story if done right but I would've been careful and made sure to make the story more about her instead of me.

This stuff works a lot better in small towns, I imagine, where everyone knows you.

 

1) Kearney isn't that small.

2) I'd rather have seen Buck Mahoney's athletic skills.

3) The Hastings Tribune did it first. Just sayin'.

 

We had a guy who was a pretty avid tennis player take on the reigning state champ, and it worked. Like you said, the column was chiefly about the kid, not the writer, and, IMO, gave an even better picture of just how dominant he was.

 

The sports staff is competing against other members of the same newspaper's sports staff? Pointless, except maybe to drive some cheap Web traffic from the initially curious lookie-loos.

I'd like the idea better if they (A) play it for laughs while (B) making it somehow informative, a la Mythbusters. ("John from the copy desk here is 25 times slower in the 100 meters than Carl Lewis and 50 times slower than this 1974 MG Midget.")

It would be even better if the sports staffers were doing this as an ongoing series, competing against local athletes in a variety of sports ... again playing it light and showcasing the abilities of the athletes. Doing it this way would enable the newspaper to market the sports department's personalities as well, and maybe build more rapport with readers while demonstrating that they're in touch with the community.

But if they're just competing against each other, who cares? Maybe they could post the results of the weekly office football pool online as well.

 

Agreed. I'd watch a writer face off against a state champion in their sport. I'm not really interested in watching sports writers play each other in games like softball or track. I think it's a waste of time and money in it's current format. But that's just me.

 

I found this very entertaining.

 

This is retarded.

Like you guys said, it'd be interesting to see them line up against high school kids who are dominant. Hell, I'd even pay attention if this was like a state-wide competition of reporters from Paper A vs. reporters from Papers B, C and D.

But the way this is, it's no different than me playing my coworker at Mario Kart. Who gives a piss?

 

I've seen reporters go up against high schoolers. It's funny because they usually lose.

Seems like a second-cousin to the classic "I'm going to pick this week's football games against the coach at the local high school" feature.

 

Agree with those who say it's much more interesting to go against/profile top high school athletes. And keep the majority of the focus on them.

BTW, is the thread starter one of the two athletes?

 

I'm suddenly reminded of the time one of the local TV stations included highlights of their flag football game against a rival station in one day's sports package. Yes, a cheap stunt ... unfortunately, that's what we're reduced to.