KC Star's Sam Mellinger on Dick Vitale

Just another note: You must not have actually read the interview at the GoodCall link. That IS Sam Mellinger talking about Dick Vitale. Not just me talking about Sam Mellinger talking about Dick Vitale.

 

1) Not sure why HGC is linked BEFORE the KC Star article ... or at all (you did say it's NOT all about hits).

2) On the HGC link, there are four grafs on YOUR thoughts on Vitale before Mellinger is even mentioned and 14 grafs BEFORE Mellinger is quoted (not including the article) about how the article -- now 13 days old by the time you blogged about it -- came about.

That being said, I agree with Elliotte Friedman that blogs don't have to be the only one that do these types of features and profiles (although it was the Kansas City columnist, which was later sent out on the McClatchy wire and appeared on many McClatchy sites).

FWIW, I don't read biofile's and Matt Stephens' stuff either when they're the ones tooting their own horns.

If was riveting/important/newsworthy enough to be posted, surely someone else would have posted it.

 

Look, I just figured that since this is a new blog, not a ton of people would see the interview who would enjoy it. So I shared it here. It's not like I'm trying to brag or get hits. Just trying to share something cool with people who I knew would appreciate it.

So, um, sorry?

 

I love watching people get taken down this way.

 

The lesson of this thread is that if you're a writer, you should strive to never have anyone see your work.

If someone wants to post a link to a story, interview, etc., more power to 'em. If you don't like it, don't read it. A thread like this makes sj sound likes it's full of bitter assholes who want as many people as possible to go down with the S.S. Journalism.

 

Thanks, YGBFKM. It's really okay. I don't take anything said here personally, for better or worse. Learned that the hard way. Just trying to bust my ass and do some good work and hopefully create something great. This website is a fun little side project that occasionally gives me a way to talk to people about interesting things, things that—once again—I thought some folks here would enjoy once they learned about them.

I knew some folks here would give me some sh*t if I posted this. That's fine. I mean, I wish they wouldn't, but hang out around here long enough, you know to expect it. And once I know to expect it, it's really no big deal. Didn't bother me a bit.

Well, it did a little: Kind of bums me out that people would take time to rip into something that's meant only for good. But then, some people just like to tear down where others like to build.

 

Disagree.

FWIW, I think Brandon's site has promise. Clean design. A focus on the positive. And an effort to talk to the author about the behind-the-scenes workings on a story (the Toomer trees, for example). He'll get a following.

If his blog succeeds, good for him. Maybe it will prove useful on a resume or help him land at a bigger paper.

I never tore down his work or his site.

But:
- Do we really want "teasing" posts that tell you one thing and then send you to something else?
- Blind bit.ly links that you can't check to see where you're being sent to?
- Do we want more biofiles(es) and Matt Stephens(es) around with more "me me me" journalism?

Sorry if that makes me a "bitter asshole" -- I understand you didn't call me that directly -- but just one opinion. And I am fairly confident other non-bitter posters and non-assholes on here would agree with "no" answers on the previous questions.

And even after he edited it, he still linked his site first over the KC Star .. you know, the guy and the site in the post topic. Or linked to any other McClatchy paper that ran it in print or online.

There's a fundamental difference in offering up work on the writer's workshop portion of this site for critique/help/insight and then doing for hits (Hi! Matt Stephens and BioFile) to help a new blog get off the ground. If it was about letting us see an insightful interview, why not post part -- like Mellinger saying it took less than two hours -- of his Q-and-A with Mellinger here and then link to the full one?

 

Yes, yes, yes . . . my sole other problem with him is that each and every college basketball coach in the history of the world is a wonderful, wonderful, wonderful, wonderful, wonderful guy.

And we all know that's bullshit, cubed.

 

Does brandonsneed have an engagement video with all of his favorite athletes from a mediocre D-I program?

We're all bitter here, but what does it say about the industry when an author who also freelances for "big" organizations has to use this site to garner a few page views?

 

Have absolutely no clue what you mean by that first part.

And about the second part—um, again ... not using the site to garner page views. Sharing something I knew people around here would like. Pretty sure I said all that pretty clearly earlier.

Thanks, Central. I mean it. I've been busting my ass on to get this site up and running the past month. It's been doing great so far.

I know I already stated my case about all the other things you pointed out, so I won't get redundant. If I post something like this in the future, I'll make sure to do it the way you suggested. That would make it look like less of a shameless self-promo and more of just sharing cool stuff, which, again, was my original goal, anyway.

Does posting here help bump views? Well, yeah. Of course. But I don't * need * those views.

 

Spit. Take. Tea. Fucker.

 

I get very confused by this place.