Next up, Kansas City...

Yeah, I'm with you on that one. This example of what Kellis is dealing with is exactly why I made myself let go of being a Missouri fan. I knew that someday, I might be in a situation where I'd have to cover a rival school, and though I'm not there yet, it's not a problem I want to deal with. So I spent all of last year, my senior year of college, divorcing myself from the Tigers. It's not a problem that's a possibility any longer, and seeing this, I'm glad.

 

I certainly don't feel bad for the guy (if he wrote the blogs, he wrote the blogs...), but I hope that both he and the readers are able to overcome it. I'd heard very good things about him during his time in Idaho and would expect that he would be able to do at least some of those things (including APSE award stories, IIRC) in Kansas. If he gets run out of town, it will be bad for both sides, because the readers will lose a good reporter (and writer) who, from all accounts (not related to above mentioned KU blog), can bring solid and interesting work to his readers.

 

That kind of sucks. You can still be a fan. You can still say and do all the fan shit, bitch and moan and make fun of your friends from the opposing school.

Just don't post it on the internet, especially where a real simple google search finds it, and after you get the job, damn sure don't get caught acting like that.

 

I never made fun of opposing fans anyway. In fact, I went out of my way to be nice to opposing fans, because it sickened me how rudely Missouri fans would treat them. So I don't know what that's like. But honestly, I've never missed being a Missouri fan. I think it makes me better at what I do and it isn't something that was that important to me.

For example, you remember last year's KU-Missouri game, in which the Jayhawks won 40-37 on a touchdown pass in the final minute? When I left the stadium, my only thought was how privileged I was to have been at such a great game. It didn't affect me at all that the Tigers had lost to their biggest rival, and I would later name that as my favorite football memory in four years at Missouri, much to the chagrin of my fellow alums.

My life is much easier when I don't have a team in the sport I cover. It makes me better at my job and it allows fans to judge me only on the quality of my work, which is all I ask. Sacrificing the Tigers was something I was quite willing to do.

 

Here, to me, is one of the shames of it: this guy is probably a very nice, cool guy in "real" life. But if I were to ever meet him, my impression of him has already been colored by all of the stuff put out online -- BY him (or by anyone who twitters, blogs, bloofs, schnauzers, whatever). You can already start to feel, as Frank Costanza once said, "This guy ... this is not my kind of guy!" And that is a true shame. It's terrible -- that in many cases we will never give the real person a real shot. Because we've been robbed of it -- by them.

You know, in most cases, the wisest thing to do is just keep your mouth shut. But these days, we don't do that. We overshare. It's always been conventional wisdom that it might not be the best thing to spout off whatever thought comes into your head. But these days, in this online culture, we're encouraged to do just that. ("You've got to get on twitter! It's a great tool to market yourself! You'll be left behind if you don't tweet.")

Myself, I'm against all this oversharing.

Part of it is I think he was just young. Look at it -- the guy is only about four years out of school. He was young (I believe the tagline of the blog said though he and the others weren't actually in Lawrence they knew more about the program than the journalists who were working in town did; an interesting thing for a journalist to say), and he had a lot of talent and some early success.

Now, he went without a job for a few months, and I think today he's probably considerably less young. That'll grow your ass up in a hurry. Why would he WANT this job? He's acting like getting this job is one of the best things that ever happened to him. And it probably is.

I don't think there will be any problems from him in behaving like a pro. The problem is he's already given everyone else lots of ammunition with which to form an impression without actually meeting the man.

One question I do have. Obviously the blog has been taken down. My question is when. Was it after he got the job? Or was it when he applied?

 

That's a very good way to put it. Never thought about it like that, but you're absolutely right.

I think his blog came down during the application process. I know the fact that he is a big KU fan was a big reason the Eagle paused when deciding to hire him.

 

Writer/editor respond:

http://blogs.kansas.com/kstated/2009/08/27/an-interesting-first-week-at-the-new-job/

http://blogs.kansas.com/editors/2009/08/27/lets-set-the-record-straight-on-the-hiring-of-kellis-robinett/

 

Thanks Kellis

 

This might be a discussion for another thread, but this hire, if nothing else, has brought up quite an interesting situation for newspapers that share content. The Eagle, as I understand it, was the paper to make this hire, meaning the Star, also a McClatchy paper, is inheriting as its K-State beat writer whoever the Eagle chooses. In this case, it's Kellis Robinett, a KU grad who ran a KU fan blog who apparently took some shots at K-State, its coaches and players. Given those circumstances, the hire was certainly a questionable one, but whatever, the hire was made, probably can't go back now.

Here's where it gets interesting: not only does the Eagle have to take shots from readers for making the hire, and they have, but the Star now also has a big problem on its hands, since many readers are too uninformed to realize that one writer is producing content for both papers. So now you've got Wichita readers complaining and KC readers complaining to the higher-ups at both papers. If you believe the talk, and perhaps that's all it is--talk--then there are hundreds who have canceled their subscriptions to the Eagle over this hire. The same thing is likely happening in Kansas City.

If I'm an editor at the Star, I'm furious over this. The Eagle made a controversial hire and now it's the Star who has to absorb much of the heat from angry readers--even though the folks in KC, as I understand it, had nothing to do with the hire. If there is even a shred of evidence that suggests subscriptions have gone down in the last week since the hire was made, not only at the Eagle but also at the Star, this sounds like a heads-roll situation for whoever was involved in making the hire.

I don't blame the writer for wanting the job despite his background. In this economy, with the industry the way it is now, I don't care if he has spent the last 10 years serving as the Jayhawks mascot, pursue the job, because it's a good one. Hopefully he is able to overcome all the backlash, and more importantly, hopefully some of the folks who put him in this situation can help get him out of it.

 

The reader comments indicate they aren't satisfied with the explanations.

Then again, reader comments usually indicate they aren't satisfied with anything.

 

The reader comments are downright brutal.

 

This fellow clearly is a good writer. Coming out of KU, I also have no doubt that he is a competent professional as well. But sometimes, no matter how solid a guy might be, he's not the right choice for your beat. This clearly is one of those instances.

Full discloser: I'm a K-Stater. While I have often entertained the notion of going back and covering KSU or KU, I've always pulled back, knowing I want to be able to keep my fan card. This fellow probably should have considered doing the same, but I haven't had to walk in his shoes. And, in this economy, a job's a job. Quite frankly, putting up with angry fans probably is better than being unemployed and living in the family basement.

On the other hand, as a professional journalist, I never, ever, ever, ever would have considered starting up a fanboy blog regardless of affiliation.