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!

Playing the royal birth

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Dick Whitman, Jul 23, 2013.

  1. 93Devil

    93Devil Well-Known Member

    I'm going to disagree.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/01/royal-wedding-tv-ratings-_n_855967.html


     
  2. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    I've already tried to distinguish the wedding and the birth. Different stories - the wedding was a telvised event. Pomp and circumstance and so forth.

    And E! Online's traffic is as irrelevant here as, say, ESPN's traffic on the Braun story. It is just proof that it's a celebrity story that may be best handled by celebrity news outlets. Of course, I realize that some celebrity stories become so big they have to be acknowledged by real newspapers. Which the royal birth was in the Times. In the International section where it belonged.
     
  3. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    Also, Braun's suspension may be a celebrity story, but it is about a celebrity performer who has been affected in his performance. In this case, he cannot perform for a length of time. I liken it to Charlie Sheen's firing from "Two and a Half Men," which I would not have disputed was an A1 story, either.
     
  4. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    I saw a lot of this talk on FB yesterday too. People going to great lengths to demonstrate not caring.

    If you don't care, why would it be worth mentioning? And why would it be worth pondering where it was in the New York Times?

    A little bit of snob appeal to being above it all, I think.
     
  5. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    No. I legitimately don't care about this story, on the merits, not as a means to garner snob cred.

    And, come on. You know by now I obsess over news judgment, particularly when different newspapers handle stories differently.
     
  6. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    That's true. You starting this thread is probably not related to what I'm talking about. More of a coincidence, now that I think about it.

    It sounds like the Times had a decent lineup without it, so good on them. Also, I don't know how much this factors into their thinking if they're the "paper of record," but the early arrival and the fact that everybody knew it already would definitely be a consideration at a paper run by mere mortals.
     
  7. BTExpress

    BTExpress Well-Known Member

    You were backed into it because your first hypothesis ("The NYT doesn't care about old money) was shot full of holes.

    And you'll keep "differentiating" things long enough until you can find an uncommon denominator that "explains" it for everyone. Yeah, whatever.

    If people "care" about something, whether its televised doesn't matter. Nothing Edward Snowden has done has been televised.

    And since this birth was not a scheduled event down to the second months in advance, and whether the child would be healthy and/or heir to the throne was unknown, it can be argued that it was more newsworthy than the wedding.
     
  8. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    I mean, congrats on getting to spike the football. I guess. It was a hypothesis. Maybe it was wrong. I thought it was good work by you to uncover the way the wedding was played compared to this. I tried to figure out what might have been different about the two events. Seems in bounds.
     
  9. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    They've changed management since then, right? Maybe Jill Abramson doesn't care about celebrity stuff as much as Bill Keller does. Maybe there's a different A1 editor who has different sensibilities. Same could be said of the Winehouse/Gandolfini question.
     
  10. MileHigh

    MileHigh Moderator Staff Member

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2014
  11. Riptide

    Riptide Well-Known Member

    Inside the A-section, with a teaser on 1A.
     
  12. Songbird

    Songbird Well-Known Member

    While most of this is all fine and dandy for print, you can bet your sweet pretty ass that every paper's website, FB, Twitter, G+ and all else digitalia plastered the shit out of the news, and will continue to do so.

    Gotta be stacking those digital dimes!
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page