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!

SMG interviews Rick Maese ...

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Evil ... Thy name is Orville Redenbacher!!, Oct 1, 2007.

  1. sptwri

    sptwri Member

    Again, a lot of you are using a wide brush. I'd say most of these guys pay their own way in the sense that if they want to cover away games, then it's up to them to either drive or fly on their own dimes. Home games? Of course not. My sense is that the salary they are paid is meant to include some of this travel, etc., but in a lot of or perhaps most places Rivals doesn't pony up for airline tickets for individual sites.

    But come on, let's be real. Where do you think MOST beat writers get their recruiting tips. I personally HATE recruiting stories, but guess what, your readers are demanding them. Have been for years.

    I agree, some lines are blurred on the net sites. Guy at Nebraska is a sideline reporter for Cornhuskers football.

    But then, sticking with the theme, there is no one more in bed with a college football team than the broadcasters who cover Nebraska.

    That said, I don't think the print guys that cover Nebraska drink the Red Koolaid.

    Finally, and sorry for the bombast, but how many beat writers call up these internet guys on a regular basis and use THEM as sources?

    I've been in the paper biz for 35 years now, and about 18 of it covering colleges. And the holier than thou posture doesn't wash. Individuals have ethics, not professions.
     
  2. sptwri

    sptwri Member

    Also, for Alma. . . More and more SIDs and schools are giving credentials to Rivals and Scout guys. And why not? They credential local TV people. Some don't do it, but some that don't that I'm aware of have been burned by Joe Fan who starts writing a blog and claims to be a professional. I think the line is drawn just below the national net services - like Rivals and Scout.
     
  3. cortez

    cortez Member

    Steele's a race baiter, and not a very good one
     
  4. fishwrapper

    fishwrapper Active Member

    I was with you until your summation.
    I can even understand the quid pro quo of college recruiting (to some extent).
    But, I/we live by a professional code. My chains' code is written. I understand an individual straying from a code or ethical practice, but to think an the ethical burden resides solely with individual journalists is a bit simplistic. If a code didn't exist, the many terminations for ethical breeches we debate on these boards wouldn't exist.
     
  5. sptwri

    sptwri Member

    Fish. We'll agree to disagree then. I've never seen a code of ethics that did anything but punish the worst possible offenders. Those who smudge the lines are legion. Give me people that do it the right way out of conviction, not out of fear of being punished. That's all I'm saying. And now I'm starting to sound holier than thou myself. Sorry, I'll stop now.
     
  6. IGotQuestions

    IGotQuestions Member

    The point in all this is that the rivals/etc. guys who cover recruiting simply are not professional journalists in the sense defined by the cores of journalism. They're simply not. They do what they must do to ensure their access to the schools they write recruiting stories about are kept intact. Because those schools give them their profits through the rabid fans who flock to their stories through paid subscriptions - not a public service, but paid access. People want to know these recruits now, now, now, but that's not why rivals exist. Rivals exists because it knows it can profit off of that. Last time I checked, newspapers originally began charging people for their product not to make a profit but to pay for the cost of producing the product first and foremost. Papers used to be free before they began reaching thousands of readers. I know it hasn't seemed like that for 30-40 years now what with corporates trying to keep those profit margins high - gotta go offer public stock to keep our moneys coming in - but that's not the purpose of journalism at its core.
     
  7. Jersey_Guy

    Jersey_Guy Active Member

    Actually, one of the nice side effects of the rise of Rivals/Scout is that we only cover a minimum of recruiting at my paper, despite covering one of the top college programs in a America. Why? Because the Rivals site that covers the team devotes 5 guys to recruiting. There's no way we could match what they do, so we don't try. Our football beat writer does a short brief when a kid commits and a big signing day package. Oh, and no, he doesn't quote the scout/rivals guys we compete with.

    That's not blurring the line, that's crossing it. In both cases. You can't be a journalist and take money from the school you cover, period.

    You know what? I honestly feel for you. If you'd worked at the places I've worked, with the people I've worked for, you wouldn't feel this way. There are papers out there which still view journalism as something more than just getting out a daily product and making money. I hope someday you're fortunate enough to work for one of them.
     
  8. sptwri

    sptwri Member

    You know what? I honestly feel for you. If you'd worked at the places I've worked, with the people I've worked for, you wouldn't feel this way. There are papers out there which still view journalism as something more than just getting out a daily product and making money. I hope someday you're fortunate enough to work for one of them.


    Your above response intrigued me enough to do a search on past responses by you. Now I understand. It probably won't interest you, but as far as ethics codes and the like, during a run as assistant sports editor, I actually wrote the ethics policy for the sports department at the major metro daily for which I work. A lot of reporters, and a lot of the PR guys for the teams they covered, thought it was too strict. So you, sir, are not the only journalist here who cares about ethics, and the concepts of journalism.

    I don't need you to feel sorry for me. In fact, I find it offensive. I hope someday you're fortunate enough to slip off your thrown. :)
     
  9. Jersey_Guy

    Jersey_Guy Active Member

    No offense intended, my man.

    I just think it's a sad thing if you truly believe this profession doesn't have ethics.
     
  10. Some Guy

    Some Guy Active Member

    Yeah, there are some really fuzzy lines when it comes to the relationship between college coaches and their rivals/scout guys.

    For instance ... Florida State. As you know, the NCAA prohibits coaches from having contact with any players during the summer. If they work out, or play 7-on-7 at the practice field, a coach isn't allowed to watch, or even ask about it.

    Here's what Bowden does: He makes sure whichever team captain is organizing the summer 7-on-7 calls the rivals guy and lets the website guy know when and where. Web site guy shows up with a video camera, put the video on his rivals site and -- voila! -- Bowden (and the rest of the known universe) can check in on how his players are doing at 7-on-7. Who's developing, who's not, who's bothering to show up and who's not.

    It's really ingenious. And, the way the NCAA rules are currently constructed, I'm not sure it's illegal, either.
     
  11. henryhenry

    henryhenry Member

    Huh?
    That is one confusing post.
    Sounds like Norm Crosby wrote it.
     
  12. Herbert Anchovy

    Herbert Anchovy Active Member

    You listen to Rick, now. He's been doing this for seven years.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page