Sports Bloggers at the Press Conference

I think what gets everyone so riled up on the subject of bloggers in the press box/press conference is that many of us have run into the loudmouthed idiots like the Redskins guys, whose only reason to be in the press box or locker room is to write about how cool it is to be writing from the press box and visiting their heroes afterward in the locker room. Oh, and to cheer like hell for their team. Because any blogger there for legitimate purposes tends to blend in with the rest of us, the idiots leave the lasting impression, so they are the ones everyone associates with the term ``bloggers.''

The key is differentiating betweeen the two when issuing credentials.

 

Bingo.

 

Some bloggers, perhaps even most when I think about it, kill me. They frown on the "old media's way" and trumpet "citizen journalism" and "honest opinion" and then want all the same access as the "old media."

You can't have it both ways.

If you're a "citizen journalists" fine. Citizens don't have access to the locker rooms and press conferences.

 

Give me bloggers over annoying radio stringers any da.

 

Let me guess - if a "good, professional, high-traffic blogger" gets put on a newspaper's payroll, THEN he or she would "deserve" to be in the press box, right? But not before that?

 

Now you are learning.

 

I always wanted to say this on here:
Winner, winner, chicken dinner!

 

Just so I'm clear: The blogger is good. Good enough to get hired by a newspaper. The blogger has "high traffic," which means he or she has readership and, in many cases, revenue. The blogger is, in your words, professional - not a fanboy or basement dweller or three thousand other stereotypes mentioned on these boards. But it's only when this blogger is hired by a newspaper that he or she should be considered for a press credential?

Save your chicken dinner - that argument doesn't make a finger-lick of fucking sense.

 

Agreed. There have been a ton of anti-blogger posts that were completely retarded, but that was probably the stupidest fucking argument I've ever read.

 

High traffic is NOT revenue.

And, as I said, if you're not working for a "legitimate news gathering agency" (the description on many creds) you're not allowed in the box.

 

For the record, any argument made by any blogger who isn't a paid employee at a newspaper, radio station, TV station, magazine, is moot.

You can't prove your readership as concretely as newspapers, many don't make money (instead, writing because they like to write), many are loser fanboys, many are poorly edited, many do not adhere to AP or CP style, and some barely - if at all - adhere to industry standards.

The arguments to keep bloggers out far outweigh the arguments to let them in.

Go to school. Get a journalism degree or diploma. Get a job at a "legitimate news gathering agency" and then get into the press box.

Otherwise, remain a citizen journalist and do what citizens do; watch the games from home or the stands.

 

SoSueMe....For the record, who said I was a blogger? I'm not, by the way. Is that the type of hard-hitting, completely false information I should come to expect from whatever your media outlet is?

Just to point out the many flaws in your argument. You can prove readership...it's called a hit counter and they are able to determine unique readers. Many blogs do make money. Most don't. Why not? They aren't permitted the same access as newspapers and it's a relatively new thing. As some posters have already stated, advertisers are increasingly turning to blogs.

They aren't turning to the poorly edited blogs written by fanboys and generally completely pointless. They are turning to the legitimate blogs. Which is what all the pro-blog people are trying to say. If a blog is well-written, informative, with a large number of readers and the author is looking to add something else with their access, why shouldn't they be allowed in the press room?

There's a reason why newspaper readership is down and people are increasingly turning toward web sites and blogs for their information. Maybe it's this staunch resisitance to change by the 50-year-olds in the newspaper business who are unwilling to adapt to the new media.