Sports Bloggers in the Press Box

I don't fear it, I've been trying to embrace it - and get my management to do the same - for years now.

What I'm saying is this: If management allowed me (us?) to do what bloggers (basement or otherwise) do, we as journalists would do it better.

Or, the alternative is to actually put the good bloggers on payroll. But that would mean spending money.

 

SoSueMe, you are presuming that bloggers have no training in journalism principles.

Of course, if the blogger is someone who has a nose for news, he or she can run an informative blog just as effectively as you could.

Generally speaking, most of the people who blog are people who enjoy writing. Many are journalists or aspiring journalists who have taken relevant courses. They blog because they want to express themselves, and often they are learned people who chose (smartly?) to avoid traditional journalism. Just because they don't hold a tape recorder or notepad for a living doesn't mean they can't offer a very good product, one that easily can trump ours (especially when it comes to niche audiences).

 

Remember folks, there is a difference between a reporter/journalists and writer, or someone who wants to express themselves.

And, I'm not knocking all bloggers, for the record.

 

Good luck with that, man -- the blog haters here pound that stereotype home every chance they get.

 

The point I was trying to make is that a lot of bloggers blog because they are well-versed and passionate about a subject. It's not about being a fanboy loooooser and getting into the locker room for them.

 

I abandoned a print media career awhile ago and now do some sports-related blogging, so I do have a journalism background that helps set me apart from the "fan-boy" and "basement-boy" population.

I can tell you that there are days when I wish I had a copy desk to save me from myself. It's not as though the desk caught every typo or factual error / outdated pop culture reference but at least there was someone there to give everything a second read.

That's where many bloggers fall short. They may have some grasp of journalism and/or a certain flair for writing, but only a few of them have someone there to reel them back in when they go to far or screw up the facts. And it becomes a black eye for all of the quasi-professional bloggers when their mistakes get out there for public consumption.

There's room for bloggers in the sports journalism biz, but the good ones are going to struggle longer than they should for acceptance because of the sins of the not-so-good ones. Try reading four or five entries from the sports columnist at the alternative weekly in Rochester, NY (http://pressboxpowertrip.blogspot.com/) and tell me with a straight face that he isn't setting back "legitimate" blogging by five years every time he logs on.

 

Bill Simmons basically was a blogger before the term blogger even was on the scene.

 

Oh, bollocks, as we old media say.
Absent the old media, most of the blogs in this country, especially the sports blogs, would be white space. Deadspin and The BigLead are probably the best of them, and there'd be a lot of empty screen if you e;iminated newspaper snark or (especially) TV.
I'm open to blogs. Love to read a number of them. But the notion that journalism gets better the more people do it is, I think, a crock.

 

And here endeth the debate.

Thank you, for proving us "old media type's" point.

Game. Set. Match.

 

You're putting words in my mouth.

What I said was that there's a lot of creativity out there, and the good stuff in the new media is far more creative and innovative (and entertaining) than what you'll find in the newspapers. One reason is that there's more people doing it and they have more freedom. Naturally, there will be more creativity in this environment.

The old media, too, is still stuck in this fantasy world that it has some sort of legitimacy in the eyes of the public. It does not. Honestly, it's really not hard to meet and surpass the journalistic standards of most mainstream media outlets out there. Like I said in my first post, when the national paper of record is not above doctoring the words of dead soldiers, the "standards" of the traditional media are pretty much in the sewer.

I'd say the No. 1 reason why old media is suffering is of its own doing ... complete and utter (and well deserved) lack of trust from the average consumer.

The consumer demand for something better than they're being given by the average newspaper is pretty substantial. And, like I said, I see it from both sides: a newspaper struggling to make heads or tails of things, while I'm off in my spare time all by my lonesome running a site that gets millions of page views per month.

The game, set and match is found here: look at the readership and profitabilty of most major (and minor) newspapers. They're getting hammered. And it's because they can't meet reader demands, expectations and standards in light of so many other options.

 

What does creativity have to do with gaining access to press boxes?

I still have yet to figure this out.

I have yet to see a blog that convinces me it needs press credentials to accomplish whatever its goal is.

Again, every jackass with a working knowledge of HTML language and an opinion is not worthy of being credentialed and I certainly don't think they need to be clogging up locker rooms, either.

 

Blogs and new media aren't the only reasons papers are losing money.

Public shares means the need for more profitability.

More box stores means less local stores means less advertising revenue.

Craigslist, eBay, et al take revenue from classifieds.

At the moment, net ad rates are cheaper. But it's yet to be proven they are more successful — and if they are, the rates will surely jump.

Back to the basement bloggers.