Sports Travel. Seriously.

I don't mean to be the first dickhead, but I would say that someone who suggests travel isn't important for a beat hasn't had a beat. And anyone who thinks the AP provides the same coverage as a beat writer is cracked.

Travel is a must for a paper that is serious about its beats.

 

Good point Bubbler.

For example: In college football, AP only has long stories on games involving top 25 teams and "major" schools. Anyone else, you are shit out of luck.

 

Why did it take so long for this post in this thread?
I'm scared.

 

Then your beat writer sucks.
Also, as has been pointed out a dozen times elsewhere on this thread, it's not just about covering that one game. And it's not about breaking news on the spot. It's about BEING THERE. You have to be there to properly cover the beat. If not, you can't do it right.

The way I see it, every second you spend with the players and coaches you cover adds up. It helps you build relationships. It helps you break news IN THE FUTURE. It gives you some insight into a particular topic or issue you might use down the road, not immediately.

Beat writers are supposed to be experts on their teams. How can they be experts if they are never there?

Again, I understand the financial realities that some papers face. I understand that some feel they have no choice but to cut back on travel. But the product suffers -- not just the away gamers, but all of it.

 

Well, he's right. We're getting so consumed with changing things in newspapering that we mess with the things that work. And writers covering their beats completely works.

 

In addition to the excellent point made by many others that coverage on the road helps the overall coverage, I have seen many instances of writers breaking stories -- often big ones -- on road trips. Coach/manager firings, trades, lineup changes, fights, controversies, etc., often happen when a team is away. If you're not there, you don't get that news.

And editors who don't send people on the road rarely have anyone covering games ``from their Lazy-boys.'' They hire stringers, who are sometimes good and often not.

 

I think we should only staff the president when he's in the country. If he's in Russia, I'm sure someone from Russia can handle it. We'll just blog about it.

BLOG TO THE FUTURE!!!

 

I'm not saying that AP coverage, as it exists, is a good enough substitute. But maybe, if most papers didn't send beat people to most road games, other things would change, too. AP might alter or enhance its coverage. And like I said, too, if two dozen sports editors at medium-to-large metro papers got together and came up with a consortium idea, they'd make sure to send out competent people to cover each other's teams. And they've have their beat guys spend a half hour before the team's trip and a half hour after the team's trip on the phone, briefing and getting caught up.

That still saves a lot of time over getting to the airport on time, going through security and so on. And saves the company a bundle.

The other thing is, I don't disagree with anyone who says that sending beat people around with their teams makes for better coverage. That never was the issue. The issue is, how high does "quality of coverage" rank right now when budgetary decisions get made at most papers, and is it more likely to move UP or DOWN on the priority list for newspaper owners and publishers in the coming years? What I'm saying is, if some of these suits can rationalize cutting down this very big expense, they will do it. And then they'll tell themselves that it hasn't hurt them in any competitive sense.

 

Why should we depend on AP coverage to improve just to save $500. You must work for AP.

And if we didn't travel with our team here, readers would notice and it would get ugly.

 

AP may suck but lets face it, if not for those two letters, MANY papers wouldn't be able to publish. As travel becomes more and more expensive, and companies having to decide between making a road trip or telling a staffer his or her services are no longer needed, AP's role will become greater. I just hope they tie up a lot of loose ends such as poor editing and flagrant mistakes on deadline.

 

As long as the only optionals they write are for top 25 college teams, they'll never be able to replace local guys traveling.

 

But that's where things are changing. AP writes for a broad audience. A local guy is writing for the local shill. But as travel prices keep rising, the local shill may have to decide which is better, AP or giving the guy the boot.
In that instance, I'd have to say that AP is a better alternative.