Tree, forest, etc: APSE gets excited, writes strongly worded letter to NCAA

He's trolling you.

 

Guess I will just have to do without what undoubtedly would be a mind-blowing explanation/education. Too bad for me. : Jackass.

 

If only.

You guys are clinging to dreams of days gone by.

I've learned that it's a waste of time to try to inform some people.

 

My point is they are able to cover it up NOW because papers are SI beholden to teams, worshipping at the altar of access.

 

So the consensus of posters who don't work in sports is that NCAA access is not important?

Dooley noted.

 

Clinging is a key word.

I'll leave the earth-scorching to Norrin, but we're talking about an industry that is still trying its hardest not to adapt more than a decade after it became painfully apparent it had to adapt.

The first response to EVERYTHING is to dig in and defend the status quo. But as they say, adapt or die. Unfortunately, from the top to the bottom, most journalists have chosen a slow, painful form of the latter.

I reiterate that I think it would be a good thing if newspapers in general were forced to re-evaluate the mostly obsolete way they do business.

The right answers for how to survive in the information age aren't simple and, sadly, may not exist. But the wrong answers are right in front of us and we continue to rely on them.

 

You are right that we were woefully slow to change. But I don't think less NCAA access is the answer.

 

Apparently, newspapers aren't the only ones failing to see the big picture.

 

The discussion is more nuanced than that, obviously.

Answer this:

WHY is access important? WHO thinks access is important? WHAT is the result of "access"?

Find the honest answers to those questions, and the discussion can continue.

Happy to play that role. Things I was saying in 2007 have mostly been proven correct. Unbelievable that I'm still reading people here put stock in the notion that readers' need for local coverage and perspective (whatever that now means) remains a truism in this business.

Who said it was? Where did you get that? The "answer" to what question, exactly? How in the world did you get "Media outlets need to change, so less NCAA access is what we gotta do!!!" from any of this?

Less NCAA access is the reality. Less NCAA access is what APSE is loudly complaining about. And the people media types pledge to serve do not care where media types have to sit when watching basketball.

 

If only what? If you write it's a waste of time, and yet you started the topic and continue to mock anyone who disagrees with you, it's trolling.

 

So, for newspaper types, it is wrong to believe that readers want local coverage and perspective? Please explain, if you think my feeble mind can handle it. So, if your team is in the NCAA Tournament and gets its ass kicked, you don't want a local beat writer to cover it from that angle, rather than take the standard AP/ESPN.com story? I am completely lost on what you're getting at here. Maybe I just shouldn't play along. And no, I don't really give a shit where the writer has to sit, but access DOES matter. Otherwise, we should just fold up our tents. But maybe THAT is what you are getting at.

 

I don't understand this argument at all. Why is it a good thing for newspapers to stop covering events that people can learn about in other media? That is ALL events, down to the fucking weather. If you depend on nothing but "stories people can't get elsewhere" you're gonna be a monthly in short order. Besides, isn't the point of this issue that the NCAA is trying to control new media and that in fact the idea is that only rightspayers should have any access? If so, then the only rational response is to shut down all sports sections and only run investigative pieces on why college sports is a sewer and ripoff of the public which should be shut down for the good of the country. Which is true, but not what the public wants, journalistically or socially.
The "you have to change" people on this board aren't arguing for change, they're arguing for the end of the idea of journalism.