i'm without speech

[SF_Express]

That said, I wouldn't start a blog about it.

That's cool ... let's just separate out the two issues.

Credibility risk: I DO wonder if at least some readers would be interested in the whole process of how he finally got the story -- although certainly without some of the foot-massagish details.

 

[JR]

I'd be curious about how he got the story but not so much that I want to wade through all the extraneous crap. And this guy is one bad writer.

 

[Batman]

Obviously, Glazer is a good reporter. He works his sources well, maybe better than anyone. And he was on top of this story. But one thing from that article bothered me:

I raced out of my seat down to the gate. I already had the story written. Actually, I had two versions written a week in advance — one if he got traded to the Jets and one if he was Bucs-bound.

So, given that he had his stories written not that day, not even the day before, but a WEEK ahead of time, how much news was he actually breaking other than which team finally got Favre? Was he just the first one to fire up the laptop and hit the send button? Was his phone number just on top of his source's speed dial, before he called guys like Mort and the beat writers?
I just have to wonder how much "news" there was in that initial report he's bragging about breaking. From the sound of it, it doesn't seem like he was digging up a ton of new facts during his time at the airport.

 

[SF_Express]

Obviously, Glazer is a good reporter. He works his sources well, maybe better than anyone. And he was on top of this story. But one thing from that article bothered me:

I raced out of my seat down to the gate. I already had the story written. Actually, I had two versions written a week in advance — one if he got traded to the Jets and one if he was Bucs-bound.

So, given that he had his stories written not that day, not even the day before, but a WEEK ahead of time, how much news was he actually breaking other than which team finally got Favre? Was he just the first one to fire up the laptop and hit the send button? Was his phone number just on top of his source's speed dial, before he called guys like Mort and the beat writers?
I just have to wonder how much "news" there was in that initial report he's bragging about breaking. From the sound of it, it doesn't seem like he was digging up a ton of new facts during his time at the airport.

Obviously, Glazer is a good reporter. He works his sources well, maybe better than anyone. And he was on top of this story. But one thing from that article bothered me:

I raced out of my seat down to the gate. I already had the story written. Actually, I had two versions written a week in advance — one if he got traded to the Jets and one if he was Bucs-bound.

So, given that he had his stories written not that day, not even the day before, but a WEEK ahead of time, how much news was he actually breaking other than which team finally got Favre? Was he just the first one to fire up the laptop and hit the send button? Was his phone number just on top of his source's speed dial, before he called guys like Mort and the beat writers?
I just have to wonder how much "news" there was in that initial report he's bragging about breaking. From the sound of it, it doesn't seem like he was digging up a ton of new facts during his time at the airport.

I don't know, Batman. Pretty standard stuff...

Three quarters of that story was background, was another fairly meaty section about what acquiring Favre would mean to his new team, and that was obviously different depending on which team it was. Glazer also likely had potential trade terms in each case.

In a lot of breaking stories of this type -- deal stories -- only the first two or three paragraphs are new. It's like an obit written ahead of time in many respects.

 

[Bullwinkle]

People write gamers all the time without even watching the second half ...

 

[novelist_wannabe]

We're critical of everything. It's an expected part of the job and at times an occupational hazard. That said, this thread quickly devolved into an extrapolated bout of navel gazing. Here's a news flash: We are not the target audience for this piece. Apparently, the target audience likes this sort of thing, because Glazer was ordered to do it. So he wrote a play-by-play of not only how he got the story but what else was going on at the time. It's not Pulitzer material, but it's not as bad a piece of writing as some of you are saying, either.

Frankly, I see no valid argument that the Favre trade wasn't news. This piece about Glazer's day at the airport, perhaps not so much. But again, apparently people wanted to read it, or at least his editors thought so. For all the platitudes we make about "don't tell me about the labor, just show me the baby," at the end of the day, people read it.

 

[King Of All Media]

I hate self-congratulatory columns "The people at Fox wanted me to write this" Yeah, I'm sure you really protested loudly.

It was a huge story that every national outlet had people working on for a month.

Breaking the news of the Favre trade is what Glazer will be remembered for.

 

[Ace]

Ragu nailed it, but I am curious whether Glazer actually did get it (momentarily) first or the same time as others or just behind the pack.

Also wondered who is "sources" were -- or at least whether they were legit, good sources or second-hand kinda guys you'd never rush into print with.

The story was boring and narcissistic.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

OK.

Glazer's piece was over the top. But frankly, that's Jay.

And I hate to say it, but a lot of readers are going to go from start to finish, with interest. Most of our readers are not, well, us.

But what really bugs me is this whole A) if we're just breaking sports news, it's not the Pentagon Papers, so it's not important, so it's not breaking news and B) if you break a story by a half hour, who'll remember or care, so what's the big deal? Sorry, Ragu, on this we just do not agree.

So A) people like Glazer aren't covering politics or wars. They're covering sports. It's part of this diverse business we're all in. Woodward and Bernstein weren't going to get Joe Gibbs returning to the Redskins (another Glazer story, by the way), because that's not their beat. It's Glazer's. In this case, he kicked ass. Relative to others in his profession, on the biggest story IN his profession that day, he was the star.

B) I really don't get the attitude about there not being much worth to breaking news. You know why it's worth something? Actually, two reasons: 1) When it's a huge story, and it leaves the rest of the country trailing far behind, it's a big deal. If every AP writethru is saying "as first reported by foxsports.com," it matters. And if it's repeated in newspapers all over the country, hell, it's branding.

But the one I keep repeating is: 2) Why they hell would anybody in this business not find it to be simply a lot of fun, one of the things we get to celebrate in this business, to beat everybody on a big story, no matter by how much? You don't enjoy seeing your byline, and new information nobody has under it, on the front page of a newspaper or front and center on a website? Or editing and producing that?

If you're a writer/reporter or editor and don't, I just don't get it. It's one of the most exciting things about this business. And if you're one of the big websites or newspaper sites, winning that battle by 20 minutes is still exhilarating. Or should be.

This was the biggest story in the country for almost a month. It's absurd and maybe unprecedented, but this was not a regional thing. This was not just a sports thing. This was one of the top stories on the national news for almost a month.

I've never seen something so ridiculous in my entire life.

What's comparable? Is anything?

 

[jgmacg]

I won't argue that Favre heading to the Jets was news. Of course it was.

Nor will I argue that Glazer had it when others didn't. Clearly he had the better source on this story. (As has been discussed, Favre himself was the least reliable source in the entire process, which is why ESPN and SI were left to scramble when the big moment came.)

What I will argue though is this: The column under discussion here can't be filed under "How I Got That Story." There's nothing in the column that reveals anything about how Glazer actually worked the story - (which of course no one could reasonably expect, because then he'd burn his source; or reveal himself to be merely lucky for having gotten the right phone call at the right time).

Rather, this can only be called "What It's Like to Wait For an Important Phone Call at the Airport," an awkward piece that succeeds in satisfying no one - neither readers' nor colleagues' curiosity about the matter at hand.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

Right. The column should have been titled "How I made Ted Thompson like me more than all other journalists."

 

[jgmacg]

"Here's Why I Send The Thompson Family a Holiday Muffin and Jam Basket Every Christmas."

 

[EE94]

I'm not a journalist but if I were, I'd think getting breaking news would be something that gets the competitive juices going.

I remember the Toronto Star scooping a major story a couple of years ago. Quite frankly I can't remember what it was but the Star rode that story for about four days straight. The Globe, the Sun and the Post were all left holding their dicks.

I thought to myself at the time, "There must be heads exploding at the other three papers"

That said, I couldn't get past paragraph four in this thing. Godawful stuff.

think you're thinking of the NHLPA stuff - the e-mail story that finally sunk Saskin

 

[King Of All Media]

"Here's Why I Send The Thompson Family a Holiday Muffin and Jam Basket Every Christmas."

Thompson is one of the few NFL GMs who usually doesn't talk to the national media. I wonder if Glazer covered Thompson when he was a player or something like that. He's probably too young to have. It's a very curious connection.

 

[shockey]

i have ZERO problem with giving jay kudos for being the first to get a HUGE story.

my problem with him/FOX is two-fold: 1 -- jay doesn't have the writing chops to pull off this sort of piece. 2 -- short of woodstein, u can't believe for a second that anyone gives a crap how hard we work to get a story, especially a sports story. beaking the news should be enough.

like the ol' saying goes, "i like sausage, but don't need to know how it's made."

always hated this kind of self-congratulatory piece and always will. find it hard to imagine joe schoe gives a darn. either.

the stuff woodstein kept coming up with helped lead to the downfall of a freakin' president. jay had nothing to do with this deal going down. he just reported it first.

good for him/FOX. but beyond those "exhilerating" minutes of the scoop, whoop-de-damn-doo, no?

 

[silentbob]

For those who don' t think this is a big deal, ask the Green Bay and New York reporters how their bosses reacted when they were beaten. Or for that matter, ask the Tampa reporters who reported that Favre was going to the Bucs.

It's a big deal.

When I heard it announced my first thought was "How did he get that?"

I don't agree with Mizzou; it wasn't the biggest sports story ever. Everyone knew Favre was going to be traded. And I think most everyone knew the Jets were a possibility. Glazer was just told first. And that's still pretty important.

 

[Joe Williams]

Glazer reporting that Favre move first makes me more likely to click on FOXSports and read his stuff.

His self-congratulatory piece makes me less likely to click on FOXSports and read his stuff.

Pretty much cancels itself out.

That's how I feel with so much ESPN stuff: Given their numbers and resources, it's hard to ignore them. Given their constant self-promotion, it's hard not to ignore them.

 

[Italian_Stallion]

I'm late to this one. But I think Ragu nailed it on the first page.

 

[shockey]

For those who don' t think this is a big deal, ask the Green Bay and New York reporters how their bosses reacted when they were beaten. Or for that matter, ask the Tampa reporters who reported that Favre was going to the Bucs.

It's a big deal.

When I heard it announced my first thought was "How did he get that?"

I don't agree with Mizzou; it wasn't the biggest sports story ever. Everyone knew Favre was going to be traded. And I think most everyone knew the Jets were a possibility. Glazer was just told first. And that's still pretty important.

again, two separate issues. good for "glaze" for being first.

but bad for him/FOX for beating their chests and believing anyone gives 2 cents how he worked the story around his airport runs and massages.

sheesh. : : :

 

[The Big Ragu]

But what really bugs me is this whole A) if we're just breaking sports news, it's not the Pentagon Papers, so it's not important, so it's not breaking news and B) if you break a story by a half hour, who'll remember or care, so what's the big deal? Sorry, Ragu, on this we just do not agree.

SF, No need to apologize. But that isn't what I was saying. I wasn't saying it's not a scoop because what happens to Brett Favre isn't an important story. It's not a big deal to me because whether Jay Glazer was working it or not, the world was going to eventually (and fairly soon) know where Brett Favre ended up anyhow. It's not like he unearthed something we weren't going to know without his reporting skills. All he might have done (if he was there first) was find out about the trade moments before dozens of other reporters got phone calls or text messages and hundreds more found out via a press release. It's just not that big a deal, especially nowadays, when the Internet and cable news takes news like that and informs the whole world really quickly. No one is going to remember Jay Glazer as the guy who "broke the Brett Favre" story. It wasn't a huge scoop -- even the biggest bumbler of a reporter would have known an hour or two later, when the press release came out.

To me, it isn't a scoop if it is news that is about to be reported via a press release. A scoop is something you dig for that no one else has, had any idea was coming, and isn't going to be given away to the world in an hour or two.