SMG does Phil Taylor

[Evil ... Thy name is Orville Redenbacher!!]

http://www.sportsmediaguide.com/interviews/phil-taylor/

Some good stuff,
Outstanding column at the bottom by Taylor.
He also discloses himself as a SportsJournalists.com visitor.

And has a few things to say about TBL and Deadspin.

Q. Your thoughts on Deadspin and The Big Lead?

A. The good points are that in some ways they keep those of us in mainstream media honest and on our toes. They point out when we’re getting stale and leaning on the same old clichés – they don’t let mainstream media get away with that, which is a good thing, it’s definitely something we needed. In the past if you wanted to be lazy and get by in this profession you could. You could write paint-by-number stories and features. Now people have more of an option. They call us out when we slip into that easy rut.

The bad point is that they can have a mocking tone sometimes, not as much from the bloggers themselves as from the commenters, that can get a little mean-spirited. In terms of Deadspin and Big Lead, if they go a little too far in that direction it’s because they’re not getting enough scrutiny and they have to look at themselves. They have to step back and decide whether the tone does go over the line. They need to make the same decisions that other journalists do. Up to now it’s been a bit like the Wild Wild West. Slowly they’re starting to regulate themselves.

Q. Deadspin is corporate and Big Lead isn’t. Do you make that distinction?

A. Good point. Big Lead is more willing to push the envelope with hot actresses and the whole leering frat guy mentality – but it’s not over the top. Some places I just click off because the sophomoric raunchy stuff is not that interesting to anybody over the age of 25 – the Big Lead has a little of that, but it has enough to keep me coming back. Which is not to say it doesn’t go over the line. It ran an item about Rick Reilly and his hi-jinks in the pressbox and to this day I have not seen confirmation. That’s these websites at their worst – they throw up rumors without any effort to confirm them. That’s failing Journalism 101.

 

[WaylonJennings]

Good read.

Some of what he says echoes that Shaunghessy column that was debated so heatedly earlier this week. In particular, I'm thinking about how he realized he wanted off the NBA beat when Brian Shaw, a seemingly nice guy and supporting cast member to Shaq and Kobe's Lakers, didn't want to make time to talk before the time. Sounds like it kind of shocked him.

 

[henryhenry]

excellent interview.

sounds like he wants out - he's seen enough brian shaws and frank violas.

and maybe his video game idea is his ticket.

(taylor suggests a video game pitting old-time bb stars against negro league stars)

 

[sportsed]

[quote author=Phil Taylor]
In 2000 I went up to Brian Shaw, who was with the Lakers at the time, and asked if I could talk with him for a few minutes. This was 90 minutes before game time – NBA rules are that the lockerroom is open from that point until 45 minutes before tip-off. He knew who I was – I asked about the Shaq-Kobe situation at the time – and though he had talked before games in the past, now he said ‘Not before the game’. He was polite about it, but I thought, ‘Are we to the point where Brian Shaw, who is nice enough but not a star, is telling people he won’t talk’? That flipped a switch in my brain – at that point I wanted out of the NBA on a regular beat basis. It was just getting too hard to get access.
[/quote]
So this was the seminal moment? Being rebuffed by Brian Shaw before a game? About a topic that Shaw probably had been asked about ad nauseam? Really?

Seems that Taylor missed the obvious lightbulb moment: That he was chasing the same story that every other reporter in the lockerroom had chased themselves, Taylor included.

Indeed, a quick search reveals that Taylor wrote about Kobe and Shaq's relationship at the beginning of that season, again at about midseason and a third time heading into the playoffs. Magazines, remember, don't like to tread over well-documented territory, though this was an ongoing soap opera.

But the point is, if you were Brian Shaw, wouldn't you be tired of having to answer the same questions over and over again?

 

[broadway joe]

[quote author=Phil Taylor]
In 2000 I went up to Brian Shaw, who was with the Lakers at the time, and asked if I could talk with him for a few minutes. This was 90 minutes before game time – NBA rules are that the lockerroom is open from that point until 45 minutes before tip-off. He knew who I was – I asked about the Shaq-Kobe situation at the time – and though he had talked before games in the past, now he said ‘Not before the game’. He was polite about it, but I thought, ‘Are we to the point where Brian Shaw, who is nice enough but not a star, is telling people he won’t talk’? That flipped a switch in my brain – at that point I wanted out of the NBA on a regular beat basis. It was just getting too hard to get access.

So this was the seminal moment? Being rebuffed by Brian Shaw before a game? About a topic that Shaw probably had been asked about ad nauseam? Really?

Seems that Taylor missed the obvious lightbulb moment: That he was chasing the same story that every other reporter in the lockerroom had chased themselves, Taylor included.

Indeed, a quick search reveals that Taylor wrote about Kobe and Shaq's relationship at the beginning of that season, again at about midseason and a third time heading into the playoffs. Magazines, remember, don't like to tread over well-documented territory, though this was an ongoing soap opera.

But the point is, if you were Brian Shaw, wouldn't you be tired of having to answer the same questions over and over again?
[/quote]

I think the point is, when a run-of-the-mill player with whom you already have a relationship won't to talk to you -- during the time set aside for interviews -- it can make you throw up your hands and think maybe it's time to do something else.