The phase out of photographers at some of our cheaper examples of journalism

[doggieseatdoggies]

Ours has started passing along edicts from the top that reporters should also be photographers and I know that some of the cheaperass papers in our family have been doing this for years...forcing gamers to be nothing but what the coach says because you can't do accurate stats and shoot pictures. Not really. Close, but not really.

And you shouldn't have to.

So besides CNHI, which other companies are pushing this now as the latest creative excuse to cut personnel?

 

[Stitch]

And take some video while your at it, plus Tweet, Facebook, blog, Cover It Live and anything internets (sic) related.

 

[doggieseatdoggies]

Team A beat Team B 21-7. Joe Blow scored three touchdowns.
Or wait, I didn't get that in my notes. Was busy blogging about that last photo I shot.

 

[Rhody31]

We've been doing it for the good part of a year. Football is nearly impossible. Basketball means the only stats you're getting are from the book or coach. Everything else is pretty easy to do.
But the quality of photo is not nearly as good as it should be.

 

[doggieseatdoggies]

Exactly.

In the years of film in the tank, I shot 3200 speed **** in b/w from midcourt. It was grainy as hell but I did it and kept some decent stats...scoring and rebounding. And of course, the photos were ****ty like you'd expect from trying to do it on the cheap.

But let's be honest. Most newspaper companies don't give a **** if there's quality journalism or not in the paper, regardless of what their company slogans say.

 

[Fredrick]

What a joke. New motto: Do it all and do it all poorly.

 

[bmm]

Our paper is on Facebook and Twitter now, which I consider a complete waste. For one, if we are going to promo something for the next day then way not do it on our web site? Or better yet post it. Let's do a lot of things poorly and wonder why no one cares about the product. How 'bout we worry about a couple of things and do them well, like putting out a decent product?

 

[murphyc]

Ours has started passing along edicts from the top that reporters should also be photographers and I know that some of the cheaperass papers in our family have been doing this for years...forcing gamers to be nothing but what the coach says because you can't do accurate stats and shoot pictures. Not really. Close, but not really.

And you shouldn't have to.

So besides CNHI, which other companies are pushing this now as the latest creative excuse to cut personnel?

The first paper I worked at, I didn't do photos. All three since then (plus four years as FT freelancer) I've done stories, plus pics and layout. I admit my photos aren't as good as a dedicated good FT photog, and my notes aren't as complete as someone just writing, but IMO they are both pretty decent. It is a compromise, but having done it for 10 years now I've gotten used to it. For me at least, it's not that big of a deal. I've actually wondered why more don't combine reporting with photography.

 

[Diego Marquez]

Did it for years as well (oooh, 3200 B&W!). I don't do it anymore, but would love to try with the digitals. I laugh seeing photogs rip off 30 frames of one play, then go back to the office and say they got the shot. The old guys, like me, remember the one-and-done of film.
As for stats, what do you need? Basketball: points, rebounds, steals, assists, blocks, threes, FTs and turnovers can be done with a camera in hand. Football: detail the play, down&distance, and the tackler(s); tally yardage and other stats during clock stoppages. I assure you that many, many people worked this way for years.
For me, even the worst of games flew by and I wrote better copy (IMO) because I was focused on the event. Without the camera, people are walking up to you to talk ('cause you're not working, right?), or the photog wants to show you the shot they got, or ... look a bird ... What did I miss?

 

[novelist_wannabe]

Diego, you're not helping.

The fact is, if you try to do two jobs at once, you'll do well at neither.

 

[mustangj17]

I had to shoot and write for a small Gatehouse paper.

 

[mustangj17]

Our paper is on Facebook and Twitter now, which I consider a complete waste. For one, if we are going to promo something for the next day then way not do it on our web site? Or better yet post it. Let's do a lot of things poorly and wonder why no one cares about the product. How 'bout we worry about a couple of things and do them well, like putting out a decent product?

Because people DONT GO to your paper every day. But they do go to Twitter, and Facebook. It drives numbers, people get click happy, they start to realize your web presence.

This is why newspapers are in such a mess right now. Its a one-track mind.

Our papers aren't solely print and Web Site entities anymore. You have to remember Twitter and Facebook and mobile sites are staples of media companies now.

And you should be promoting things on your site. But that's not the point.

 

[UPChip]

We (owned by Ogden) have no staff photographer. With the exception of the local D2 university, which has strobes that only our tech guy has permission to access (he's a hobby shooter), we have no choice but to shoot for ourselves.

Is it unfortunate? Perhaps. But when it's the way I've had to do it my entire career (we had a photog at our previous shop, but she was also responsible for photo editing and an hourly employee, so we were only allowed to use her in important situations, such as football Fridays), it doesn't bother me that much.

 

[Flip Wilson]

Did it for years as well (oooh, 3200 B&W!). I don't do it anymore, but would love to try with the digitals. I laugh seeing photogs rip off 30 frames of one play, then go back to the office and say they got the shot. The old guys, like me, remember the one-and-done of film.
As for stats, what do you need? Basketball: points, rebounds, steals, assists, blocks, threes, FTs and turnovers can be done with a camera in hand. Football: detail the play, down&distance, and the tackler(s); tally yardage and other stats during clock stoppages. I assure you that many, many people worked this way for years.
For me, even the worst of games flew by and I wrote better copy (IMO) because I was focused on the event. Without the camera, people are walking up to you to talk ('cause you're not working, right?), or the photog wants to show you the shot they got, or ... look a bird ... What did I miss?

A question-and-answer from two coaches who were scouting the high school game I covered this weekend:

Coach A: What happened on that play?
Coach B: I don't know. I was texting.

 

[golfnut8924]

I had to do both writing and photog at my first paper. My strategy was to get a few good pics early in the game and then go sit down, put the camera away and focus on the game. Hell the paper only runs one photo with the story anyway so why do you need to take 500 pics? As soon as I would get 2 or 3 decent ones I'd call it a night and concentrate on the game. I always found that taking pics distracted me from what was happening in the game. Not from a a statistical standpoint but it took my attention away from details like what kind of defense are they playing, which players are they trying to exploit, etc. Much easier to soak in that kind of stuff from the press box or the scorers table.

 

[Rhody31]

Did it for years as well (oooh, 3200 B&W!). I don't do it anymore, but would love to try with the digitals. I laugh seeing photogs rip off 30 frames of one play, then go back to the office and say they got the shot. The old guys, like me, remember the one-and-done of film.
As for stats, what do you need? Basketball: points, rebounds, steals, assists, blocks, threes, FTs and turnovers can be done with a camera in hand. Football: detail the play, down&distance, and the tackler(s); tally yardage and other stats during clock stoppages. I assure you that many, many people worked this way for years.
For me, even the worst of games flew by and I wrote better copy (IMO) because I was focused on the event. Without the camera, people are walking up to you to talk ('cause you're not working, right?), or the photog wants to show you the shot they got, or ... look a bird ... What did I miss?

You are insane if you think you can keep full stats and a running PxP for basketball with a camera in hand.

 

[RickStain]

I'm pretty sure every professional in every field in all the world is convinced they could do better quality work if they had more fewer responsibilities. It's true, I'm sure, but so what? It's a job and you do it.

I take photos, shoot video and keep stats as best I can. Does the quality suffer? Sure. But oh well, it's a living.

 

[txsportsscribe]

Did it for years as well (oooh, 3200 B&W!). I don't do it anymore, but would love to try with the digitals. I laugh seeing photogs rip off 30 frames of one play, then go back to the office and say they got the shot. The old guys, like me, remember the one-and-done of film.
As for stats, what do you need? Basketball: points, rebounds, steals, assists, blocks, threes, FTs and turnovers can be done with a camera in hand. Football: detail the play, down&distance, and the tackler(s); tally yardage and other stats during clock stoppages. I assure you that many, many people worked this way for years.
For me, even the worst of games flew by and I wrote better copy (IMO) because I was focused on the event. Without the camera, people are walking up to you to talk ('cause you're not working, right?), or the photog wants to show you the shot they got, or ... look a bird ... What did I miss?

You are insane if you think you can keep full stats and a running PxP for basketball with a camera in hand.

i guess i'm insane because i did it for 4 years covering high schools. kept running pxp, points, rebounds, assists, turnovers, blocked shots, fouls, etc., and got some pretty decent photos, too. the complete stats were for team i was covering only while i kept just points for other team. double-checked against scorebook and stat sheets afterward and i was usually pretty close to dead on.

 

[sgreenwell]

I would be fine with it for some sports - I did it for lacrosse, soccer and tennis with no issues, and I've done book for basketball for six or seven years now, so I can imagine doing it for that too. But football seems like it would be hellish, and it's a horrible sign if your company can't spring the $40 to $100 to just hire a freelance photog for what is normally the marquee sport of the week.

 

[playthrough]

How about phasing out photography entirely? I interviewed at a paper not too long ago that got rid of AP photo. It was a smaller paper that never ran many large AP photos on a page because of hyperlocal stuff, but it seemed strange nonetheless to not have it at all. And right before getting rid of it the paper stockpiled a bunch of file art, at one point during a major tennis tourney they ran the same old Roger Federer action photo twice. There's no way readers wouldn't catch on to that trick. And of course the publisher, seeing that the sports section had survived for a year without AP photo, began to wonder if it could survive without wire copy.