When bloggers are accredited

[Mr. X]

What has happened when bloggers, who are not affiliated with a professional media outlet or team, are accredited for events? Are there specific examples of them asking questions so angering players, coaches or mangers that they cut off the interview session, negatively impacting the work of professional reporters? Have bloggers acted so unprofessionally (because either they have no clue about how to act professional or desire not to act professionally) that they hurt the reputations of professionals? Is there anything bloggers add to the mix through their questions and presence?

 

[Appgrad05]

I am just happy when they wear the pants their mom put at the top of the stairs for them.

Seriously, I've never heard of any problems. The NHL bloggers have been very professional. Yes, they're homers. But there are homers in the mainstream media — bloggers are just, for the more part, more transparent about it.

 

[SF_Express]

What has happened when bloggers, who are not affiliated with a professional media outlet or team, are accredited for events? Are there specific examples of them asking questions so angering players, coaches or mangers that they cut off the interview session, negatively impacting the work of professional reporters? Have bloggers acted so unprofessionally (because either they have no clue about how to act professional or desire not to act professionally) that they hurt the reputations of professionals? Is there anything bloggers add to the mix through their questions and presence?

I'm a "mainstream" guy, but I think the way the question is worded is a tad unfair to bloggers as a group. I've known some "mainstream" media people who could be assholes and disrupt press conferences with the best of them.

There are very knowedgeable and good bloggers -- more all the time given the state of the industry -- and some really crappy ones. Their behavior will get sorted out in the normal ways; in other words, if they're bad early on, they'll learn.

And finally, that genie isn't going back into the bottle anyway, so it's kind of moot.

 

[Mr. X]

I assume you mean homers in terms of writing.

The writing isn't too important to me. What I'm interested in is their questions and how they act in the press box.

 

[Double J]

Bottom line - if they don't affect how you do your job, it's none of your business why anyone is there or what they're doing while they're there.

 

[Mr. X]

If someone asks a question that prompts someone to walk away, that affects how I do my job. Plus, anyone, even professionals, asking awful questions or acting unprofessional makes the experience less pleasant.

 

[Double J]

So why single out bloggers? What's your beef with them?

 

[Mr. X]

I'm singling out bloggers because accrediting them is a relatively new development, I am wondering what the standards to be accredited are (I know they vary from organization to organization), the fact you can be self-appointed rather than hired and the possibility that some bloggers just view being accredited as a way to get into games free.

Years ago when I was starting out, at a now-defunct newspaper, I was accused by a public relations director, of just wanting a credential to get into a game for free, so that is something that has stuck in my craw. This was for a paper that was 55 years old at the time and had significant readership. (Paper had previously not covered college or professional events.)

There is still some organizations that make it difficult for me to be accredited, or do not accredit me, although I am now at a company that is 80 years old, but previously not covered college or professional events.

I also think acting professionally is important.

 

[Appgrad05]

Look at it this way — an 80-year-old paper (like that matters, but I digress) has never covered college or professional sports, but is now looking for credentials. And it sticks in your craw that the PR director is asking why?
Going back to my initial post — homerism is a state of mind. It does not manifest itself in just the writing of the fanboi, but in the questions asked. While it is not likely to drive away a player or coach, sometimes a little blow-up is a good thing.

 

[Mr. X]

Problem then was the attitude of the PR person. I had sent in a letter on company letterhead. I did end up getting a credential. I still don't think there is much of a ticket-buying market of reporters from small media outlets. He seemed to be thinking, "If I accredit this guy, that means one less ticket sold."

The occasional problem now is from PR person/SID is, "Is this something you usually cover?" "No, then no credential." That does not take into account increased sports coverage or special nature of event.

SID, who turned me down for team's opener, then later accredited me for season finale against arch rival asked, "Do you really want to cover this," thinking why would I want to cover one-sided loss by his team. I answered yes.

 

[TheSportsPredictor]

What has happened when freelance journalists, who are not affiliated with a professional media outlet or team, are accredited for events? Are there specific examples of them asking questions so angering players, coaches or mangers that they cut off the interview session, negatively impacting the work of professional reporters? Have bloggers acted so unprofessionally (because either they have no clue about how to act professional or desire not to act professionally) that they hurt the reputations of professionals? Is there anything bloggers add to the mix through their questions and presence?

This is dumb. Reporters affiliated with major media outlets do this stuff often enough themselves.

 

[MrWrite]

And the question is, why suddenly were all the old-ass papers you were working for, which had never covered the stuff, suddenly trying to cover it?

I would argue that at least a blog covering a team or a league has an established (albeit relatively recent, based on the medium) mission to cover that team or that league, as opposed to a writer from a paper that has never covered a team or a league suddenly wanting to.

Which one sounds more sketchy if you're the SID? Maybe the newspaper guy, despite it being "old" media. Sounds like this thread is a personal gripe that bloggers have been able to get credentialed by places that gave you a hard time.

 

[SouthernStyle]

And the question is, why suddenly were all the old-ass papers you were working for, which had never covered the stuff, suddenly trying to cover it?

I would argue that at least a blog covering a team or a league has an established (albeit relatively recent, based on the medium) mission to cover that team or that league, as opposed to a writer from a paper that has never covered a team or a league suddenly wanting to.

Which one sounds more sketchy if you're the SID? Maybe the newspaper guy, despite it being "old" media. Sounds like this thread is a personal gripe that bloggers have been able to get credentialed by places that gave you a hard time.

I think you nailed it. This smells like a grudge.

Yes, some bloggers are homers. Yes, some are annoying. But the same can be said about some print reporters.

I hate to admit it, but there are some damn good reporters working for new media. They also take up space on press row. But with the way things have gone in the newspaper industry during the previous year, space on press row really isn't an issue anymore. Cutbacks have diminished the number beat writers attending events, and most newspapers are trying to find cheap ways to cover pro and college teams (outsourcing, AP, etc.).

Don't hate on the blogger that was trying to do his job — asking tough questions is part the biz — because your "old" rag has never covered the local team. That's not the blogger's problem.

 

[write then drink]

on my beat, the bloggers are quite often better prepared and harder working, ask better questions and are in general more professional and hard working than many of the print guys

it's my experience that if a blogger is actually out covering stuff and not sitting in mom's basement just rambling on about something he read or heard, that guy approaches what he's doing with a high level of professionalism

 

[MrWrite]

on my beat, the bloggers are quite often better prepared and harder working, ask better questions and are in general more professional and hard working than many of the print guys

it's my experience that if a blogger is actually out covering stuff and not sitting in mom's basement just rambling on about something he read or heard, that guy approaches what he's doing with a high level of professionalism

Amen. I know I still get a good chuckle when we do our "BLOGS!!!" bit here on SJ, and there are certainly some (read: many) blogs that are ridiculous, opinion-driven, basement-dwelling drivel, but for all the talk of embracing new media, some of us here who came up in more traditional formats often can't help but hate on those who begin their careers in new media of the non-traditional, non-newspaper-site variety and do it with some (though not always all) of the traditional skills and ethics.

 

[buckweaver]

This is dumb. Reporters affiliated with major media outlets do this stuff often enough themselves.

Ding ding ding.

And I've seen a whole lot of unprofessional asshats mucking up a press box who probably have never heard of a blog. Team personnel, radio guys, TV guys, print guys, hangers-on, etc.

Whoever said this smells like a grudge is right.

 

[sportsnut]

I am not sure if I should post this here or in another topic but what about people that have a podcast and or internet radio show? Do you all think the same of them as you do with bloggers?

 

[ServeItUp]

This was sent to me a while back, and I figure this is as good a place as any to bring it up. Jamey Newburg covers the Texas Rangers for... himself. It was nine years ago in March that the Rangers' front office deemed him worthy of accreditation.

http://www.newbergreport.com/article1.asp

Point from me is that the landscape is changing. You're just as wrong to paint all bloggers as basement-dwelling, mouth-breathing fanboys as you are to paint all print reporters as professional, knowledgeable, founts of objectivity. Quoting another poster, there's no getting that genie back in the bottle.