Should newspapers let their writers go on ESPN? - Page 2 - New England Patriots Forums

***JSn*** · 10-01-2009, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patsfanin Philly

How long until Gasper joins them???

He's the last reason for me to click the Globe's link and even now it's an after-thought.

That said, Reiss seems to be going downhill a bit. Still good stuff, but I dunno. Something seems sub-par about the latest (and slow-to-occur) bunch of blog posts.

TheComeback · 10-01-2009, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by italia44

Actually.......no.......even though I detect a political slant to your post....I'm going to keep away from that.The internet and the dearth of reading skills of our young people killed-off newspapers.

Even though there are many "catchy" and quick media outlets available,there are also hundreds of in-depth and well-written articles available to anyone in the world with an internet connection.You just have to turn your myopic eyes away from ESPN and MTV............Wouldn't hurt to shop at Wal-Mart,instead of Whole Foods,either.

I don't read the Globe,NYT,Wash Post anymore,because their particular philisophical bent,permeates down to their sportswriters,as well.........this I cannot tolerate.I don't watch Letterman or Keith Olberman,whether on MSNBC or on NBC's Sunday night football.

This has nothing to do with sweat shops,saving the whales,greed or "righteousness",as you put it,but about "choice"...............and the American viewing public,have "chosen".....astutely,imho.

No, you're wrong, as well. People's imaginary "dearth" of reading skills has nothing to do with the decline of newspapers, which have been written at a 6th grade vocabulary level for decades.

The reason the internet is putting newspapers out of business is because it's making newspapers obsolete. Sites like ESPNBoston are not only updated in real time, but they're cheaper and easier to access than a newspaper. I can read ESPN at work, but it's a lot harder to sneak in the Washington Post.

And as for bias, it's everywhere you go. I'd argue that on a global scale, newspapers like the NYT and WP really aren't that liberal. Try The Independent from the UK; now that's liberal. Papers in the UK aren't scared of outright stating their bias like they are in America. (except for the borderline tabloids like the NY Post)

***JSn*** · 10-01-2009, 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheComeback

The reason the internet is putting newspapers out of business is because it's making newspapers obsolete. Sites like ESPNBoston are not only updated in real time, but they're cheaper and easier to access than a newspaper. I can read ESPN at work, but it's a lot harder to sneak in the Washington Post.

It's everything, not just newspapers. We can now check the latest Football news, rent a movie, buy an album, and check the weather from a computer and even a cell-phone (though this forum BLOWS on the iPhone).

Relatedly, all but the biggest video rental stores are closing up shop, Virgin shut down it's mega-stores and with downloadable game purchases for platforms, these forms of media are disappearing.

I've been saying it for a while, but CD is the last musical delivery "hard" format and Blu-Ray is the last video delivery "hard" format.

Survival of the Fittest is weeding out every information/entertainment medium that doesn't find a way to progress.

Um, go Pats.

***mgteich*** · 10-01-2009, 11:45 AM

I agree with these comments.

Local papers are more likely to GAIN readership when their reporters appear on other media.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob0729

ESPN is a huge ratings grabber. If a newspaper writer goes on ESPN, he/she gets exposure for themselves and the newspaper. It is free advertising.

Besides, ESPN is not killing newspapers. Lack of readers and advertisers are killing newspapers. A boycott of ESPN will do nothing to change the newspapers' fortunes. The loss of Mike Reiss probably had a neglible affect on the Globe's readership.

***MoLewisrocks*** · 10-01-2009, 11:45 AM

Not sure it would have saved them but the mistakes were made a long time ago. Newspapers can't compete for breaking news... unless they restrict their own to breaking it on their websites. Allowing their writers to shop their talent to competing outlets (radio, web, tv) was their big mistake. Talent exclusivity was all they had left to cling to, and they lost it (not to mention cheapened it along the way).

robb01 · 10-01-2009, 11:47 AM

I can really see both sides of it, I know if I were a writer I wouldnt turn down the opportunity