Should newspapers let their writers go on ESPN?

[jmt57]

Should Sports Editors Forbid Their Writers From Helping ESPN Essentially Kill Newspapers? | The Big Lead

With the launch of espnboston.com and the revelation that espn is not letting their people appear on any radio shows (other than espn radio), will newspapers and other media retaliate? In my opinion it's too late; the espn-local city-dotcom sites are destined to overtake newspapersfor coverage of local pro and college sports.

It has been well-documented in recent months that ESPN is making a push into regional markets with websites like ESPNChicago, ESPNBoston and this week, ESPNDallas. According to Fox Business, “The push by ESPN is aimed at leveraging the company’s global name recognition into new ad dollars at the still-growing local level.” This is already working in Chicago. The Boston Globe, perhaps nervous, is fighting back. Is the next logical move for sports editors to forbid their “star” columnists and beat writers from helping ESPN essentially kill newspapers?

 

[Satchboogie3]

There are two problems. The first is the writers. All newspapers have to (or should have to) do is have great, talented writers on their staff. The point of having local journalists/papers is to have a local view and get a point of view you can't anywhere else. If local papers make it a priority to have well written articles, a great writing staff, and great, honest journalism, I don't think they will have any problems sticking around.

However, the other problem is much more serious. The problem is the people. If the majority of people today no longer care about honest, solid journalism and only care about quick media and reading something "catchy", then the local papers may very well be doomed. People today have forgotten the point of supporting companies that deserve support. Too many people only care about prices. Many people would buy a product from a horrible company, knowing that it uses sweat-shops, pollutes the Earth, are greedy, and doesn't care about the customers, just because it is "cheaper". The have lost the drive to support righteousness. Everything comes down to the people and frankly, I have very little confidence in the public.

 

[italia44]

There are two problems. The first is the writers. All newspapers have to (or should have to) do is have great, talented writers on their staff. The point of having local journalists/papers is to have a local view and get a point of view you can't anywhere else. If local papers make it a priority to have well written articles, a great writing staff, and great, honest journalism, I don't think they will have any problems sticking around.

However, the other problem is much more serious. The problem is the people. If the majority of people today no longer care about honest, solid journalism and only care about quick media and reading something "catchy", then the local papers may very well be doomed. People today have forgotten the point of supporting companies that deserve support. Too many people only care about prices. Many people would buy a product from a horrible company, knowing that it uses sweat-shops, pollutes the Earth, are greedy, and doesn't care about the customers, just because it is "cheaper". The have lost the drive to support righteousness. Everything comes down to the people and frankly, I have very little confidence in the public.

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.

 

[MassPats38]

I believe this issue was discussed on RealSports last week. Newspapers are dying, and with that death goes true investigative reporting (the BALCO scandal and the years of investigative reporting and team of journalists dedicated to the story was an example), as well as the genuinely local coverage (e.g., high school level). Internet-based companies are quick to get the news out ahead of the crowd, so you will not see attempts at genuine higher-level story writing.

But this is the culture of the day, and the general population does not want to read a newspaper story a day after the wire media has reported. Simply prohibiting reporters from working on television or the Internet does not address that problem. I see this as an analogy to Blockbuster Video/Netflix battles, in that Blockbuster never really comprehended the threat until it reached critical mass and then it was powerless to stop the bleeding. Newspapers have simply lost too much at this point to do anything about it.

Much like the Cronkite-era television news when compared to television news today, the current newspapers are shadows of their past form. I wouldn't miss it if they dropped off the planet at this point as I do not see much of a value added in their current contributions.

 

[JSn]

Whatever happened to real newsmen?

 

[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.

 

[JSn]

Chris Forsberg just bolted from The Globe to ESPNBoston.com as well.

 

[102 Pat]

Newspaper's seem to be a dying form of media.

 

[weswelker#83]

Should Sports Editors Forbid Their Writers From Helping ESPN Essentially Kill Newspapers? | The Big Lead

With the launch of espnboston.com and the revelation that espn is not letting their people appear on any radio shows (other than espn radio), will newspapers and other media retaliate? In my opinion it's too late; the espn-local city-dotcom sites are destined to overtake newspapersfor coverage of local pro and college sports.

Good , very good news. Fresh blood in every business is always welcome . Give the chance to a new generation of writers to shine.

Hey , that's why we have Media/Journalism schools all over the country.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

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..

Absolutely, at the risk of sounding OT but to drive home the point of newspapers via new media ala internet, recently I hired a new employee. The newspaper charged $400 for a week long 4 line ad. Craig's list charged me $25 for an ad twice as long. I got 7 responses from the newspaper and 55 from Craig's list. Needless to say it was the last newspaper ad I'll run.....

How long until Gasper joins them???

 

[JSn]

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]

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]

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]

I agree with these comments.

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

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]

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]

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