" Veteran sportswriters made cranky by the arrival of the New Media"
Interesting piece from Dave Kindred about new media reporting and covering golf (and, yes, Wei Under Par). Here’s a key quote:
For me, the more important question is the question that has been asked of every reporter forever. Can we trust what the guy writes? Is she responsible and fair? Does he verify his information? If a reporter/writer can provide positive answers to those questions over a long period of time, yes, she’s the kind of journalist I aspire to be. If the answers are negative, he won’t be around very long, anyway, because, like golf pros who chase pars, a reporter who makes enough bogeys loses his card.
Co-sign. Read the whole column.
Who and what is a “journalist”? Honestly, that’s a great question and if you have the million-dollar answer, then I’d like to shake your hand. But at the end of the day, who cares? — let the writer’s work speaks for itself. Anyway, the topic lends a good discussion for those interested.
. . . unless that reporter works for foxnews.
Great piece and agree with Kindred on the end. One concern I have with where “journalism” is currently going is journalists throwing (generally) tabloid stories out there, as look this is what is being said. The theoretically reputable journalist isn’t fact checking, but putting it out there anyways. In that case it seems to me nobody gets held responsible or even has to report if the initial rumor turns out to be inaccurate.
I am all in favor of letting someone’s work speak for itself, but part of the reason I read news, is to not have to go fact check it. When I read something in the NY Times, I trust that the paper has certain quality standards as an institution, and there is something to be said for that.
Cool article. @Stephanie – gotta like the next to last sentence – called you “not the first sportswriter to..”, good company to be rolled in with DK.
The line was blurred long ago. When we became a society of rumor first facts later. The 24 hr news cycle killed journalistic “ethics”. The goal became to get it out first and then retract if you happen to be wrong. I know personally two very talented people who left TV reporting because they did not want to give up there own ethics to “get the story out”.
The reason I enjoy your sight and come here daily is because you write and “report” from a similar perspective as me. You report as a passionate fan of golf with the resume and understanding of golf. I don’t always agree with you, which is good, but I always appreciate the discussion.
It is nice as I have said many times to see events from the way I would look. I would want to hang out with the Day’s at their RV. Keep up the good work.
@thugsone…good point!
Journalistic “ideals” are exactly that: unrealistic goals held as “standards” marketed by the businesses that are performing the most basic transactional function – selling. Stephanie is a journalist in the most pure and fundamental way: she reports on what the people want to know.
Whether it is the atmosphere at The Masters or a seedy hotel room vacated by Tiger, she has an informed, intelligent, and interesting perspective that has gained a significant following based solely on her personal efforts. With no constraints from schools of journalism just doing what has always been done or editors that are pawns of media magnates, she has filled a market niche and gained relevance and admiration from her readers. That is why she has been awarded credentials and deserves them more than anyone else in the media room.
She sets her own standards and her readers accept them in growing numbers. With no marketing vehicle other than her personal web publications, social networking outlets, and references from other sites (I found her through a link from Alan Shipnuk), Stephanie is helping push out the established media business model by utilizing technology in a way that benefits herself and her readers. Stephanie should be the one questioning whether DK still deserves his credentials since he obviously hasn’t grasped the inevitable extinction of the old media business model.
Fuck the powers that be; the standards will be set by whomever people choose to read, as they always have been. Only now, a fresh new voice like Stephanie’s, enabled by the free distribution of information through emerging technologies, doesn’t have to go through all the bullshit conformity that generates the boring droning espoused by the established media, which is now thankfully crumbling because their self-appointed, judgmental, superior perspective is as obsolete as the paper upon which it is printed.
@Andrew – “a seedy hotel room vacated by Tiger”
Pray tell us more. People want to know. Places you frequent so you have the perspective of seedy hotel rooms.
Your last paragraph etc suggest that you are on the wrong blog. Did you lose your way.
Thumbs up to the new media.
Thumbs up to Wei.
Thumbs down to internal journalistic turf wars.
Thumbs down to Ian Poulter.
For a dose of reality, check the comments on this article over at Shack’s site; seems more than a few are not impressed with this vanity project. “Look at me, I’m at Aronimink!” “Look at me I’m at Merion!” “look at Jason Kidd and I!”
Del the Funk is the man!
Loved this. One thing I never expected to see in my lifetime was the names Stephanie Wei and Dick Young in the same article/blog. Being fairly close to the current situation…..uhhhh…….plight of newspapers and magazines, who knows what sports journalism will look like twenty years from now. Not that Sirak needs me, but I will be unfollowing him in short order. I just have to bite the bullet and be out of touch with his entertaining work. He writes the same stuff over and over that many others write over and over.
I must confess I’ve always liked Kindred. He wrote a great article about Morgan Pressel early in her career.
Ok. I need to go read the latest issue of The National (ah- the good old days.)