Weighing in on the Deadspin Debate
10 comments so far
May 21, 2008 by
Those who watch HBO or visit Deadspin.com or who perhaps catch the kind of viral videos that circulate e-mail and the net may have seen this excerpt from Costas Now.
It’s easy for those in the blogging community to get drawn into the battle. Are blogs good or bad? Are newspapers obsolete? Is one better than the other?
If you watch the piece it’s probably fair to say that if you were a blogger you wouldn’t necessarily elect Leitch to be your spokesman. Though Buzz Bissinger didn’t exactly make newspapers seem particularly classy. And Bob Costas’ assertion that he didn’t have a dog in the fight because he’s on TV was laughable. The internet is absolutely stealing attention from TV. It’s stealing ad revenue. And sites like YouTube allow anyone to broadcast video just as blogs allow anyone to print stories. Many blogs already do both.
Here’s my two cents. I too am concerned at the current state of newspapers and television. Not when it comes to sports content. Let’s face it, printing an entire sports section or running sports content isn’t disseminating “need-to-know� information. It’s pandering to what your audience wants and while it may be non-fiction, it’s still essentially entertainment. And when it comes to entertainment, it’s all in the eye of the beholder.
I’m more concerned that newspapers and major networks served a useful purpose for a democracy. By maintaining high ethical standards and investing a great deal of money in deep investigative research and reporting they absolutely serve to advance the interests of a free society. Unfortunately, the financial pain these outlets are feeling is causing them to make drastic cuts. It’s bringing down the quality. In other words, we now have a harder time knowing what to believe. And that’s just flat out depressing.
But we don’t need a healthy free press to follow sports. If the information we get about our sports is imperfect. So what? If anything, the competition between print, television, and the internet only bring us more flavors of a snack we already love. Visitors to the Big Red Network know we love Nebraska football. If anything, that’s why they’re here.
The Lincoln Journal-Star’s Steve Sipple can get stories I can't. I can say things Steve Sipple can’t. Why is that? Because if Bo Pelini gets angry enough he could deny Sipple information and access. That could cost Sipple his job. We don’t have that vulnerability. So we continue to do what we do. I hope someone will always continue to do what Steve does, because we rely on that access too.
There’s room for both. Someone close to the story and someone further away. Someone instructed to fight their biases and someone free to maintain them. It doesn’t have to be either or. But then, this is only a hobby for me. Maybe it would be different if I were Bissinger and needing some good paychecks in order to retire or trying to make blogging a career.
Did you enjoy this article?
Get Husker news by email
Follow us on Twitter
Related Stories: Point Counter Point
Post a comment
doombob May 21 08
Hey, if I could get interviews and have information from program insiders, I'd take it in a second. I always wanted to write for a print publication (of any kind), but I was good with computers and easily found work in that field after graduating. Because I blog for a hobby, I do not have to worry about getting cut off. I must say that papers have been pandering to the masses for a while now and blogs are the new media with integrity. I don't have to worry about an editor giving an article the ax because he's afraid my opinion will reduce readership. No way some of my articles get put up on my blog if someone have to give it the OK.
carlinthemarlin May 21 08
I think you're off the mark to assume we can trust information less now than in the past. Actually, I think the internet, with it's wide net of information grabbing, showed us that we could never trust Newspapers. I mean, Newspapers had credibility pretty briefly in the wake of Watergate and Vietnam but that's about it. They've always been a medium that panders to readership and sensationalizes for the sake of revenue. The Spanish American War was all but started by newspapers. They have ethical standards, yes, but that doesn't mean they give you a clear view of issues. Editors have to run what sells, which is how articles like the one alleging the existence of a taped Rams Superbowl walk through wind up in print. The internet doesn't have any policing agency, which means that anything can be printed. The result is that you take everything with a level of skepticism. Newspapers carry an air of accountability that lulls readers into a general state of unquestioning acceptance. Of course this is fact! They have ethics! (Fact, by the way, is a pretty tricky word. Facts can be manipulated very easily and actually tell us little. Context is everything, and this is where journalistic integrity falls apart in my mind). With the internet, if you're smart about it anyway (and not everyone is), you treat everything with a healthy dose of skepticism. You can easily access many different views of the same subject. And at the end of the day, if two people with very opposite opinions of an event agree on a few points, you can generally take those few points as fact.
I'm not trying to argue against the existence of Newspapers. I just think they have a supposed integrity that doesn't really exist.
darren May 21 08
Thanks for weighing in on this topic, guys. I'm not suprised to see fellow bloggers being the ones with a "take" on the subject.
Of course, we seek to be about football every day. But hey, its the off season.
So you know, I'll be offering a counterpoint to Steve's opinion on this, tomorrow. Even though he and I agree in many areas, we do have points of disagreement.
Austin May 21 08
I think blogs are valid. The problem Bissenger had is because he thought that blogs are in same domain as print media and the two are competitors for readers/viewers. I think that the two are in separate domains and are not mutually exclusive.
As a reader, I use both print media and blogs, but each in a different way. I get breaking news and scores online - it's the fastest, easiest, and most precise way to get news. For a deeper analysis, I go to print media - not so much newspapers, but magazines and books. To discuss the topic, I go to blogs.
Blogs are informal, so you're writing (and logic) doesn't have to be great for you to be apart of the argument. This informality is very conducive to creating a discussion among people. The average person can discuss a particular issue with a relatively large and diverse group in a blog. A blog with 100 views has 100 people reading the article. Any of those 100 people can comment - the discussion is not limited to "experts." Discussion has an inherent value to it - it makes you smarter, you learn how to relate your thoughts to others, you learn how to recognize BS, and it makes you mindfully think about the topic - everybody should discuss issues. Blogs are great for this... it's the primary benefit of blogs.
Print media is not the place for the actual discussion. Print media articles raise issues that spark discussions; the fire happens in blogs. Each has it's own place and blogs are valid because they provide a place for discussion to occur. It doesn't matter if everybody in the discussion is an idiot - what matters is that they are discussing - the idiots are getting smarter. And in the Socratic fashion, I'm also an idiot.
bnahusker May 21 08
Darren........
The upper right hand corner of this page tells us that there is no "Off Season". Now you say that there is, and we're in it? What next? Are you going to tell me that there isn't a Santa Claus? The DH is GOOD?! Football isn't 24/7?!
Just kidding!
On to the points of this string. Anyone can find what ever they want, in any media they want. I have a great love of Husker Football, so naturally I have a great affection for this website, along with a few others. I'm also a political junkie. Especcially during a Preidential election year, I could find several hundred sites that cater to my views. I could also find several hundred that cater to those with differing opinions. More importantly, there are probably a couple hundred thousand blogs that we could sift through to find the "Truth". The issue to me isn't what we have to choose from as much as what we do with it, and how we choose to deal with those who may disagree with our points. The news papers were supposed to disappear with the emergence of Radio. TV was to be the death knell of Radio, and cable was going to kill the big three networks and local stations. I think that all of them keep the others somewhat honest and accurate. It is my hope that we don't abuse, or worse, ignore what ever truths that have the light shone on them.
As always.....................
GBR!
Bob
doombob May 22 08
The responses here actually made me think about the fact that I don't actually read print publications anymore. I do go to their websites, but ever since my local small-town paper started putting articles up online, I don't read a single newspaper. I still read wired magazine, but I can't take their webpage with me everywhere (until I get a smartphone with unlimited internet plan). I'm living in an all digital world baby!
mjm May 22 08
Blogs are the source I get the majority of my news coverage. I currently work in Finance and believe the Wall St Journal to be a great paper, but besides that, papers just aren't objective. I will never read the NY Times or the LA Times, they just don't paint an accurate picture.
Greg Morrow May 22 08
I too, hope Steve Sipple and the LJS thrive and prosper. In our cozy little realm, Steve also isn't obliged to make the over the top comment or criticism, about anybody. Just come up with insights with how he thinks things are going or, going to go. In other much larger markets, he doesn't have to make a "name" for himself, to be quoted at the national level like the usual suspects. He's not trying out for "Sports Reporters," if that's even on anymore.
Besides, the over the top comments should be left for the (un)professionals. I'm glad you're blog, Steve, doesn't allow for "language," 'cause I know I'd go there...
As far a rumor mongering, there's still plenty of cross-reference sources to sort out the "corns" from the crap.
To me, it comes down to entertainment value and an overall lack of spare time. I value this blog much more than I value my city's paper. But I still drop in $.50 for it.
Тимур Макаров Jul 09 09
Даа... Ну у вас либо талант писать, или это стыбрено откуда-то! :)
кaппИ Jul 21 09
Прикольно!:) Но есть и минус ! У меня скорость инета 112 килобит/сек. Страница грузилась около 15 секунд.