Indiana University

National Sports Journalism Center

Based at IUPUI with programs at IU Bloomington SPORTSJOURNALISM.org

Our Voices

Emerging new media redefines journalists, stirs debate over credentials, qualifications

After a World Series game in Yankee Stadium, a tall, thin man moved through the working press room. He wore a red three-piece suit with a red snap-brim hat. Most of us knew the man named Slim as an entrepreneur of sorts. He attended big sports events to accommodate customers eager to purchase, for the night, companionship. There was a place for the devil in red, but that place was not among sportswriters on deadline. To remove Slim, someone threw a grenade.
 
No, wait.
 
It was cranky old Dick Young speaking with the volume turned up.
 
"SLIM!" the New York Daily News columnist said. "YOU DON'T BELONG HERE."
 
"Dick, I don't belong in hell, either," Slim said, "but that's where I'm going."
 
The question before the house today is a variation of Slim-you-don't-belong-here. It comes from veteran journalist Ron Sirak, whose resume includes the Associated Press, the New York Times, Golf Digest and Golf World. As preamble, Sirak provided part of a recent Twitter exchange in which English golfer Ian Poulter scolded Stephanie Wei, a freelance reporter and creator of her own blog, WeiUnderPar.
 
Ian Poulter: @stephaniewei You wanted to interview me at US Open while I was in players lounge. It's called a players lounge for a reason. Intrusive…
Stephanie Wei: @IanJamesPoulter Didn't know it was players lounge. I'm sorry for rookie mistake, but it was only 2nd event I'd covered. Cut me some slack.
 
An admitted neophyte, Wei yet had a working press badge for the nation's biggest golf tournament. Sirak asks, "Does this mean anyone with a laptop is eligible to be credentialed to the U.S. Open?" He also sees a larger question. Sirak, the next president of the Golf Writers Association of America, thinks it's past time for the GWAA, and others organizations, to determine "who is a journalist and who should be credentialed."
 
Once, answers to his questions were simple. You may not have been Edward R. Murrow, Alistair Cooke, or Herbert Warren Wind. But you were a journalist if you reported for a newspaper, magazine, or broadcast outlet. You were likely to receive credentials to a major sports event. Now it's more complicated. We are in a media revolution so profound that all previous definitions are outdated, if not useless. That much became clear when I read the U.S. Golf Association credential guidelines with an eye to seeing where Wei fit.
 
The USGA provides no room for an unaffiliated neophyte when it declares: "To simultaneously provide the best competitive environment for the players and the best possible working environment for media at the USGA Championships, media credentials will be issued only to personnel regularly employed by and on assignment from newspapers, golf publications, golf Internet sites, radio and televisions stations, networks and wire services, as determined by the USGA in its sole discretion. . . ."
 
I traded e-mails with Wei. She wrote, "To answer your question – which is completely fair – about why I had credentials in the first place (honestly, I wasn't sure if I'd get them before I spoke to the media director last year), my site reached the USGA's criteria for receiving credentials. I average 150,000-200,000 page views a month and that number is consistently growing and I'd made a name for myself in the golf community by the time I'd applied. Also, the fact that I grew up playing junior golf (including USGA events) and on my college team probably didn't hurt, either. . . ."
 
From Pete Kowalski, of the USGA's Media Relations department: "To confirm, we have several criteria for Websites to pass muster on. In addition to pages views, among others we track original golf content, consistent news coverage in content and affiliation with a legitimate news outlet.  We also check with industry wide Media Relations partners to see if they have been credentialed at other events. In our less than scientific method, (Ms. Wei) provided enough evidence that she was indeed covering golf. As a rule, we annually review our credential criteria and try to see where and how the business is evolving. Indeed, there were other Websites with similar ‘newness’ to Ms. Wei’s site (from Europe in particular) who were given U.S. Open credentials as writers."
 
Wei is 28 years old, a native of Seattle.  She knows the game. A 2005 graduate of Yale University with a history degree, she played there three years and was the team captain her junior year. Burned out on golf, she considered law school but opted for the corporate world of law, finance, public relations, and business development.  Finally, in November 2008, realizing she missed golf, and for the fun of it, with maybe a hope it could help get a job when the golf market rebounded, she started WeiUnderPar. To her surprise, the blog became her life.
 
"It kept evolving and growing," she says, "until, suddenly, I was not just a blogger, but a writer." In the last two years, while running her blog and reporting for it with interviews and video, she has done freelance work for the Wall Street Journal, Huffington Post, Mediaite.com, and ESPN.com. Her steadiest employer is Sports Illustrated; she has done one major feature, ghostwritten first-person pieces, participated in the magazine's roundtable discussions, and reported from PGA Tour events. "At the moment, " she says, "I'm doing the jobs of five, 10 people, but since I'm not heavily funded, that's the way it goes for now."
 
So, to return to Sirak's question: is Wei a journalist?
 
She thinks so. "I follow journalistic ethics. I gather information through reporting – talking to sources, such as players, officials, whoever – and then bring golf-related news to the public."
 
Among those surprised by such words is Wei herself. In November 2008, she had no idea it would turn out this way. She had no experience in journalism and no training. She had never covered high school football in a snowstorm. She had not been struck blind by coffee-smeared copy turned in by spelling-challenged misfits. She had never heard the primal screams of a parent outraged that Little Joey had been left off the All-Neighborhood soccer team. In short, she had not paid her dues the way the way some high-falutin' journalists had.
 
But y'know what? Today there is another way to do it. You only have to be brave, smart, and a little silly. Then, instead of waiting for the future, you can create it by paying dues of another kind. Be brave enough to quit the corporate world. Be smart enough to know what makes you happy. Be silly enough to think you can build a small business without once having an entrepreneurial thought in your head. Do you want to pay those dues? Do you, Mr. Ink-stained Wretch? As it happens, that's what Stephanie Wei did. And now, in this revolution that has left Old Media sports writing gasping for its very life, Wei suddenly finds herself a member of the New Media inventing sports writing all over again.
 
She's not Dan Jenkins, young, with hair, in a skirt. Wei's blog reports are superficial and predictable. She's a golly-gee-whiz fan and it shows. (Go to her blog, catch the video tour of Jason Day's motor home.) At the Masters this year, advertised by the Wall Street Journal as part of its "team…on the ground in Augusta," Wei had no press credentials; instead, she contributed to WSJ.com by cadging daily tickets from friends, spending time at the course, then returning to her residence to watch play on TV and write – which, cheesy as that is, is not much different from the way a couple hundred other journalists did it while sitting in the Masters press room. For all that, she is a blogging machine who posts all the day's important golf news, adds commentary, reports and writes, and runs the business side, too. And she already has credentials for the Open coming up next month at Congressional.
 
Back to Sirak's question: Who's a journalist? He asks because he believes journalism today faces a challenge "to bring the ethical standards of print to new forms of delivery — websites, iPad, and social media — rather than let those new forms of delivery establish a lesser, more relaxed ethical standard." Yes, he says, the new delivery systems "have brought a greater democracy to communication by giving everyone a voice, but not everyone with a voice should be considered a journalist."
 
I hate answers that aren't answers. But when Sirak asks who's a journalist, I say it depends. If a "journalist" is only a highly skilled veteran decorated with a hundred combat ribbons, it's a small club growing smaller. Even my hero, Red Smith, said he was happy to be known as a reporter. "I'm just a working stiff," he said, "trying to write better than I can." If a "journalist" is anybody reporting anything, however superficial, however predictable, then the verdict is in. Everyone with a laptop is a journalist.
 
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.
 
I'd suggest three things to veteran sportswriters made cranky by the arrival of the New Media. 1) Welcome the newbies, they're keeping press rooms full; 2) Congratulate them on leaving the law to have fun and tell the truth; and 3) teach them the lessons of behavior we learned the hard way. After all, I have it from a reliable source that Stephanie Wei is not the first sportswriter who ever walked into a room where she was not allowed. Remind me to tell you sometime about the great old Kentucky basketball coach, Adolph Rupp, in a shower, nude.
 
Dave Kindred's latest book, "Morning Miracle," is an inside-the-newsroom account of two years in the life of The Washington Post. Now a contributing writer at Golf Digest, Kindred is a Red Smith Award winner and member of the National Sportscasters and Sportswriters Association Hall of Fame. He can be reached at inkstained1@aol.com. He can be followed at Twitter.com/DaveKindred and facebook.com/people/Dave-Kindred/509353295.
Tools: | permalink |

14 Responses to “Emerging new media redefines journalists, stirs debate over credentials, qualifications”


  1. Reader says:

    Nice piece. And an interesting — if settled in other sports fields, because the correct outcome is relatively obvious — issue.

    But the unspoken issue here is sexism. Male athlete talking down to female reporter in that way? In a huge public forum? At least worth thinking through a bit further, no?

  2. John Potts says:

    Dave, you’ve pretty much nailed it. Again.
    I still do some reporting myself, and have been credentialed by some pretty big auto racing events. However, that could be because my name was pretty well known around the sport anyway.

    I like your assertion that they (we, I guess) need to pay the same dues and follow the same rules that we always have.

  3. Jim Osterman says:

    It’s a new world and those who dole out press credentials had best come up with policies that respect the legitimacy of the Stephanie Wei’s of this world. From your reporting Dave, it would appear she belonged. Hats off to both of you.

    And would it be too much for someone to have posted a sign on a players’ lounge indicating it as off-limits to EVERYONE not a player?

  4. Sean Breslin says:

    As someone who has been a “newbie” in sports media, I have to say that the old school reporters are pretty crabby towards the newcomers. They think that “paying your dues” is limited to doing the things you described — working in a smoky newsroom with copy and typewriters and covering the little events for little pay.

    What they don’t understand is that these newbies are so passionate about what they do that they are willing to forgo a career in a different field to hone their skills for free via a blog or some other form of cheap-to-free labor. How is that not paying your dues? Additionally, these folks that work their way up from a blog may take their opportunities to cover an event with more professionalism because it’s the break they’ve waited their life to get. Yet they still have to deal with the angry old men who take covering their 54th consecutive Masters for granted.

    Miss Wei can only apologize for the mistake, and it’s a mistake most young media members make. At almost every event I cover for the first time, I find myself lost in the stadium or misguided as to where the presser are being held. Sure, I feel dumb and embarrassed, but I lose respect for the media members who look down on me for that because at some point, they were all me. They all had to cover an event for the first time and be lost and ask for help, and regardless of how the experienced media members treated them at the time, it should have reminded them to treat the newbies better.

    There are bad apples in our new breed of journalism, but that has been the case with every generation. Maybe the old guys should keep that in mind.

  5. Bob Brancato says:

    As a Wei fan and golf blogger I read Poulter’s cranky tweet firsthand. He’s a pompous peacock with a declining game. He better figure out how to monetize his Twitter feed. Don’t think she was scarred at least.

  6. Dave Andrews says:

    Good piece. I know Stephanie Wei to be a hard working and able golf writer. The times are changing, and the people in charge of media credentals at golf events will have to change with them if they want the coverage they desire.

  7. Paul Borden says:

    Sean Breslin puts the subject in perspective rather well. I cringed when I saw that Sirak was proposing that the GWAA get involved in who gets credentials at an event and who doesn’t. I suspect that protecting one’s turf could become a priority and the old guard golf writers aren’t going to want newbies who represent new-fangled outlets on the Internet aren’t going to be welcome. If Wei has a couple hundred thousand page views a month she has a considerable number of faithful followers and probably more readers than many credentialed print reporters do.

    I would add one thing and that is as I sometimes follow post-game press conferences on TV following events, it’s interesting to see how many questioners identify themselves as representing some dot-com outfit and how few identify themselves as newspaper reporters.

  8. GottaPlayHurt says:

    Dave, you make many points worth considering. Kudos for being open-minded amid a seismic change in our business.

    But there’s a difference between paying dues and simply taking risks. In the mad rush to jump on the social network bandwagon and infuse sports journalism with fresh, bold personalities, some prominent media brands have given Ms. Wei (and others) a forum not so much on merit as her potential for attracting page views. Of course, that’s the way of the journalism world these days.

    For Ron Sirak and others who have been around Wei in golf press rooms, there’s a certain amount of wariness about her credibility. Sure, those fears are partially fueled by sexism and insecurity, but some of her sophomoric posts and profiles like this one in the New York Observer – http://www.observer.com/2008/fore-birdie-beatrice-inn – don’t work in her favor.

    The jury’s still out; maybe she’ll be a superstar, maybe she’ll move on to something else. Meanwhile, let’s hope her employers are vetting her thoroughly.

    PS: Jim, typically there are signs outside player lounges that indicate them as off limits to reporters. Guidelines are noted with credentials, as well.

  9. charles pierce says:

    I have never read Ms. Wei’s work, but anyone calling her a fangirl lightweight need only to read an awful lot of the pre-fire-hydrant coverage in the golfing press of young Mr. Woods to realize she ain’t alone there.

  10. Wxwax says:

    I can’t imagine a worse group to have control over credentials than Sirak and the Golf Writers. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that print journalists have tremendous animosity to new media. Hell, they even sneer at TV reporters, and those folks have been around for half a century.

    Print writers are a territorial, judgmental, cliquish, sexist bunch who feel (rightly so) threatened by new media. Give control over access to a gang like that? Talk about a disservice to the public.

  11. Wayne_Lee says:

    Enjoyed the piece.

    I would have to disagree that the debate regarding Wei has anything to do with sexism. Dave’s could have written the exact same article using Ryan Ballengee as his example. Ballengee came to golf via the Waggle Room blog before he was picked up by NBC’s Pro Golf Talk. He covers events much the same way as Wei, and often from afar.

    While I find I enjoy both Wie and Ballengee… IMHO a more important ETHICAL discussion needs to be had regarding their approach.

    It’s apparent few of their writings are based on unique facts or angles they’ve dug out of the dirt themselves. Some of the work may be from the rare access they get to players or “Tweets” from players, but for the most part it seems they monitor the online postings and work of the traditional working golf media. Then they repeat the “guts” of the article and provide their own commentary. In many ways they are more “aggregators” with an editorial twist, instead of journalists in their own right.

    But perhaps Wei and Ballengee are not to blame. With neither having a journalism background how are they supposed to know about any ethical boundaries they may be approaching, or possibly even crossed. Near as I can tell Geoff Shackelford, author of numerous successful books and contributor to many respected golf publications started the trend. Or at least he was one of the first widely read golf bloggers on the net. But like Wei’s and Ballengee’s, most of the “value” Shack’s website seems to have its roots in the efforts of other journalists who originated the base articles.

    Granted, all three do link back to the original content they are borrowing to make their commentary. But the problem is there is no way to know if the original authors are receiving just compensation for having their work used by others in this way. While all three are certainly generous with their credit and links to the original content (well… most of the time anyway) I would have no way of knowing if those back links generate enough traffic to be of sufficient value to the original writer or publication.

  12. Loyal Reader says:

    Dave,

    Yet another cutting-edge column. How do you so consistently cover the issues affecting sports journalism, months before anyone else even thinks of these topics?

    What wonderful insight you have provided here. It is so, so true that elbow grease and dues paying are still essential to good sportswriting. My eyes are opened now to the possibilities of the Internet and blogging.

    Keep up the great work!

  13. charles pierce says:

    Snark in the wrong hands is an ugly business. Go away now, please.

  14. Loyal Reader says:

    I don’t know who you are talking to, Mr. Pierce. Surely you could not have read my post as “snark”?

    Do you not agree that Dave’s column features many new insights into the workings of sports media?

    And if not, why?

Leave a Reply

Our Voices

Guest Blogs

more Guest Blogs »

The Buzz

May 22, 2013Bears’ Uracher retires after 13-year career

Brian Urlacher may have been able to play another year in the NFL, but the linebacker decided it was time to call it quits. (SI.com)

May 22, 2013Cleveland Cavaliers win NBA Draft lottery

For the second time in three years, Cavs owner Dan Gilbert’s son, Nick, was the lucky charm as Cleveland nabbed the No. 1 pick. (NBA.com)

May 21, 2013Super Bowl L to be played in Santa Clara, CA

Levi’s Stadium, the soon-to-be home of the San Francisco 49ers, will host the 50th Super Bowl in 2016. (NFL.com)

more of The Buzz »