Comments on: Who Should Cover the World Series?

By: J. W.

J. W. — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 03:55:21 +0000

Worth noting: Murray’s blog makes no mention of how many papers were at the World Series last year, or any other year, for that matter. I don’t mean to say that newspapers are in fine fettle, just that Murray’s claim that this news is a “startling barometer” is a little moronic.

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 02:07:19 +0000

Not every newspaper needs a movie critic, or a Washington bureau, or a roving sports reporter, but the big regional paper that I get delivered or turn to first online needs to have all of the above. I don’t subscribe to this paper for stories about fires and school committee meetings. I want my area’s view of the news from reporters I’m familiar with, and if they go, I’ll go.

By: Tiffany Powder

Tiffany Powder — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 22:38:56 +0000

“Does every newspaper need a World Series reporter?” Most publishers, men, would say yes.

“Does every newspaper need a copy desk?” Most bean counters, who read balance sheets for errors but don’t think a newspaper needs professionals to read copy for errors, have said yes.

Would the cost of sending one writer and one photog to the World Series have saved the job of a copy editor, maybe not. But as the Washington Post found out, it might have been the better idea.

By: Jason Fry

Jason Fry — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 20:59:17 +0000

Thanks for all the thoughtful responses — much appreciated.

Couple of points of clarification, from the writer’s end:

* I wouldn’t use wire copy for the World Series. I just wouldn’t automatically send a reporter/columnist there if the local team isn’t involved. Great baseball writers come armed with their knowledge of the game and their gifts as writers. Give them a big TV and they can do terrific stuff. Now throw in new tools — such as smart aggregation (a la Buster Olney) and Twitter (following a World Series game with Mike Vaccaro is enormous fun) and you’re serving readers well without using up increasingly scarce resources to cover something that’s peripheral to your audience and well-covered anyway.

* There’s a value to networking, sure. But in this era of cutbacks, the time to build those relationships and that reciprocity is during the year, while on the road with the team. Because I do think if papers have beat writers for a team, those writers should go on road trips. Fail to do that and you’ll drive readers away — the NYT used wire copy for some Mets road trips late this year, and as a fan and a reader I felt betrayed.

To be clear, I’m not arguing there’s no benefit to sending reporters/columnists to the World Series/Super Bowl/etc even if a local team isn’t involved. There is, for the reasons people have offered. But that’s not the question. The question is if the additional benefit of being there in person is worth the price, given our profession’s woes, readers’ ability to read other sources and our ability to include those other sources in what we do. And I’m sorry, but given all that it’s clear to me that the answer is “no.”

By: K.P.

K.P. — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 20:47:20 +0000

Networking and all is great, IF you can afford it. I think that is the real point here. When other departments are losing people completely and the computer-assisted reporting editor has no functioning computer or software to do his job with, you don’t sent your sports guys to the World Series. Not only is it economically a bad idea, it kills morale in your newsroom. Other departments see sports going along business-as-usual while struggling to do the jobs that two or three times the number of people used to do. It’s demoralizing, frustrating and just plain wrong.

By: A.C. Taylor

A.C. Taylor — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 19:51:36 +0000

“Does every newspaper need a movie critic? A house and home reporter? A Washington bureau?” All god questions. My answers would be no, no and yes…at least a Washington-based reporter who covers the local Congressional delegation and other stories that relate to the paper’s market. What about a weekend book review section? I have often wondered why there isn’t a syndicated stand-alone book review section a la Parade magazine.

By: mike

mike — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 19:47:47 +0000

@11

If Sports is the moneymaking part of the paper, why are all the ads in the A section, and almost none in the Sports section?

By: mike

mike — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 19:45:46 +0000

@10

Trust me, you would not want to read a World Series column by Jason Whitlock. Maybe a football column (maybe), probably not a basketball column, but definitely not a baseball column. Jason knows nothing about baseball. He doesn’t know the history, doesn’t know the strategy–he barely knows the names of some of the name’s greats. (See his famous quote, “Who’s Ted Williams?”)

By: Michael Fitzgerald

Michael Fitzgerald — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:55:03 +0000

I agree with you, Jace. Papers should try to cover DC for their constituents, especially if the papers can avoid covering politics as if it were just sports.

But sports? Sure, it is the moneymaking part of the paper, but I’m not sure why Boston needs to send somebody to cover the hated Yankees play the Phillies.

By: Harrison

Harrison — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:48:35 +0000

A great sportswriter is a great sportswriter regardless of whether the hometeam is in the World Series. I would rather read World Series coverage by Ray Ratto, Bill Plaschke or Jason Whitlock than a wire service account. Of the major sports, baseball is the most expensive to cover, with the most games and longest season. Rather than using souless wire copy, papers could use a network of out-of-town freelancers to cover away games.
One problem with freelancers coverging baseball is that it is very, very hard to get into the Baseball Writers Association of America and many teams won’t issue full time credentials to writers without a Baseball Writers Association card. Making it easier for freelancers to cover away games on behalf of the hometown paper could reduce costs of sending reporters to cover the dog days games in Pittsburgh and Kansas City, thus making it economically feasible for the hometown paper to send the paper’s top sportswriters to the All Star Game and playoffs.