It’s not enough to report the scores and quote the athletes in the 2013 world of sports journalism, you’ve got to be more engaging, more compelling…You’ve got to give them a reason to come back…Michael Felger of ComcastSportsnet New England and Tanya Ray Fox, who writes for She’s Games Sports and SB Nation as well as running the assignment desk at CSSNE, joined us at a Sports Journalism Seminar recently and when asked directly if he thought he was a journalist or an entertainer, Felger candidly responded, “entertainer, no question about it”…Now, that’s a pretty stark admission for someone who went to Journalism school, had an internship and cut his teeth at a Boston daily, the Boston Herald and worked as the lead reporter covering the Bruins followed by a beat reporter job following the New England Patriots
But Felger, if nothing else, has adapted…he understands where his audience is and he embraces it… In embracing that attitude, Felger often times runs afoul of the people he covers…”It’s all about be supportive(of the athletes)”, says Felger, who doesn’t think it’s always necessary to be at the game to be credible…”They’ll say how do you know, all you do is sit in a studio all day. Well, I don’t want to be there, so some guy can take me in the corner and spin me so I say nice things about him, that just defeats the purpose.”
The Nieman Journalism Lab ran a piece recently entitled The Newsonomics of Big Sports Money – and News in which Ken Doctor proposes that sportswriters have a new credo, the coverage mantra sounds like readers-first: “How are we going to cover for the fans, in such a way that they are accustomed to trusting and believing and expecting….” By “expecting” I would offer he means “entertaining” …
Fox worries that ownership deals may sway coverage as well….Boston Red Sox Owner John Henry just bought The Boston Globe…that’s not a unique situation in the sports journalism world anymore….Won’t that slant coverage?…””It’s exponential, says Fox, sports journalism can’t lose everything about it that’s newsworthy. There’s always going to be games and there’s always going to be someone to report it. I don’t know i it’s going to be beat reporters, people who tweet, I don’t know how it’s going to progress…”
“What’s sports coverage for?, asks Doctor, is it journalism, covering a team, a league and its athletes the way journalists cover mayors, presidents and business leaders? Or is it simply a means of promotion?”…..
Whatever it is, it’s going to be competitive and the new breed of sports journalists had better figure out how to reach their audience…
17 Comments
Tim Healey posted on September 16, 2013 at 11:42 am
That sports media is shifting more toward entertainment and away from true journalism, as Michael Felger admitted Wednesday, is no secret. It is following the same trend as other forms of journalism (think about the growth of click-hungry websites over more expensive long-form journalism) as well as other genres of TV (think terrible-but-cheaply-produced reality series over well done shows).
That said, I call it “sports media” because it is important to differentiate between sports journalism, which is what a lot of us want to do, and sports entertainment, which is what Felger does now. Felger himself admitted that he does not do sports journalism anymore. (That’s not to take away from what Felger does. He paid his dues and came up through the ranks — he mentioned he didn’t get to cover the Bruins for the Herald for nearly a decade into his time there, I believe — and earned the more cushy jobs he has now, a position I’m sure most of us wouldn’t mind being in somewhere along the line.) Sports talk radio and debate shows similar to ESPN’s “First Take” aren’t necessarily included in this.
The more narrowly defined practice of sports journalism — excluding the “sports entertainment” side — is also changing. The first sentences of this blog post are spot on: “It’s not enough to report the scores and quote the athletes in the 2013 world of sports journalism, you’ve got to be more engaging, more compelling…You’ve got to give them a reason to come back.” In terms of writers, as opposed to broadcasters, this is particularly true, and it’s especially evident in this market. No longer is a day at the office simply reporting pregame notes, a game story and maybe a side bar. Smarter fans look for stories with more perspective — be it statistical, historical, or within the confines of a given season/player’s career. Stories aren’t just about what happened — they are about how it happened and why it is (or is not) surprising. Alex Speier of WEEI.com, as well as the Providence Journal duo of Tim Britton and Brian MacPherson, come to mind as local examples of writers who do this on the Red Sox beat. Along the same lines, the “Blogging Rights” article made me think about how some of the more informed fan blogs around — Over the Monster and Beyond the Box Score, for examples — provide this insight without clubhouse access.
The guests also touched on a topic addressed in Ken Doctor’s story on niemanlab.org — about an inherent conflict of interest involved in MLB.com’s coverage of its own teams. On the surface, that coverage and future coverage of the Red Sox by the John Henry-owned Boston Globe, will look decent enough. Chances are, Globe coverage won’t change significantly, and there doesn’t seem to be anything systematically wrong with MLB.com articles. But unless you’re on the inside, with knowledge of the day-to-day decision-making process, it’s hard to tell. What stories would an outlet in that situation not run? What stories does the NFL really hand ESPN, as Felger suggested is the case? It is hard for us to tell, but a healthy degree of skepticism is helpful.
One last tidbit that resonated with me: The question about whether or not it is important to work to brand yourself. Tanya Ray Fox, obviously a relative newcomer to the field, said yes. Old-timer Felger said no, specifically, “If you try to be something, you probably won’t.” I like to think (hope) Felger is more right. If you have a clean online presence and do consistent, good work for whatever outlets your write for, your brand should pretty much take care of itself.
Eddie Murphy posted on September 16, 2013 at 5:01 pm
There’s a reason why “old” journalism is dying and its because its boring. Everyone wants to be entertained, I know I do. When I do my radio show here I try to be as engaging as possible.
Mike Felger is one of the best in the country and certainly the best radio talk show host in Boston because he mixes his hot sports takes with entertainment. When you’re on the air for four hours a day you need to do certain things to get people to listen. I think its an unfair assessment to say what he is doing isn’t journalism because he is a very well informed person. Part of being in the media is giving your opinion on certain matters. I love the fact that he’s not a homer to the teams here, he will call them out on stuff no one else will. I think he looks at the games in a different way than the fans, its respectable how he doesn’t care about what the teams think of him.
Tanya Ray Fox is inspirational as well, she fought tooth and nail to get to where she is now, gives us young kids hope.
A few other things that stuck with me:
– Felgie saying how the NFL sells out news
– Tanya Ray Fox saying for the most part she hasn’t faced that much criticism by men being a woman covering sports. I think that’s incredible news because she obviously deserves everything she’s achieved, she really knows her stuff.
All in all I think long, boring articles about games or athletes are dying out and thats a good thing. We’re in a faster paced world and people like Felger who keep us entertained in the sports world will come out on top. Its survival of the fittest.
Kevin Dillon posted on September 16, 2013 at 9:37 pm
Michael Felger is no longer about reporting breaking news. He isn’t an “insider”. With his position at Comcast SportsNet, he wouldn’t even have much of a chance to break any news anyway unless it was about the Celtics (a team CSN holds the broadcasting rights to) — but he doesn’t like basketball. Felger is now a member of the modern sports media, which is no longer journalism. Instead, it is a group of talking heads with hot takes about whatever everyone else is talking about.
Reporters like ESPN’s Adam Schefter and Chris Mortensen each get their information first thanks to multi-billion dollar rights deals with the NFL, according to Felger. They have the advantage over everyone else in terms of reporting, so the only way for local stations to compete is by bringing something different to the table. ESPN doesn’t have the time to break down every possible storyline from every Patriots game on the air, so CSN and 98.5 the Sports Hub do. Local highlight shows are becoming things of the past thanks to the introduction of the internet, and opinion shows with more analysis are getting better ratings. According to Felger, this is because everyone has already seen the highlights before those shows come on, and they want to hear people yell about them. These analysis shows are the only way local coverage will survive, but they do not provide much benefit to the public besides letting it know that Tony Massarotti thinks Xander Bogaerts is better than that bum Stephen Drew.
As big network sports media increases its reliance on the leagues for information, its traditional journalistic values are being pushed to the side. ESPN recently ended its affiliation with “Frontline,” a television series about the NFL’s handling of head injuries, due to pressure from the league, according to a New York Times report (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/24/sports/football/nfl-pressure-said-to-prompt-espn-to-quit-film-project.html?_r=0). What this tells us is that ESPN is turning into more of a promotional outlet for the NFL. The NFL holds all the cards because if people don’t want to watch the NFL, people won’t be watching ESPN as much. The league and the outlet have a mutually beneficial relationship, which means that the only good ESPN will do for the public is entertain it. Shining a light on the league’s problems is not good business for ESPN.
Instead, ESPN is continuing to run programming that essentially doubles as advertisement for the leagues it holds the broadcasting rights to. In 2012, 23.3 percent of SportsCenter coverage discussed the NFL, which is the highest percentage of any sport. The NHL, which NBC holds the broadcasting rights to, only took up 2.7 percent of SportsCenter’s coverage (http://deadspin.com/what-i-learned-from-a-year-of-watching-sportscenter-5979510) .The abundance of NFL coverage helped ESPN’s first Monday Night Football broadcast of the season on Sept. 9, which drew 16.5 million viewers and had a household rating of 10.1, according to Nielsen. It was the highest rated Monday Night Football broadcast of all time (http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-espn-monday-night-football-ratings-20130910,0,5187994.story).
The ratings determine what is the big story in today’s world, and people would rather be entertained than informed. As Felger pointed out, that is why cheap, crappy reality TV shows get better ratings than well-researched documentaries. It is the same thing for print and online sports reporting, which is measured in copies sold and page clicks instead of viewers. But with John Henry buying the Boston Globe, it looks like the days of hard-hitting reporting on the Red Sox are over. Tanya Ray Fox pointed out that Henry now has the power to stop a story that would make him look bad from running, and she is probably right. Just look at NESN’s Red Sox coverage.
The blog post above is titled, “Let Me Entertain You…” But with the sports media filled with entertainers nowadays, who is available to really inform you?
Meredith Perri posted on September 17, 2013 at 12:00 am
At this point it seems like a cliché to say that the sports media world is rapidly changing. Media in general always seems to exist in an environment of constant adaptation. What stands out about the evolution of sports media is that, depending on background and experience, industry professionals look at the field in contrasting ways.
Before even looking at content, I think one of the best examples of differing opinions within the field starts with whether or not a sports media professional should create their own brand. In the classroom, the idea of marketing oneself has become commonplace. That leads to the question, though, “What is my brand and how do I create it?”
During Wednesday night’s seminar, Michael Felger and Tanya Ray Fox had, as I alluded to, differing opinions on the subject. Fox made it clear that, as someone who recently needed to break into the industry, she believed creating a brand for herself was important. Part of her thought process had to do with becoming noticeable through the white noise on the web. Fox’s opinion makes sense – with advances in social media and the importance of it not just for more traditional journalists, but bloggers and fans, it can become a challenge for a fledgling writer to create credibility and develop a fan base. Felger, however, said that he didn’t actively think about branding himself.
Perhaps the differing opinions have to do with when Felger and Fox were working their way into the journalism world. At the same time, it is interesting that Felger who has a very distinct brand is the one who does not focus on it.
Transitioning over to the actual content created by media outlets, Felger and Fox once again showed a difference in viewpoint of the industry. Both acknowledged the increase of entertainment in sports. As Professor Shorr said in his own post, “It’s not enough to report the scores and quote the athletes.” While this is true though, something that Fox said resonated with me. No matter where sports media goes, someone will always need to find the facts. Felger may not work as a journalist anymore, something he readily admitted, but in order for him to argue and give his opinion about a team, someone will need to do the traditional grunt work of finding out the story. That isn’t something that will change, although the people doing that work and how they present it may change with time.
This is where the importance of this seminar comes into play. At the very basic level Felger and Fox are sports media professionals, but they come from different backgrounds that lead to them having contrasting opinions on the industry. The reality is that until we are working in the industry we will not know what works and what doesn’t. Even then, with the distinct changes the field is going through right now, our opinions will evolve with time. The clearest lesson from this seminar was that the sports media field will continue to evolve, and for now that change is heading toward a more personalized and entertainment based industry. Furthermore, an ability to adapt to the varying challenges that we face breaking into and remaining in the field is essential.
Katarina Luketich posted on September 17, 2013 at 10:56 am
There’s no doubt that the world of sports journalism is changing. A huge part of that is the emergence of social media and the idea that anyone can be a journalist. The major theme across our readings was the effect social media is having on sports journalism and our two speakers had pretty contrasting views on the way in which Twitter is being used.
“It’s a cesspool/sandpit for nonsense opinion,” said Mike Felger, which is the reason he strays away from it. It’s becoming a place for fans, athletes, and coaches to vent their innermost thoughts, which more often than not is getting people into trouble.
Furthermore, Twitter is pushing sports journalism to become even faster. It has the capability to break news as soon as it happens, thus letting anyone be the reporter. The huge issue this creates for sports journalism is where do you draw the line? Do you take the extra time to fact check or do you immediately post it in order to break the story before anyone else? This is a huge gray area where sports journalists are forgetting the differentiation between themselves and the “consumer reporter.” A regular person can tweet out “fact” and if it’s faulty no one cares. However, if a journalist tweets out a rumor as fact and it’s wrong, well then they just shoot themselves in the foot and lose all credibility. For example, in 2010 Mike Wise of the Washington Post tweeted out that Big Ben would sit out five games for his suspension. He tweeted that out as an experiment to show that Twitter is not a reliable source of information. Well he certainly did that, but in turn lost a lot of his credibility as well. Sports journalists using Twitter need to fact check and be extremely careful that what they’re posting is true.
While Felger wants nothing to do with Twitter, Tanya Fox said she wished that she uses it more. She said that about 40% of Twitter is used for sports, which is why more and more sports journalists are gravitating towards the platform. It allows you to interact with your audience and it lets you give yourself a voice that extends past your journalistic one. Both Felger and Fox stressed the importance of having a distinct voice that separates yourself from the rest and making a Twitter presence (most importantly a credible one) is a pretty efficient way to do so.
Twitter is just one example of the way in which sports journalism is changing that we spoke about in seminar; the emergence of blogs and sports talk shows are others. What they all have in common is that they are a double-edged sword. With sports journalism becoming more interactive across so many platforms, it’s easy to build yourself up professionally, but it’s just as easy (if not easier) to knock yourself down. The true fact of it is that we have no idea where sports journalism will wind up in 2, 5, 10 years from now, but as a journalist you have to let go of the idea of traditional reporting and be capable of adapting to whichever road the field will take.
Lisa Erickson posted on September 17, 2013 at 11:20 am
The changes facing sports journalism, particularly in terms of heading toward a more entertainment focus, are the same types of issues affecting journalism as a whole. The first example that comes to my mind is television news and reliance on talking heads. Many of CNN’s shows, for instance, have various people on purely to spew a particular-Democratic or Republican- point. It almost seems more about who can be the loudest or say the most outlandish things, rather than about the news itself.
As our speakers mentioned, sports journalism is moving toward this entertainment route. Being interesting, stirring up controversy and drawing audience numbers is gaining prominence. This isn’t all bad (I definitely prefer reading articles that are written creatively), but there are valid concerns.
This reliance on attracting an audience or readers makes sense, if you think about the state of the media today. With the internet, people can go to virtually any website they please, including hundreds or thousands of blogs. With such an array of choices, including television, organizations and individual readers need to find a way to stand out. They need to find a way to grab attention. And it seems like one way to do this is to focus on this more entertainment-esq presentation.
Tanya Ray Fox emphasized the necessity of being distinctive. She said you need to have a voice that separates you from everyone else. You need to present compelling content. In particular, she talked about the ability to brand yourself using social media. What I took from this topic is not that you should change yourself or pretend to be someone you are not, but rather, you should use all tools available (including social media) to promote yourself and your work. Social media gives you the potential to reach people you might never have been able to reach in pre-social media days. (Although, I also social media enables an overreliance on trying to be witty or put out an image of what you would like to be seen as, rather than who you really are).Today, you really need to be able to do it all: write, tweet, blog, etc. Many sports writers today are writing about the games, but also sending out tweets with statistic updates throughout the match. Some writers then also write game summaries during half time. There seems to be no shortage of opportunity for putting out content.
One thing Fox talked about was the belief that no matter what, there will always be someone out there to report the news. She said that there will always be a need for someone to report the facts (because many bloggers are simply commenting on what journalists are writing and reporting). I also believe this, however, with a caveat. If the media industry does not find a way to really make money, then the ability to pay journalists to actually dig for and report the news will slack. That’s one reason why I think there is such a heavy emphasis placed on the entertainment side. The entertainment side drives up audience numbers, which then allows money to spend on reporting (or at least that’s how it might turn out to work, if the substance of basic reporting is not hampered).
One thing that really caught my attention during the presentation was the necessity of maintaining credibility. It’s not enough as a sports reporter to simply write down your thoughts about a game or a team or an issue. You have to have some sort of authority, or else you might be like any other blogger who wants to write a post. And to maintain credibility, I think, you have to establish yourself as a reporter or writer. And you have to write the truth. One major way in which sports journalists differ from the average blogger, is that journalists have access. They have the ability to actually be with the teams, to speak with the athletes and to observe what is going on. This ability, also necessitates a certain level of responsibility. Teams might view sports journalists as a means for promotion or drawing attention to themselves and their team, but the reporters need to view it differently. Journalists need to ask the questions that other people don’t have the access to ask. Everything doesn’t have to be hard-hitting news, but sports journalists should be more than super-fans.
The Washington Post article we read about Mike Wise’s “twitter hoax” comes to mind when I think about the issue of credibility. It’s far too easy with the media landscape as it is today to do something that can hurt your credibility. The ease of putting content online allows you to almost post things independently (there is not necessarily always going to be that step of an editor looking over your work). This is especially the case with social media, and the wrong tweet or incorrect fact written in a blog post could legitimately damage your credibility. Even though most people who use social media do not adhere to the journalistic code of ethics in terms of reporting and verifying information, journalists cannot let this go. If people lose trust in you as a journalist then there really is not much you are going to be able to do.
Rachel Harrington posted on September 17, 2013 at 11:32 am
If I hadn’t already been convinced that sports media is shifting from stats-driven, investigative pieces to opinionated entertainment, Mike Felger and Tanya Ray Fox certainly proved that in their discussion last week. While Felger admits to being more of an entertainer than a journalist, Fox’s most popular piece ever was a counterargument she wrote attacking the opinion of a Boston Globe reporter. The point? Old school journalism is out; sports debate is in.
What I really enjoyed about both of our speakers is that they seemed to know their places in the industry. Though Felger has an extensive background in journalism, he doesn’t pretend to be a reporter anymore. Back in 2007, Gordon White of The Pilot said of bloggers, “Ninety percent of them have no compunction about putting out any kind of rumor. Doesn’t matter the source or how reliable it is. They just toss it out there because they are not journalists. They are not responsible and don’t claim to be.” (http://shakedownsports.wordpress.com/2007/10/02/blogs-are-ruining-espn/) Felger isn’t a blogger but I think this quote could apply as an attack on him as well. There are certainly more entertainers in sports today than journalists, but I think it’s important to note that few of them pretend to be investigative reporters. If audiences believe these media personalities are journalists despite them telling us otherwise, who is to blame?
The role of sports media professionals is changing and so are the duties that come with the job. Those working in the industry today are expected to be multi-taskers. They can’t just go to the Bruins game (if they even do that – Felger admitted that he rarely makes a game anymore), interview a couple of players and draft their articles. Now there is an expectation that they need to blog, produce a video version of that same story, respond to feedback, tweet (although Felger has avoided that medium), and so on. Like Professor Shorr already wrote, “It’s not enough to report the scores and quote the athletes in the 2013 world of sports journalism, you’ve got to be more engaging, more compelling… you’ve got to give them a reason to come back.”
In one of the comments above, Eddie suggested that “‘old journalism is dying because its boring.” Though I do agree that traditional journalism is on its way out, I don’t think this is because it’s boring. Rather, I think it’s dying because it’s not profitable. Why would someone buy a paper or watch a news program filled with commercial breaks when that same information – and features, box scores, stats, and so on – are available on the team’s website? Thanks to social media and the Web, so much control of a story now belongs to the sports organizations themselves, as was discussed last Thursday. Teams like the Los Angeles Dodgers have figured this out and make the most of that role. (http://networkedblogs.com/ms0IH) They now have the followers and control the information. Similarly, the Patriots organization will be the ones to tell us about Rob Gronkowski’s injury status – all the journalist has left to do is react.
Though I think the shift in sports coverage was inevitable, I can’t help but wonder who will be left to uncover the future steroids scandals or the next Belichick spygate. As Fox alluded to when she spoke about John Henry buying The Boston Globe, what’s to stop him from shelfing a story that makes the Red Sox look bad? Opinions are great and certainly do make up the majority of sports media I consume, but without reporters providing the stories and background information, will there be enough to argue and debate about?
Aaron Holden posted on September 17, 2013 at 10:45 pm
It’s pretty obvious that sports media has become more entertainment than the classic, hard nosed investigation that it used to be. I think that’s more because of how people view sports today compared to ten years ago. With the emergence of Twitter and blogs, sports information is at everybody’s disposal, whether you’re a journalist or not. People don’t want to view sports the same way they see hard hitting news, they want it to be more like movies and tv shows where they can just enjoy the performances, but find out the behind-the-scenes information elsewhere. Sports reporting has turned to giving fans what they want versus what they need.
When Mike Felger and Tanya Ray Fox came in Wednesday, they clearly addressed these changes.
Fox uses Twitter to get her foot in the door on a story. Whether she’s putting a story out there or just learning about it, Twitter is where she goes. That’s exactly the point of Twitter when it comes to sports journalists. Only there is a major issue with the fact that Twitter has redefined the race to get a story first among news outlets. Twitter is instantaneous and that’s how people use it. There are a lot of tweets about “breaking” news in the sports world that weren’t fact checked because the person wanted to break the story. In February during the NHL trade deadline, Aaron Ward tweeted the the Boston Bruins had acquired Jarome Iginla right before the night’s games had begun. After the games, the Calgary Flames said they had not announced any such trade at all and Iginla ended up on the Pittsburgh Penguins. Granted mistakes don’t always happen and it’s clear to tell who is a legitimate sports reporter on Twitter or not, but Twitter should be used more as a way to get followers to read stories or to update stories, not just for breaking stories.
No matter how Twitter or blogs or any sports related website is used, that’s how people get their information. As Felger pointed out, people get their information, they watch the games, they don’t want the sports media to tell them or show them what they already know, they want them to yell about it. Felger’s analogy to reality tv vs. well organized documentaries put it in perspective. Documentaries are the journalistic side, they are just like Twitter and watching the game. Reality shows are the entertainment, they are what gets the best ratings and what fans want to see. The opinion show has taken over the highlight show, and deservedly so. Opinion shows bring a new aspect to reporting. They allow for negativity that can’t be skewed by rights deals with certain leagues. They allow for people to speak their mind about any certain topic. Most importantly, they allow the viewer to be involved, which is what everyone wants. Fox says everyone thinks they’re an expert, and opinion shows allow people to feel like they are in fact an expert. The thing that resonated with me most was when Felger said, “It’s better to talk about what they didn’t do, rather than what they did.” Everyone knows what their teams did, but they want to turn a blind eye when it comes to what they missed. This is exactly what the new sports media has become, they have gone outside the box and rather than just reporting on a game, they are almost coaching from afar.
Near the end of the seminar Fox said, “Journalism should be able to catch up to the entertainment side.” For the sake of hard working reporters everywhere, like Fox herself, I hope she’s right.
Saba Aziz posted on September 18, 2013 at 12:12 am
In this new era of technological advances and innovation, drastic changes are taking place in every sector of our society. These changes affect our lives in more ways than we imagine. This transformation has been ever prevalent in the journalism industry, and even more so in sports journalism. From the days when sports reporting was only restricted to the paper and later on T.V, and ESPN had only one channel, to the advent of twitter and the blogosphere culture, sports journalism has come a long way. Not all of it has been for the better though.
Star of the market, Mike Felger whose beginning in sports journalism was as traditional as it could get, expressed how he reinvented himself to meet the demands of the going market. It is the entertainment value of the news and the fact that what sells which governs newsworthiness nowadays. A traditionalist by heart, it was interesting to hear, for me personally, how simple score reporting and game stories are not going to cut it in today’s world of sports journalism. In the words of Felger, “There’s more entertainment than hard core news. And the days of the reporter are few and far between.”
Sports journalism has become fan driven and journalists are giving the fans what they want as opposed to what they need. The audience wants an angle and an opinion and that is what they’re getting from the countless bloggers who have sprung up of late. In the March 2007 edition of the Boston Sports Review, David Scott talks about how average Boston sports fans sitting in their living rooms are going toe-to-toe with the established, skilled media. And while blogs are “the future of the business” as expressed by Albert Breer (MetroWest reporter) it is the art of reporting and the accountability which comes into question here.
In the guest column by Roy Reiss on Boston Sports Media Watch, he goes on to blame twitter for the mess it has created where fact-checking and authenticity of the report is an afterthought. According to Reiss, controversial journalists lose their credibility in attempts to attract attention and stand out. It’s sizzle over substance. Then there are the agenda pushing journalists and newspapers with vested interests.
While all this becomes difficult to digest for the old school traditionalists, it is in essence what sport has come to. With all the big money involved, it’s a show and source of entertainment and not merely a game. Sports journalists of today have to respond to this new concept to do justice to the audience. As Tanya Ray Fox, very aptly said, “While the entertainment side has gotten bigger, sports journalism can’t lose its newsworthiness and there will always be people providing the facts.”
abunker posted on September 18, 2013 at 11:40 am
The reason that the shift from traditional journalism to entertainment based sports media is currently taking place, is that there are more options than ever for consumers. More than ever before people who are interested in sports news have the ability to cater the news they consume to their exact specifications. Due to the oversaturation of information, the only way to rise above the masses is to out perform in entertainment. If I have 3 different beat reporters, or bloggers, or radio hosts that I can listen to at a given time, I am naturally going to choose the one that best fits my idea of quality. They are all going to have the same facts, stats and quotes for the most part, now it is incumbent on them to provide entertainment.
This is where the advice that both Michael Felger and Tanya Ray Fox offered our class is so vital. Felger said that above everything else, you have to “be yourself”. Fox echoed that sentiment by encouraging us to “find our voice” in the given platform that we choose. It’s easy to see why they would offer this advice when you look their individual career trajectories. Felger has been a successful sports media member in the Boston area for over 20 years, but it wasn’t until he joined The Sports Hub and Comcast Sports Net, that he became a personality synonymous with Boston sports. While he had undeniable success as a writer, it is clear that his skill set, “his voice”, is best fit for the platform that he is currently involved with.
As for Fox, her biggest career boost happened when she decided to take on one of Boston’s big named sports radio hosts on her blog over his assessment of Tom Brady. Fox had been working and writing successfully up to this point, but it wasn’t until this article that she attracted major attention.
The benefit that we have as emerging sports media professionals in 2013, is access to this massive landscape of platforms. When Felger entered the working world back in the early 90’s, the path to sports media success was pretty narrow. But as Fox proves, in 2013 there are substantially more ways to find success in sports media.
The trick is finding where you fit best, so you can “be yourself” and be successful. Think about the most successful names in sports media currently. Peter King has been a quality writer for Sports Illustrated for decades, but it wasn’t until he developed his Monday Morning Quarterback column in the mid 2000’s that his popularity skyrocketed. Not coincidentally, King was a writer who was able to maximize the use of online journalism, and this has spawned into radio, television and his own website. All because he found the right platform to use his voice and be himself.
The same can be said for many of the most successful sports media professionals today, and for Felger and Fox. The landscape of sports media is changing, but it has always been changing, and it will continue to change for the length of our careers. The biggest mistake that we can make is thinking that we have ever figured it out. All we can do is continue to adapt as these changes take place, and continue to heed the advice of Wednesday’s speakers. By using our individual talents to our benefit, and of course working hard, we will find success.
Adam Jakubiak posted on September 18, 2013 at 1:13 pm
There is no question that sports media is an entirely different landscape now than it was 5 years ago. To me, the biggest reason is the advancement of social media and how fast breaking news is relayed to the general public. Twitter, especially, gives everyone the belief that they are a sports journalist. But there are so many “sports journalists” out there that the entire social media landscape can become very cluttered. Michael Felger brought up a great point at the start of the lecture when he mentioned that sports journalism today is just as much about entertainment as it is about news. This can be evident on the mainstream networks, like ESPN, where everyone seems to have a persona that is more “hip” or “cool” than someone you might see on CNN or another news network.
And that’s really what it’s all about. No viewer or listener wants to just get the news in sports anymore. They want to be entertained and get an inspired opinion. We have reached the age where just about anyone can be a “sports journalist” and can write a note on Twitter in 140 characters or less. Reporters will generally all have the same facts, quotes, information and more. A lot of successful writers and journalists today put their own spin on things to stir up discussion and keep people coming back for more. Additionally, Felger pondered the thought of whether or not viewers and listeners want information or an opinion. This is a fantastic thought and someone who delivers strong opinions are normally the most popular figures in sports media. Take Skip Bayless and Stephen A. Smith on ESPN, for example. These guys may not be entirely well-liked by the general public, but they are extremely popular because they have their own style and can give a strong opinion on any given topic. Dan Shaughnessy of the Boston Globe is another great writer who isn’t afraid to speak his mind. Love him or hate him, everyone always makes sure to read his articles and columns. Being opinionated and having an edge is very important these days.
Despite taking different routes to get to where they are today and having some different opinions on various matters, both Michael Felger and Tanya Ray Fox offered great tips of advice to try to get ahead in today’s sports journalism world. “Having an edge is important to developing an audience,” says Felger. Fox advanced these comments a little more, saying that developing your own style is important and that you need something about yourself that is distinctive. There is a lot of “white noise” on the Internet, and you need to have a voice. It’s important to be edgy to get ahead in this business, and that’s how these two individuals got their breaks. Fox wrote an article that went against a radio host’s thoughts on Tom Brady, and it became big for her. Felger used his voice over his writing skills to make a name for himself. Whether it be print, broadcast, radio, television, blogging, Internet, whatever…it’s crucial to find the platform that works best for you, develop a style, and most importantly, be yourself.
Nick Zelano posted on September 18, 2013 at 3:11 pm
The reason that more and more changes are happening in all of the media outlets in journalism specifically is because of technology as it has been said throughout this feed numerous times. Technology offers an outlet, the platform, whatever you want to call it to everybody to spew their opinion.
This causes a blurred line between the professionals and everybody else out there who is just trying to get their opinion out there on the web somehow, someway.
Michael Felger pointed to this earlier in our session last week when he said that he is an entertainer. That is what he does for a living now he is paid to entertain to drive a fan base to gain listeners for his radio show. There is a clear difference between beat reporters, news reporters AND TV show hosts, and what Michael does.
Some are paid to simply report the news the numbers, the statistics, whatever it may be that is what they are paid to do. They are paid to get information out there, while others, an increasingly more popular manner, are paid to entertain by giving the news, by sharing their opinions.
To call what Michael Felger does and what Tanya Fox does the same profession would be incorrect in today’s media world. One entertains, they are paid to put out high ratings and high fan numbers, when the other one is paid to get information as quickly and fluidly as possible to the masses. That is the main difference between what sports journalism and sports entertainment have become. I do believe that sports entertainment is its own form of media.
I love sports as a sports fan growing up I always could envision myself as a sports journalist, on ESPN as a broadcaster or writing and sharing news about sports. However as I get older, as I am learning more about the business, more about what each outlet does within the realm of media, I am realizing that a job like Michael Felger’s is a lot more appealing to myself Than Tanya Fox’s.
That is where I think I would fit better than simply reporting sports news. I think that going to journalism school has helped me realize the difference and has helped me realize what I need to doing order to get to a Michael Felger like job and entertainment, sports job.
Michael does not consider himself a sports journalist anymore and I agree with that. If I were to gain the status or the job title that Michael Felger has I probably would not consider myself a sports journalist any longer as well. With that said I think that ultimately there will be a blend between the two sides of the coin. I think that ultimately reporters will be asked to sell their brand just as Tanya Fox told us about.
They will be writing about and sharing the news in the sports world, reporting the news in the sports world, as well as being on Twitter on Facebook in different social media outlets selling their brand selling the news and selling who they are as a person in order to gain credibility, respect, and a “fan base”, for lack of a better word.
That is ultimately how young upcoming reporters will have to share their news and gained the credibility to separate themselves from the regular Joe Smith out there writing on his Twitter on his blog about relevant sports news. Credibility and professionalism is what is going to separate the new styled sports reporters from everybody else out there talking about sports
Natalie posted on September 18, 2013 at 3:43 pm
I think there were two major things that I took from Michael Felger’s and Tanya Ray Fox’s visit on Wednesday:
1. Be yourself in the industry.
2. Sports Journalism has and is changing, and everyone in the industry is adjusting and responding in very different ways.
I’ve had a few classes now who have brought in guest speakers, and this is certainly not the first time I’ve been heard the emphasis to “be yourself” in the industry, and it is ringing more and more true the further along I have gone in my internships and in my graduate classes.
There is huge importance in keeping your own voice and not being fazed by “industry standards” of reporting or speaking, and I think most people who attended this seminar understood the same coming out of it. This applies to writing and broadcasting all around the board. Even before getting into journalism, it was easy to pick out “voiceless” articles I was reading. A little bit of personality goes a long way, and a lot of personality gets you even farther. Felger is my case in point.
It was also interesting to dialogue a bit about how what he does works wonderfully in Boston, but in “Somewhere” Texas, there is no way it would work as well. There are enough cultural differences in this country that it makes it impossible to have a black and white response to how to deal with the changes in the sports industry, and it is most important is to keep your voice and your opinion through the changes.
I found the discussion about both Felger’s and Fox’s responses to the changing industry. It seemed like they both had good practical advice about how they’ve adapted and what they think the general trend may be. I thought this was both a valuable discussion and the primary reason that we had them as guest speakers.
The entertainment versus news-value balance of sports media was probably the most interesting question that Felger and Fox discussed. Many of my classmates have already addressed the reasons why this has become such an issue (rise in social networks, digital media, teams owning news outlets, etc.), and I think this is an interesting point. Journalists are seeing this happen. They have seen the changes in the media, the “gets” that journalists look for in the locker room, and the expected speed at which journalists are supposed to get and release information. The expectation for immediate information has changed the industry.
This seminar discussion became a bit of a personal challenge. Fox talked about sports teams buying newspapers and broadcast shows giving them power over their press. She talked about how there will always be another outlet of people still seeking the truth and trying to investigate and reveal the “dirt”, the stories that a major franchise might not WANT to be out in the open. Sports journalism has become a topic about freedom of press and the influence money has over it.
I agree with Fox and think there will always be someone out there trying to report what the money wants kept silent. I think that this, and remembering to “keep your own voice” in the industry are points worth committing to memory and putting to practice as we pursue our careers in sports journalism.
Raphaelle Steg posted on September 18, 2013 at 6:04 pm
The news today, especially in sports, has become more entertainment based, than pure news, because of the new technologies. You watch the games, you get live statistics on your phone or from the internet, you have live tweets or live commentaries on many websites. Newspapers, radios and tv channels have to find another edge to make you want to watch.
Michael Felger, who does both radio and tv, argues rightfully that opinion shows have supplanted highlight shows. People, whether they agree or disagree with you, want to hear an expert opinion and watch discussions on subject, and react on the social medias.
Tanya Ray Fox also emphasized the importance of finding your voice that will make you stand out of the mass of aspiring sports writers. You have to brand yourself and make people want to come back and read your papers. She was noticed after she criticized another journalist, but she says that she is still working a lot on developing her voice and her credibility.
What was the most interesting part of these interviews for me what the fact that both Felger and Fox are at very different place in their career. He is well established while she is just beginning to be noticed on a bigger scale. They come from two generations and will not have the same path. He went through the “traditional” way, with an internship in a newspaper, then becoming a beat writer, and following the trends and the evolutions in technology by switching to radio and tv. She had to deal with these new technologies in college, learning to work with them from the very beginning, and trying to make her career through blogging.
The other thing that differentiates them is obviously gender. Fox, being a woman, said she never faced sexism in the workplace, but still has to face skepticism from people. She also says that it is harder for a woman to be on tv to share her opinion. Most women on sports tv are anchors and entertainers, but are not asked to participate in debates. Being myself a woman wanting to work in sports, it was a valuable testimony.
What was also compelling was their different views on social media. Fox is very active on Twitter, whereas Felger does not have an account and does not feel that it is that relevant in the bigger picture. There are various opinions on Twitter, some are very critical, saying that it might be the end of “sports media as we know it”, as anyone can get information directly from a source in less than 140 characters. Nowadays, Twitter has become a major forum for many sports writer to be in contact with their public and discuss many issues. It is also a way to showcase your work. Due to that, journalism and sport is evolving. The NFL has regulated the use of Twitter, banning it during the games for the players in 2009. It pushes also the journalists to be more careful of what they read. Just because it is said on Twitter does not mean it is true, and the basis of verification is still valuable in the field, as Mike Wise has proven with his Twitter hoax in 2010.
With this discussion, it is clear that sports journalism has evolved from being news-based to an entertainment prone media, for better or for worse. The field will have to evolve with the new technology, and it is still not clear what it will look like in even a few years. However, even if reporting is getting harder, as Felger said, because of the lockdown on information by the big leagues, news and reporting will never really die because we need it, it is the basis of all opinion and of journalism.
Andrew French posted on September 18, 2013 at 9:15 pm
Wow what a seminar! The debate highlighting the seminar: entertainment vs. informational, and opinion show vs. highlight show. Journalism is changing and this seminar with Mike Felger and Tanya Ray Fox really drove that point home.
According to Mike Felger, “Everyone has seen the highlight show. Now they want to see people yell about it.” Felger has learned to adapt in this ever-changing world of sports journalism. Felger went from a student at BU, to an intern at Boston Daily and the Boston Herald, to lead reporter for the Bruins, to beat reporter for the Patriots, and then eventually a sports radio personality (notice I said personality) for the number one sports talk radio station in the city and the number one show to boot. What Felger does down now isn’t what he used to do. What he does now isn’t journalism. Felger even admitted it. He paused when asked how he could possibly be a journalist if what he’s doing now (giving his opinion and entertaining people with his arrogant slants and critical sports takes) isn’t journalism. Probably because deep down he knows he’s not a journalist. Not right now anyway. He gave a lame answer saying that because he worked as a “journalist” in the past, he should be considered one now as well. Not sure if I buy that one.
Right now he doesn’t go to the games, he isn’t in the locker rooms, and he doesn’t talk to the players and coaches in person. In other words, he’s not around the team at all. But even though Felger won’t admit he’s not a journalist, he does admit he’s not doing journalism work and that’s how he likes it. According to Felger, he doesn’t want to be at the games. He doesn’t want to be in the locker room. He hates it. He doesn’t want to be swayed to write only good things for the team he covers. He values his opinions and can’t imagine going back to choosing his words wisely for fear he could possibly anger a player or coach and then not get the access he needed to do his job. What he has right now is what he wants. What he’s good at. He sits in a studio, and gives his opinion, not fact. But sorry Felger, you can’t have the job you want, which isn’t journalism, and then also get the title of a journalist.
The article by Roy Reiss, “The State of the Media,” talks about the exact same changes Felger personally went through to get where he is today. “You have people pointing out what others are writing instead of developing their own stories. The heck with checking the facts or authenticity of the report, simply get it out there and be first. Who cares if the facts are incorrect since no one is held accountable for what they report. And to think this is what new media people are taught as they learn the ropes which all serves as a preview of what to expect in future years.”
But people are handing out information to everybody nowadays, according to Felger. Comcast Sportsnet does it right. They know people can get the information very easily. What they can’t get are people taking the information and debating it. Information is everywhere and easily accessible, but using that information to form an opinion show, well now that’s something different and something the younger generation seems to be drawn to; something that entertains them instead of informing them of something they already know.
This particular article has a very critical undertone and seems to dislike the path journalism is heading to.
Reiss writes, “I’d love to see some of these so-called reporters go two weeks without any locker room access that seldom results in meaningful quotes or insight. No longer would they have the crutch of players droning on and now they’d face a real challenge of developing story lines outside their comfort zone.”
But Felger has said he wants no part of locker room access. He knows that those reporters need to tread lightly on what they report and write. Does he care that he gets absolutely no credibility from the athletes? No he doesn’t. But the difference is that Felger is claiming that he is still a journalist despite not doing journalism work and that would piss Reiss off to no end.
But anyone can give an opinion on something. What separates Felger from the rest of them? Reiss writes, “With so many people covering teams now, the question becomes “how do you stand out? The quick and easy path is you become the story rather than covering the story. Sadly many of the young journalists follow this path. They insert themselves into stories and try to be
controversial in the hopes of attracting attention to their work. In the short-term it may work, but long-term Boston sports fans are too smart. Sooner or later these type of reporters lose their credibility which is the one ingredient anyone in the media should cling to.”
But the credibility doesn’t matter to Felger and he knows he pisses a lot of people off. According to Felger, he never claims he knows something. He’s just paid to give his opinion. But plenty of people who don’t piss people off are opinionated on the radio. But then why are Felger’s ratings number 1? It’s the arrogance. It’s one thing to give your opinion but there are times when Felger is so sure about a sports take that he deems others wrong for not thinking the way he does. He walks a very fine line between opinion and fact. Even though what he’s saying isn’t fact, the way he delivers his opinions makes it feel like it is and because he isn’t at the games being a journalist, people get angry and feel like he he has no business having that strong of an argument about something he simply is witnessing like a fan.
So he pisses people off. Shouldn’t he get bad ratings then? Well here’s the deal. I like to compare Felger to Dan Shaughnessy. They both make people angry with what they say or write. But people still watch them and people still read their stuff. In this new era of journalism, it doesn’t matter how informative you are. It’s about making sure people follow you. Shaughnessy still gets plenty of people to read his column in The Boston Globe and as Felger put it, whether people hate him or love him, they are still tuning in to his radio show and that’s all that matters. Arrogance helps these two men. As Reiss points out, they insert themselves into these stories and make it controversial. That’s what people want nowadays. Even if they don’t agree with these men, they are drawn to them because they are potentially the two most entertaining people in the Boston media right now. With journalism becoming more entertaining than it has ever been before, these two men are thriving.
Tanya Ray Fox was also extremely helpful during this seminar. She talked about and agreed with a lot of things Felger said including making sure you stand out. As a woman, and someone who thrives with writing online, it’s important to separate yourself from everyone else. Felger may do it with his arrogance, but Fox says when you’re writing, you need a distinct tone and to think of writing like an art form similar to acting and singing. Both agreed that to make it in the world of journalism today, you have to be different, and you have to stand out anyway you can. Make people notice you; whether it’s because they strongly disagree with you, or strongly agree with you. The attention is good no matter what.
Given the way journalism is heading and has been heading the last few years, this seminar was so crucial. We all are about to embark on a quest to do the thing we love: work in sports. And in order to do that, we need to know how the journalism field has changed and where it’s going and how we need to act, speak, and write in order to get noticed. And what better people to teach us than Mike Felger and Tanya Ray Fox. Biggest thing I took away from this seminar: be yourself, look at things with a critical eye, and separate yourself from the pack by being entertaining. If you stand out and you can draw people to watch you or read you based solely on your opinion of something, not necessarily fact, then you may have a chance in this field.
Jeanna posted on September 18, 2013 at 10:34 pm
Covering the changing landscape of sports journalism is one of the most important lessons when trying to learn about the field. When reading some of my classmates’ responses, I think Andy said it perfectly:
“The landscape of sports media is changing, but it has always been changing, and it will continue to change for the length of our careers. The biggest mistake that we can make is thinking that we have ever figured it out.”
The landscape is always changing. It’s changed from where it was last year and will continue to change in a year from now.
I think the biggest contributor to this change is how many outlets the sports audience has available to them. Whether it be in news or sports journalism, society has an insatiable thirst for information. News and information is literally at our fingertips, whether we are sitting in class or on the T heading home after a long day. We constantly have the need to find out more and more information. The thing that changes the landscape of the journalism world isn’t just that people want to know everything; it’s that people CAN know everything. Whether it is from our desktop computer, smart phone, the “aged” source of an actual newspaper, radio, podcasts, tweets…. the list continues on and on. On top of traditional media, there is technology that truly speeds up the pace of our world.
Another aspect of this change is that people want more than just information. The 11:00 news can no longer just be regurgitated score recaps from tonight’s Red Sox game. We can find that out on our ESPN SportsCenter app. We want more. This is where the entertainment aspect of sports journalism comes into play. Having someone like Felger come in displays this concept perfectly. He spent years developing as a journalist and now calls himself “an entertainer.” The thing is: he is on the top of sports journalism in Boston. People listen to him because he offers more than just sports; he entertains people.
This transitions into my next point about the changing landscape of sports. Tanya Ray Fox spoke about branding yourself as a journalist. If you’re not loud, bombastic, or opinionated like Felger, then don’t act loud, bombastic, or opinionated like Felger. Eventually, you’re going to be called out as a phony. Your real personality will come out. Tanya’s opinion relied more heavily on having a recognizable brand for yourself. However, this is another aspect of the evolution of sports journalism. If you’re a female, you need to level the playing field between yourself and your male counterpart. Respect and knowledge are huge when it comes to women finding a spot in the sports realm. Especially when it comes to print, such as Tanya.
Lastly, another huge contributor to this change in sports journalism is money. For example, the article, The newsonomics of big sports money from the Neiman Journalism Lab, discusses that journalism is not what it used to be and that the landscape is heavily driven by money. I thought this point that was made was very pertinent when looking at the change in sports:
All of these combinations, and wannabe combinations, pose larger questions about sports journalism. When the leagues, the owners and those who cover them are all glued together by money, how independent can sports journalism really be?
Sports journalism is tied directly to who has the money and power. Beat writers who follow a team around for 100+ games during one season can’t write with all the freedom that journalists should have. More and more, in recent years, we have seen broadcast and print entities being driven completely by money.
Through all of these factors, the landscape of sports journalism is inevitably changing. It has exponentially changed from years before and it will continue to reshape itself for years to come. Tanya Ray Fox and Mike Felger were important speakers to have in our class because they are direct witnesses and products of that changing world. Tanya is fighting against the odds of available jobs as a woman football writer and Felger is proving there is more attention as a sports entertainer rather than a journalist. The field is different than it ever has been before and only a journalist with a thorough understanding of that process is going to be able to not only survive, but excel in this dynamic state of journalism that we find ourselves in.
Nick Koop posted on September 19, 2013 at 1:42 pm
While sports journalism has definitely seen a shift towards entertainment over the past decade, that change can be attributed toward a changing audience. Breaking news and reporting on games used to be enough, but now there are so many ways for fans to consume news through league packages, YouTube, etc. What made “experts” useful was their special access to teams and games. Now, fans have that same access and want to learn something or argue their opinion, which explains why debate has taken off on talk radio and television.
On-air personalities have more pressure than ever to stimulate their audience with provoking conversation. Often times journalism takes a back seat in favor of holding the audience. I can’t think of a better example than Skip Bayless and his nonsensical rants about Tim Tebow. However, Bayless has sustained an audience for his antics. Professor Shorr mentioned about people are attracted to Felger, both positively and negatively because of his strong opinions. Bayless has experienced the same thing, and they both have a job because of it.
But not all hope is lost in sports journalism. Print remains a home for strong writing, evident by Bill Simmons’s Grantland. One if their writers, Zach Lowe, has made his way into the upper echelon of NBA writers with his thorough analysis of game film. The website also publishes lengthy oral histories which require months of reporting. Adrian Wojnarowski of Yahoo! Sports breaks more NBA news than anyone else. What we’ve seen from a lot of print writers, Lowe and Wojnarowski included, is they have found the ability to tell an audience something they didn’t already know.
Print’s ability to adapt and cater to a smarter audience gives me hope that broadcast can adapt as well. It seems that debate programming will be here to stay for some time given its favorable ratings. But the issue remains the same, if you can’t tell fans something new they need to be entertained