fshorr's blog

It’s hard not to reiterate some of the things that we’ve discussed in this past year’s seminars. I don’t think that’s a bad thing, but it goes to show that there are small details that carry over in every area of sports journalism.

Do the research.
Be yourself.
Be a hard worker.

These were all talked about in Thursday’s seminar for good reason. Every single one of those details makes a difference when you’re a journalism breaking a big news story like the Hernandez case or the Manti te’o’s fake girlfriend, and the Boston Marathon bombings.You have to commit 100% to a story because readers/viewers can sniff out a poorly researched, half-hearted journalist in a heartbeat.

We also broached the subject of how much Twitter has changed sports journalism in general. It’s turned locker rooms into somewhat of a vicious cycle of reporting.
1. Wait for the main topic athlete
2. Get the quote
3. Tweet immediately along with the other 10-20 journalists tweeting the exact same topic or quote

It is difficult to be original. It is difficult to be one-on-one with athletes. It takes time and patience. In one of our past seminars about women in sports journalism, we were told not to get in the way of your own story. Don’t make it about yourself.

We had a beat reporter for the Red Sox visit another class and he shared an excellent locker room tactic. First of all, observe and read the room. Second of all, when you see the pack of journalists going all in the same direction, don’t be afraid to look the other way and talk to another athlete. Some reporters don’t have that luxury, but once you’ve proven yourself as a good beat reporter, you might find that you have more access to some players because you were always there and always willing to approach the guy the media herd did not approach.

This seminar touched on that same subject. The fact is, Twitter is a real part of our lives now as journalists, and I would take the same advice with it: tweet what you have to, but don’t let that or your own self get in the way of the story.

You say that the discussion evolved from what stories were big to what constituted a big story. I think another question that arises from this post is, What makes a story a “sports story?”

To answer your question about Manti Te’o, of course he would have his own Wikipedia page without his imaginary girlfriend. In fact, he did, going all the way back to 2008, when he was a five-star high school recruit from Hawaii. Not to mention he was a multiple award-winning Notre Dame football player who was a Heisman Trophy candidate even before the girlfriend madness. But the imaginary girlfriend story was big only because Te’o was already a major figure because of what he had accomplished in sport. Same for Aaron Hernandez. These two stories wouldn’t be nearly as big if they each involved your average Joe Blows. For me, if these are sports stories at all, it is only because they involved people who had considerable stature in the sports world.

The Boston Marathon and the Miami Dolphins stories are different. The former is a sports story because it was a bombing that happened during a sports event; and the latter because it was about the culture in a certain sport. The story of Houston Rockets guard Jeremy Lin is even a more “pure” sports story, if you like, because of what he did on the court in the context of his history — he was an undrafted Chinese-American player that was sent down to the D-League before getting a chance with the New York Knicks, pretty much just because they needed another body; and then he became a star and improved the team once he got significant playing time. Thus started a following termed “Linsanity” by the media.

That’s what you need for a big sports story — something interesting, out of the ordinary. A description of the game telling you who won and lost won’t cut it.

The key to this seminar was the underlying question, “What’s a sports story?” It means different things to different people, and while there are certainly the more obvious answers — articles about a game or team or athlete — the entire scope is much wider than that.

To me, a sports story is anything that had its origins in athletics or is getting as much press as it is due to sports. So yes, Manti Te’o and Aaron Hernandez and the Boston Marathon are sports stories, and will continue to be for as long as they are talked or written about. Imagine if a regular guy gets ousted for being in love with an imaginary girl? That has “The Onion” written all over it. And there are, unfortunately, many alleged murders that don’t get nearly the amount of coverage as the one that Hernandez is involved in. It’s only because of their notoriety for their athletic accomplishments that it is as “important” as it is. (Another example is the Dolphins’ bullying situation. If that happened in a typical Florida company, it would be a flash in the pan — at the most — and get tweeted from this account, maybe: https://twitter.com/_FloridaMan).

(Quick aside: As Andrew detailed, Teo would absolutely have his own Wikipedia page if not for the girlfriend situation. There isn’t a particularly high threshold for getting your own page these days, and Teo long ago surpassed it.)

That said, the ambiguity surrounding professor Shorr’s original request for the list of the “top” three sports journalism stories of the year is completely understandable. In the sense that the “top” stories are the ones most discussed, the three above — Teo, Hernandez, Marathon — certainly qualify, especially locally.

But I took it as the top three works of sports journalism, and from that perspective, only one of those three (Teo) immediately comes to mind. Jeff Passan’s piece on Yasiel Puig’s journey to America, for example, was spectacular for all of the reasons that I thought should qualify a story as one of the best of the year. It had a previously untold angle, was well written and incredibly well reported, and to me — a probably naïve, just-getting-started sports journalist — it sets a standard that I strive to reach. (http://sports.yahoo.com/news/coast-guard-crew-reflects-on-time-with-yasiel-puig-during-attempt-to-defect-to-u-s–141306377.html)

But moving on: Jess Camerato’s observation that “accountability is different now” because people move on and aren’t as critical of errors long-term is a downright startling one — and even depressing to a certain extent. While I wholeheartedly agree with Professor Shorr that “we shouldn’t fall back on that,” I realize — as I do my professional growing up in this day and age — that it is, quite unfortunately, the new norm. Tweeting quotes from the clubhouse scrum is a rat race, and many writers may feel compelled to keep up. It’s the world we live in now, and while it’s far from ideal it doesn’t appear to be going back to the good ol’ days. I’ve come to accept that. (It is also worth noting that while the audience may not criticize as long for errors, other people who matter — bosses — will. The Internet ignoramuses matter little on that front.)

I also appreciated Steve Buckley’s perspective about sports journalism generally. The news doesn’t have to be positive or negative, it’s just news. Call it as you see it. It’s a simple philosophy that I have to remind myself of from time to time. In this brave new world, as we have discussed all semester long, it’s important to block out the nonsense.

That’s sports journalism in 2013, I guess.

Claire, I think I have to agree with you. Even though it is known as the “Boston Marathon Bombing,” I still had not really considered it a sports story, instead choosing to look at it through various other lenses: international relations, terrorism, politics, law enforcement/crime, and health care. I understand it occurred at a sporting event. But I think the story stopped being a strictly sports story very quickly; sports may have been the entry point for the news, but it certainly wasn’t the main point, in my opinion, of the continuing coverage.

In terms of what makes a story “big,” to quote Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart, “I know it when I see it.” A big story is one that lives on beyond the first day or week. It’s a story that when further investigated, continues to reveal more and more information. A few of the commenters above have stated similar thoughts on this topic, so I won’t belabor the point except to say that if nothing new is being said, then the story is dead.

What’s my top sports story of the year, as a person not inclined toward sports news? Thanks for asking. Hands down, the whole Manti Te’o thing. It had it all—complete and utter oddity, social media hijinks, sheer idiocy, conspiracy on the part of his fake girlfriend but also on the part of those that supported and corroborated the false story, shoddy “reporting” by some of the top sports media outlets, etc. As someone who pays much more attention to the politics and international sections of the paper than the sports page, this particular story caught my attention and had me searching for additional coverage.

Claire, I think you’re right that it’s about what the reader will gain from a story and from in-depth coverage. But we should also consider whether the audience should or does care. Public interest in a story has to play a part in making it big or not.

In addition to considering the fact that stories involving bigger names often get more attention, the nature of the story itself impacts the amount of coverage that it gets. In other words, the more scandalous or unbelievable the story, the more people want to read about it. In 2013, the Manti Te’o story is the perfect example of this trend. The story, with its naïve, love struck protagonist, was simply too outrageous to ignore. And, although the concept of “catfishing” someone was already within the realm of popular culture at the time (because of the 2010 documentary “Catfish” and the 2012 MTV docu-drama series of the same name), the astonishing story of how Manti Te’o fell victim to an internet hoax managed to overshadow all of his football-related accomplishments for the general public.

Similarly, the scandal involving Tiger Woods’s infidelity that erupted in November 2009 is a sports story that has permeated the public consciousness since the story broke. As more information became available, Woods lost his status as a “great American hero” and became the subject of gossip columnists, tabloid newspapers and magazines, and entertainment news shows. Even now, after four years, Woods is still spoken of in terms of his past indiscretions, especially in the wake of his current relationship with Olympic skier Lindsey Vonn. Most stories about either Woods or Vonn focus in some way on their relationship rather than simply talking about their careers.

Steve Buckley stated that “what you need to do at some point is rid yourself of the notion that it’s positive or negative. It’s news.” But, in terms of what gets the most attention, negative stories are usually talked about and remembered for longer than positive ones, especially when those stories reveal embarrassing information about someone. If Manti Te’o had started a charity or saved someone from a burning building, the press recognition he would have received would not have been as pervasive or as enduring as the coverage that his relationship hoax did. The fact that Te’o was already a recognizable figure certainly contributed to the fact that the media paid so much attention to his story. However, Te’o’s fame was not the only factor. The scandalous nature of the story itself definitely explains the lasting interest that was shown in it by both the media and by society in general.

As much as I agree with what Jess Camerato said about the viewer/reader being nowadays more forgiven about reporters posting untruthful twits, I think that when it comes to big stories, like the marathon bombing, accountability shouldn’t be taken lightly.
When working on a big story, one of the important things to take into account is the public interaction with it. There are various steps for s story to become a big one. There is a first article to which people can respond. Then as good reporters, if it’s relevant to our community, we can find new and different angles to a story; but that is only possible by taking into account the people’s reactions to it. I think that what makes a good story is not only the people’s interest but also interaction with it.
I think what Claire and J Bologna said about not really seeing the marathon bombing as a sport story, or seeing sports as the entry point for the news, its right. However, I think that is always the case. Depending on the reporter, a story can take all kind of different angles. Regardless of the story being a sports story or anything else, it is always about people.
Having different angles to the same story adds to the story’s accountability. As more journalists report about a single story, more angles the reader/viewer will have to compare and understand the story.

Having this seminar was I think a good way to finalize the semester. Sum it up, as well as the year we just had. In the last weeks of December, every publication will have an issue of “The Best/Worst/Important Moments of 2013”, and you will look at most of them saying “Oh right this happened this year!”.
Because when we were talking during the seminar about the big sports journalism stories of the year, I was thinking about them myself and how immediate news is. I had to go to a website to really remember what happened in January of this year. Being a huge winter sports fan, my big event of the year was the World Championships in Schladming, Austria. And France did quite well with four medals, two gold, one silver and one bronze. But why does it feel like a lifetime ago? Even closer in time, my favorite tennis player, Richard Gasquet, finally reached a Grand Slam semi final in the US Open, and I had been waiting since 2007. Even if I am fond of those events, it does not seem that close in time.
So what is a huge sports journalism story? What makes one event stand out of all the other, so that we remember the date, the year, what we were doing at that time? It is sad to say, but it is often negative stories that have a bigger impact. A scandal, an arrest, a judicial affair. When something actually goes further the world of sports. This is when a sports story becomes a sports journalism story. That is what struck me during this seminar. Aaron Hernandez, Manti Te’o, the bullying in Miami, what we remember of the year is what made the headlines outside of the sports pages.
In France, one of the biggest story of the year actually started in 2012, when several famous handball players were accused of betting on their own game and losing on purpose. It all started in 2012 but the investigation is still ongoing, and the trial pending, and this is what makes the news, and we still read articles about it every week.
The other big story of the year is Lance Armstrong, finally admitting to abusing performance enhancing drugs during his career. His big interview with Oprah was in January, and still last weekend there was in the biggest sports newspaper in France a double page on his meeting with Christophe Bassons. He was a French cyclist that had accused him of using drugs, and he had kicked him out of the professional cycling world, using his influence and threatening him. The Armstrong story has gone out of the small world of cycling, and that what makes it so interesting.
Finally the last story of the year is Oscar Pistorius, the famous South-African amputee sprinter, who shot his girlfriend in February. I remember reading it waking up on Valentine’s Day, the first official version was that he confused her with a burglar. Then he was arrested, then the trial. A French website launched a series of multimedia pieces like the Times. There are usually profiles, with pictures, videos, drawings, in depth interviews. And in the middle of them, one about this trial, and the South-African society and approach to guns, the corruption of the police and justice… And yet it is still written by sports journalists.
Having this seminar made me think about the approach of the career I want to get into. As a sports journalist, is it part of our job to make the story bigger, to reach outside of the world of sport to make it the “story of the year”? Do we have to give in the impulse of society to be attracted to negative stories rather than positive ones, only for the ratings and the sales? And how do we get ready for a story that goes fast outside our zone of comfort of sports, statistics and game reports?
This is why it is important to start preparing now for what is to come, anticipate not to miss the moment. This is why this seminar was important for our program.

I think the essence of journalistic accountability has changed much. It still serves the functions of informing people. What Twitter did, from where I stand, is changed the way news is delivered and received. It expedites the process. Everything that is on the need-to-know list is a click away. Concise sentences, real-time updates, citizen journalists, these elements all in a way contribute and facilitate communication.

Difference is social media sites like Twitter provides every one with something to fall back on. If you posted misleading information or false alarms, you can always go back online and correct it later. The presence of different media outlets on different platforms has diluted the sharing of information and stirred up competition with one another. Personally I think it doesn’t necessarily make people more forgiving, but makes it highly unlikely for any given news agency to have the attention heavy enough to cause widespread dissatisfaction from the public.

The importance of verification and research is somewhat diminished in the process as people are getting less and less patient being fed fast information without much background checking. Even if major news outlets put a hold on the information at hand, there are always eager citizens “journalists” who can’t wait to be the first reporter online.

Excellent sports journalism will not differ from excellent journalism, other than it’s main content focus on the arena of sports and the impact that sports has on people. The other qualities are consistent: doing the research, asking the hard questions, clarity and creating a connection between the reader and story. In my opinion, sports journalism has a greater potency for excellence though than mainstream journalism because of many readers precondition to be emotionally invested in the stories that we share.

Like Saba mentioned, my top five 2013 sports reporting stories would likely vary from the person sitting next to me. When you look at the top 10 stories overall though, they should have qualities that are exemplary in that either they are unique events or news, and they affect a wide portion of the sporting community. The reporting itself of that event or news will also go beyond the typical writing.

Some events, like the Boston Marathon Bombing, become so large that–like many have noted previously–are distilled into countless perspectives and features. Some of these stories as they go outside the actual event reporting and directly relative results become a part of news journalism that is less connected to sports. In that situation, some coverage of the Boston Marathon Bombing I would not consider sports journalism. When you profile how a bomb of that type was constructed and the feasibilities for them to be replicated—that goes outside sports journalism. But any time you write on something relative to the actual event, how victims are rebuilding and how the city is healing; those stores are still about the sporting. It goes back to the marathon.

Whether you’re looking at the enormous effects of Andy Murray’s Wimbledon win or the shock from Auburn’s Iron Bowl victory, the journalism that follows has the opportunity to be some of the most monumental of the year. When it comes to a story of that magnitude and you can post a valuable, succinct comment or update on Twitter then it is valuable. But for it to be considerable to be some of the best sports journalism of the year—then that is reserved for the long-form reporting that tells you an entire story. Can you really get the full story from a 140-word tweet?

As Professor Shorr started his blog post with a quote by the illustrious Scottish poet Robert Burns, I will too. “It’s hardly in a body’s pow’r, tae keep, at times, frae being sour,” he wrote in his 1786 Epistle to Davie, A Brother Poet. In English, “It is hardly in a person’s power, to keep at times from not feeling good.”
“Being sour” is how I felt at having to write a sports blog post, until I realized that I could actually use my lack of interest in sports to my advantage. See sports and I do not get along. Never have and I doubt we ever will, despite my faked enjoyment, which usually comes at the hands several beers.
For me, a non-sports fan, I realized that any sports story I did hear about throughout the year must have been especially important in order to break through the neatly contained bounds of sports journalism and into my realm.
So what did I hear about? The Boston Red Sox winning the World Cup. Some football players having problems, some football coaches having problems. Auburn, Alabama shockingly beating Alabama, Alabama. The upcoming soccer World Cup and the Winter Olympics. But details of these I could not tell you.
I understand that some of you sports fans may take my response here to be glib, but I am making what I feel is an interesting point. For a sports story to break through the usual cycle of sports coverage to reach a non-interested observer like me is very remarkable.
It is same way in that a story that I find incredibly important, for example about the music industry, may completely bore a sports fan. However if that story is important enough and global reaching enough, it will surely come to the attention of any self-respecting news-reader.
We started with Scotland so I shall finish with Scotland. Burns again,

“Misled by fancy’s meteor ray,
By passion driven,
But yet the light that led astray
Was light from heaven.”

I agree with Katarina when she said, “what makes something a great sports journalism story is when it is able to become more than a sports story.” I think this seminar was a great way to end our class this year because it really proved to be a real discussion about what types of things we as future sports journalists will cover. It is a variety of things, but when it comes down to it sports are more than just the final score. People are captivated and engulfed in a culture that is surrounded by sports year round. Each person loves their sports teams or sport for their own reason. Everybody is connected to sports in a very distinct and personal way, and kind of like Tim said, they have their own different reasons for that.

We as sports journalists will be asked to cover sports stories, and then also stories that go beyond sports. Those stories can be sports journalism stories that breach into the real world, that go beyond a score line and impact people on a deeper level. We discussed some of the major sports journalism stories of the year, and all of them affected people outside of the world of sports. They became part of everyday life somehow someway. The Hernandez trial, will affect people in that community for months and the side trials are still coming. That story is not over, and much like a murder trial, the victims’ friends and families will never forget that story.
The bombing story will last in the city for years to come. Anyone who thinks otherwise is foolish. 9/11 was still a sports story even 10 years after when the NFL celebrated the anniversary that moved the entire country at each game. This bombing may not have affected the entire nation, but it will be remembered and a relevant story for years to come in the city of Boston. These types of stories that live on, that remain talked about and written about are the types of stories that go beyond sports, that live beyond sports stories. They are sports journalists’ stories and they are why we got into this business.

Some of the stories I brought up when talking about it before class were the Oklahoma St. Story and Adrian Peterson story. These stories reached people that know little or nothing about sports. They are about universal topics that are identifiable and relatable to people on a different level than sports do. That’s why these stories go beyond sports and last longer than a regular sports story.

This week’s seminar was great to end on because it really gave us a great conversation. It really inspired a debate and conversation that proves that there is no right answer, just that there will always be a business for us as sports journalists. We will always have things to talk about, whether new or old, we will always have discussion points. That is why I want to get into this business because sports is the most amazing thing in the world and there is nothing like the wide world of sports. That is why sports very often moves beyond just a statline or scoreboard. Those stories are ones worth keeping alive, the ones worth writing about over and over. The ones worth relating to today’s world. It is why I got into this business to begin with.

I think the biggest part of this seminar was discussing what constitutes a great sports journalism piece. Clearly, having a breaking, unique story, like Manti Te’o or Aaron Hernandez, is almost guaranteed to be a great journalism story as well. The big deciding factor is how it is written. With the Hernandez story, everyone was covering it so it was key to find a certain angle that nobody else had. This can provide for great journalism because of the creativity involved usually leads to something memorable. Another aspect of great journalism is using a lot of color. How a writer is able to describe situations, people, really anything is what sets them apart and could potentially make them great.

Each year a book comes out titled “The Best American Sports Writing.” The stories are chosen and edited by a different sports writer every year. Looking back over the last two editions, there are a lot of stories that are written well rather than just being great stories. In the 2011 edition there is a story about the end of the Canada – USA olympic hockey game titled “Eight Seconds” by Michael Farber of Sports Illustrated. It’s a story about 12 pages long breaking down exactly how these eight seconds came to be. This was one of the biggest moments in sports for 2010 so the story itself was great, but it was the angle, color, and writing that really put it above and beyond.

When I think of the best sports stories of the year, I tend to think of the championships won, or the scandals revealed. But when I think about the best sports journalism stories, I think about the best written stories that have a unique angle and great color. A lot goes into a story, but to be the best you have to get creative.

“If it’s news we cover it.” Frank pointed this out in his post but I had to repost it because that is what I came away with after this seminar.

There were plenty of sports journalism stories this year. Some sad, some triumphant, some that just fell flat. But this seminar was important because it taught us that as journalists, we need to rid ourselves of the notion of whether the story is positive or negative. It’s news. Let the readers make that decision.

Bigger stories are contingent upon who is involved. The bigger the name, the bigger the story. Because Aaron Hernandez was a major NFL player on the New England Patriots, his whole story was huge. Sometimes the popularity and the bizarreness of a story can make it bigger and more memorable too. Just look at the Manti Te’o story. So weird. But we won’t ever forget it.

This seminar was also important because it really drove home the notion that the field is now all about getting the story first. Twitter is reinventing journalism. If you’re story is two minutes late on twitter, it’s old news. Jess Camerato said something that was really disturbing when it comes to sports journalism. She said, “Due to the rush to get the story up first, people are more forgiving if you’re breaking news is wrong because they know you’re just trying to get it up there on Twitter ”

It’s easy now to blame auto-correct for mistakes and there are more outs because it’s online. Inaccuracies just aren’t that rare anymore and that is pathetic in the field journalism that used to pride itself on getting it right. Now, you just need to get it first.

As mentioned, this discussion started off with the topic of the best sports journalism stories of 2013. When thinking about various stories, I brought these three to the table:

1. Erin Andrews and Charissa Thompson’s ridiculous promo for Fox1.
2. Erin Andrews calling Jim Leyland “Joe” and referring to Justin Verlander as “Justin Bieb–” when she blew the post game interviews from game three of the ALCS.
3. The truth behind Manti T’eo and how Deadspin and new media had a huge role in it.

Now these three stories don’t necessarily qualify as the “top” stories of 2013, but I do think they offered interesting insight about contemporary sports journalism along the same lines of things we discussed in class.

After beginning the discussion with our guests, this conversation quickly went into what makes a good story and what keeps it around. I think this quick transition happened because the state of journalism is at such a different place than it was in the past. We live in a society with an insatiable thirst for information and we want the latest information, not only as soon as possible, but also at our fingertips. Information consumers don’t want to wait until the newspaper is published, or until the post-game report after the game. This insatiable thirst is the responsibility of today’s sports journalists.

I think this introduced a few interesting concepts that are extremely prevalent in today’s state of journalism:
1. SENSATIONALISM
2. TECHNOLOGY
3. SPEED VS ACCURACY

Is it a good story or is it just sensational? Is it a quality storyline or are we captivated just because it is somebody in the limelight? In recent years, people have gotten so obsessed with their favorite celebrities and athletes that nearly anything they say or do makes news. For example, Andrew McCutchen proposed to his girlfriend on Ellen and Deadspin and several other media outlets published stories about it and are getting HUGE amounts of traffic. (http://deadspin.com/andrew-mccutchen-proposed-to-his-girlfriend-on-the-elle-1481235553) Is this news or is it sensational? As this is a just an example, the idea of sensationalism happens much more often with larger stories. I think this was a topic that was talked about with our guests that hugely affects what makes for a “great” story nowadays.

Technology has played a huge role in the advancement of journalism. As Jess was saying, Twitter is a significant part of being a reporter. Oftentimes, you’re considered more credible or more qualified if you are the one who breaks the news first. I thought her example of being near the press table at Celtics game was really interesting. Truthfully, the split second difference between one reporter and the next doesn’t make a huge difference, but with our present dependence on technology, unfortunately, it plays a HUGE role in a journalist’s job. This goes back to my initial point… that people not only want to know the information, but they want to receive it at their convenience. They want it quick and immediately at the fingertips, on their phone, computer, or TV screen all at once.

For people who have been in the industry, like Professor Shorr, I can see how this can be an extremely bizarre trend. The importance of speed vs. accuracy. In a follow up to my last point, speed is oftentimes viewed more importantly than accuracy. Personally, this was exemplified time and time again during the Boston Marathon. I remember outlets from CNN to the AP, from the NYTimes to ABC were reporting that they found the bombers, then they didn’t. Then they identified who they were, then they were on a train to Connecticut. I remember thinking that the Boston Globe was the only source I truly thought was accurate for the entire time. I do not think it is a coincidence that the main traditional form of media who was taking part in the coverage was the one who was actually getting it right. I think that proves that the responsibility of journalists should lay with the foundation of what was started back in the days of newspapers— If the information isn’t accurate, it isn’t published. There is such a need for speed lately that it trumps accuracy, but I don’t ever think there is a fitting time for that.

I don’t think Manti Te’o ever would have been able to get the attention that he did without his fake girlfriend being blown up. I don’t think the significance behind Aaron Hernandez and the Boston Marathon is what keeps them around. I think it is relating the information to something significant that is happening today. I think there is a combination of things that change the landscape of journalism and it is important that we recognize that as we become journalists. As we always say, do your research, report well, and keep truth above all other concerns. Like Professor Shorr said, whatever you do, do it with sound journalism in mind.