And The Dude abides.
There seems to be two schools of thought in bloggyworld. The first is that blogs don't need the same type of mainstream access to coaches and players that the regular media has. This lack of access helps give them the freedom to say whatever they want and not have to worry about pissing off anybody important. It's an interesting idea, and works quite well for a lot of sites. The other school of thought is that blogs are a legitimate form of media and should be treated the same as mainstream media. I guess I fall into the second category since I'm kinda trying to be a "real journalist".
Luckily, hockey seems to be a bit ahead of the curve when it comes to this, thanks to none other than Washington Capitals owner/AOL head Ted Leonsis. Say what you will about Leonsis and American Online(and there is tons to complain about), but over the summer he: 1. Created this very nice NHL draft site 2. Didn't sign Travis Morin to a contract 3. Hopefully helped bloggers get their foot in the door of more ice rinks.
It seems that earlier this year, Leonsis asked hockey journalist Eric McErlain, who is one of the best in the business, to come up with some guidelines for bloggers who want to receive press passes to hockey games. The result of that project is here.
The criteria seems easy enough to follow.
1. Email Media Relations at least 3 days before an event. I can do that.
2. Don't publish objectionable content. I guess I can do that.
3. Be in operation for at least 3-6 months. I've already done that.
4. Submit traffic data. I can do that. Traffic here is just under 800 visitors a day, which isn't all that bad for a college hockey site.
5. You have to interact with players and coaches and write something about the game. I can do that.
6. You have to act professionally. I can do that.
So really, it's not that hard. I'm totally trying this, and hopefully schools around the country(especially in Minnesota) will be willing to give me a chance. It'd be great if they did because that would only make the coverage here even better.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Those rules are HARD, dude. I wrote a little response of my own.
Something that bothers me is #2 on that list.
The others are pretty straight forward and obtainable without much confusion. But what do they classify as "objectionable?"
If a blogger writes an editorial piece on his blog (in between informational pieces) about the problems the Capitols are having with whatever it is they are having problems with, does that mean that the press creds could be revoked?
Criticism is part of free speech and, as long as it isn't defamatory (like listing why the Capitols stink by using Leonsis' mother and close friends and likening them to certain lifestyle choices), should be allowed?
Am I reading too much into this?
Looking at the post on Off Wing Opinion, that seems to be the complaint a lot of people had with it, and I agree that it's vague. My guess is as long as things are written in a classy way, it shouldn't be a problem.
Redwing77,
I am not sure anyone can give a definate definition what objectionable. It sounds like if someone is offended then it is objectionable.
One more item the captials do stink.
Brad- I understand about the accountability thing, but I also agree with Hammy on the other comment page that is newer than this one. Beat writers aren't the only source of information and bloggers/message board posters are often very good at breaking the news well before a journalist writes his/her column. Using the Sioux as an example, several Siouxsports.com posters knew (and posted such) about many of the early defections well before they were confirmed by a source like the GF Herald or UND's Athletic Department or wherever. Sure, I find myself skeptical (I did at the time those posters posted that info) on the information, but so far, they've been proven to be right 99% of the time.
I have no doubt that the reason for this comes in the accountability standards you cite, but still, I often speculate as to why these posters get the info faster than journalists do. Perhaps it is the anonymity that allows for this?
Chris- Written in a classy way? So, if I write "The Capitols problems are that they have no offense, no defense, and no goaltending. Their coaching is less than stellar, and the front office is in need of "housecleaning." However, one has to admit that the players look really good in their jerseys." That's not objectionable?
Goon- Your definition is scary, but I bet you ANYTHING that it is the correct one. I could say that the problem that the Capitols have is that their head coach couldn't coach his way to a 1-0 victory if the oppositing team only dressed the head janitor to play against their top line and I'm positive someone would object to that. And, for the record, I'm sure you'll never see a Capitols game via the press box (and neither will I). :P
Redwing,
I was just saying that it's possible to be critical, without going over the top. Take for example my upcoming preview of Alaska-Anchorage. Needless to say, there won't be a whole lot of positive news in there. Now if I simply said that they sucked or called them names or whatever, I'd consider that objectionable. But if I provided stats and reasoning to explain why I think they're going to be bad, I think it would be hard to classify that as objectionable.
Also, I want to thank everyone for all the quality comments. It's great to see back and forth discussion between two well-informed and respectful sides. I didn't want to dwell on the "blogosphere vs. mainstream media" debate, but there's some good stuff here and I may make another post out of it.
David is right.
As much as I hate to say it, bloggers are probably destined to be on the outside...unless stringent and uniform standards are drawn up for who gets let in.
As far as his story about Drew Stafford, I've had that happen to me, and I've seen it happen to others.
Bruce and Brad,
What your talking about as far as accountability maybe for the sports world, it isn’t however, the same say political blogs, like say the daily Kios, but these types of blogs seem to becoming the norm around the blog world as far as standards for reporting. It seems like the authors of these political blogs are being held to less stringent standards than the hockey bloggers Chris that is talking about in his article, it almost is like they are trying to confuse beat writers with bloggers. This might be what we are doing here.
An example of this is that there are thousands of nut jobs out there that think a missle hit the pentagon during the 9/11 attacks when the evidence is insurmountable that it was in fact a commercial airplane.
Lastly, media people like you and Brad cover sports teams because it is the profession you have chose, so can we say its your job. Don’t get me wrong I am thankful for your work, because I read Brad’s work religiously and if I lived in Duluth I would probably listen to your radio shows. Why because we are fans, we love sports, and you provide a service to fans by giving us information. I might also add for this service you guys provide I am sure most of us are thankful.
That being said, by doing your job and performing this service to the fans, your going to be compensated for it. However, by doing your job you also have a front door pass to the locker room and to the players, most of the bloggers don’t have this access and maybe we shouldn’t either. So I am not so sure you guys would be considered bloggers either, that Is just my MHO. So going further with that. Chris the writer on this site might be in fact more of a journalist/hockey beat writer and less of a blogger. That seems to be the way he is leaning.
Post a Comment