The Athletic keeps growing .......

It doesn’t sound difficult. But it is. Because everything we do is subjective.

What’s “compelling?” If youre in the business its kind of like porn, I know it when I see it. If you’re not, how do you recognize a great story? Whats great to one might be over wrought crap to another.

Clicks can be really stupid but they’re quantitative, and yeah its a lot like how pop music isnt always critically great even though it sells records, but I think a lot of suits and MBA types want to grab any numbers they can and run with em.

 

Knowledge is power. So if you get people to believe you possess knowledge- even if you have no idea what the hell you are talking about- you an gain power. This is how many consultants make a lot of money.

So if an editor is looking the copy of a journeyman sportswriter he has no idea how effective he is in reaching the audience. So he looks at the clicks. It may be completely inappropriate but it will give said editor a perception of knowledge. Hence clicks will become important.

This is how management works throughout the world.

 

By compelling, I mean things people want to read. But not just one occasional story people want to read. Multiple stories people want to read. Inherently that includes measuring traffic, yes.

Traffic boosts are nice and all, but if Stop & Shop has something I want in stock maybe one week out of 20, I’m not going back no matter how good the sales are. Just because you were Drudged for a day and doubled traffic doesn’t ensure the long-term survival of the enterprise.

 

I subscribe to The Athletic and read one or two articles two or three times a week while I eat lunch. I haven't clicked once through a social media post, but the daily email highlighting an article has drawn me in a couple times.

I enjoy most of what I read, but I can live without it. I won't renew unless I get a great discount when I cancel.

That said, I hope they succeed. It's just not what I'm making time for currently.

 

It's not that easy either when reporters have so much going against them. No support from suits; ridiculous time wasting enterprises by suits. It's not like anybody has the answers. To say it's not that difficult sounds like something a suit would say. It's not that easy either considering reporters are on call 24/7 and don't get paid for that.

 

MTM, you should know that you'll automatically have your subscription renewed at full price when it runs out unless you cancel ahead of that date. That happened to me last September. I've already canceled so that when it runs out this September, I can grab a discounted subscription afterward. If I have to go without for a couple of weeks, that's fine. It's just poor business to now warn a subscriber that the automatic renewal is about to happen. With Dish Network, for example, I get an email message a few days before a discount rate on an add-on is about to expire. That's the honest way to do business.

 

In my career I’ve never worked with someone who was let go because they didn’t have enough clicks on their stories. Some reporters have better metrics simply because of the beat they’re on, and in my experience most editors understand that.

It’s true that numbers don’t often tell you how well a story has been done, or the time spent on it, but this is where we are. I mean, some reporters can barely write yet their large number of twitter followers are helping them land good jobs.

 

My understanding is that every Athletic writer is given a goal for number of subs to drive in a year (probably tied to how much money they make), and every story is given a "pass" or "fail" grade based on how many subscribers convert off of it.

 

This is Adam. One of the company's co-founders. I've thoroughly enjoyed reading all the speculation/commentary in this thread over the last few years, so keep it up.

I have never commented here and don't expect to much, but thought it was important to clarify one point. The reason we give our staff/editors access to metrics for their stories is to create a feedback loop whereby they can internalise which formats resonate with readers and prospective subscribers, and which don't. Most of the time, the 'best' stories--qualitatively speaking--actually do outperform basic reports (game recaps, etc.). Believe it or not.

 

My sources tell me The Athletics is adding a writer in Boise and a writer in Spokane to cover Gonzaga/Wazzu. Possibility for covering UNLV and Colorado State too

 

If you’re the real Athletic, prove it

 

I'm talking about all journalists on Twitter, not just those from The Athletic.