The Athletic keeps growing .......

Who has "left" recently beyond the handful of obscure names mentioned on this thread who were let go?

Even if there were people departing right and left, where would they be going? There are virtually no newspapers hiring anyone except cheap "trending reporters. If someone has left the Athletic, it's because the Athletic nudged them out the door. It's regrettable for the people involved, but it's hardly an epidemic.

 

Ok, then set me straight. The name of the thread is "The Athletic keeps growing," yet all I've seen for quote some time are castoffs -- and the talk is there's been more than a few.

So is it growing or not?

 

Here's the thing - a lot of those mistakes you've noted in the Athletic are also in print in newspapers around the country.

The Athletic has opted to mostly forgo copy editors and line editors. Some sites have managing editors, but they don't seem to do a ton of heavy editing - more big picture planning.

Typos, grammar mistakes, and other miscues make it into publication. Just like every other outlet. So I don't think The Athletic should be singled out for that.

Criticism should be saved for their overall direction. Are they providing something different than newspapers? Is their model sustainable overall? That should be the focus, I think.

 

This thread was started almost 10 months ago.

 

That's the point of this thread.

 

I hate typos, grammar mistakes and other "miscues" that appear in print. I don't ignore them. Mistakes are mistakes, period.

Absolving a publishing entity, be it print or online, of basic rules of writing is not in my wheelhouse. Mistakes make a product look shitty and gives less credibility. If you bought a car with a trunk lid a slightly different shade than the rest of the paint, you wouldn't ignore it. That's apples and oranges but IMO the principle is the same. The concept of thinking "everyone does it, it's not a big deal, it's just a little mistake here and there" is bullshit.

As to the overall direction, I'm all for what The Athletic is doing if it can be successful. Bravo to them and keep taking my money. Whether it's sustainable, I don't know but I hope it is.

 

I think a lot of the content is quite good. Some of the writers who were let go recently are NOT great writers, or even good ones. But clearly they have many writers who were hired hurriedly and now go unsupervised.

 

I'm not saying to ignore them, as they stand out to me, as well.

But some in this thread - not necessarily you - seem to be pointing to the lack of copy editors and the number of errors that are published as evidence that the Athletic isn't working. The truth is, the only real barometer is whether the Athletic makes money and serve as a source of gainful employment for journalists.

 

The Twitter feed of the Hurricanes beat writer is horrible. It's fan-girlish and her avatar photo is completely unprofessional. It's not a good look at all. And I say this as a subscriber to the Athletic who enjoys a great deal of the site's content.

 

I don't understand The Athletic's hiring process. They don't hire deserving people and seem to find people off the streets for some of these beats.

 

It seems as though The Athletic really likes writers with a lot of Twitter followers who produce a lot of social-media engagement.

 

The only reason I criticized the thread was it had seemed to devolve into a lot of name-calling instead of legit criticism.

Anyway, as a subscriber I agree that the content varies widely from beat to beat and writer to writer. Quality control is an issue. You can tell they've spent a lot of money in certain areas so they're trying to go cheap where they can.