Hearst papers to use Bleacher Report stories

I am pretty sure they spice it with completely random, opinionated, inaccurate stuff, too.

 

It used to be that newspapers hired good people who went out got scoops for them. Since those people are gone and the editors' lazy friends are left behind, guess they have to turn to Bleacher Report. And we wonder why the hell newspapers are failing...lmao!

 

They were already failing. Now they are just taking the brakes off the runaway train.

 

From the linked article, it would appear the the Bleacher Report stuff is just going on the website. If that's the case, why is this a totally terrible thing?

Bleacher Report has to have some kind of fan base of people who like those articles. If there's a market, more people will end up going to the newspaper site=more ad revenue for the paper, however small it may be per hit.

 

So newspaper websites shouldn't at least try to maintain the same level of quality (if not more) than the print product? (Yes, I realize they don't try a lot of the time. But I think they should.)

 

BR doesn't rewrite wire copy. And there are actually some decent people doing things for them.

Decidedly the exception, not the rule, but it's not unheard of.

 

I know now and then I get an e-mail from people on fishing expiditions for jobs and they'll list BR or some fanboi site as "experience," then you click the link and a few paragraphs in it's so obivous they just watched the game on TV and want to spin it. Quotes? Stats? Color? Alien concepts. All I can picture is someone coming back from a Friday night game without a box score, but lots of great takes.

 

Disclosure: I work at Bleacher Report.

That said, I am very interested to read the reaction on SportsJournalists...

Nobody at Bleacher Report claims that we are doing investigative journalism, nor are we likely to be the first to break a news story. This aspect of journalism is important. And we're not the ones doing it.

But you do not need locker room access in order to break down the pros/cons of a recent trade. An educated, impassioned fan is plenty qualified to discuss his team's NFL Draft needs, or offer a grade once the draft has taken place. The fan voice is particularly welcome when it comes to light-hearted content.

Bleacher Report is not trying to put traditional media outlets out of business. We are actually helping traditional publishers by helping to better define the line between professional journalism and fan-powered content. That is why established publishers like CBS, Sports Illustrated, News Corp, Hearst, The Telegraph, and USA Today are excited to work with Bleacher Report.

We totally understand the concerns voiced here... but try to see it from our perspective. Major shifts are taking place in the realm of Media. That's just the way it's going to be. Bleacher Report is advancing the cause of New Media in a way that is sensible. We are working hard to identify and promote the best fan-writers. We are trying to help the cream of the 'blogging community' rise to the top of our site. We are helping large publishers understand which types of stories can be covered by fans, and which types of stories are best handled by established professionals. And we are succeeding on all these fronts...

Bleacher Report is a true ally of the established media. And we will continue working hard to demonstrate that.

 

All I know is that a month or so ago I wrote something original and the major point of it was rewritten into a Bleacher Report article, with no attribution. It was just a hair short of stealing, so I won't pursue it. But it doesn't mean it wasn't a dick move.

 

Here is the problem with Bleacher Report: It has no value. No one is willing to pay for it. Not newspaper publishers, not advertisers, not readers, not other journalists and certainly not other sportswriters. The people who write for Bleacher Report write for free, thus lowering the value of professional sportswriters who are still trying to make a living in journalism.
Sites like Bleacher Report are not allies of established media. They are parasites. They do nothing to increase the value of the news product. They eat away at it and they do nothing to increase the value of the product they produce.

 

What do you write about the other 364 days a year?

 

I am, without a doubt, "pro-online" when it comes to sports journalism. But here's where I have a problem with Bleacher Report, and I'm taking this off the post written by the employee (and thanks for posting here and giving your viewpoint). Basically, from what I can tell (and has been written here), BR is a fan writing an article, based on fan opinion.

A reporter is at an event. OK, let's say that isn't necessary. A reporter talks to people in the sport to gather information on players, trends, trades, etc. to help form a non-biased article.

Can some fans create good copy? Yes, and there are a number of them out there. I just haven't seen that from BR. Too much floating around in the cesspool to notice the diamonds.