Opelika-Auburn News runs photo of awful Treadwell injury on sports front

If I am the shooter, and I get the shot of the game -- hell, the season, when considering the national title implications -- and it doesn;t get run, I am pissed.

As an editor, I might have waffled a bit, but looking at the fact that it does not show the actual painful break, probably would have gone with it.

The headline? Meh ... deadline parroting of the lede. It happens.

The fact that multiple fan boi bases are losing their minds over it? Not surprising ...

Then there is this: Every game, and really every season, can be broken down into defining moments, seminal seconds that impact far beyond the final outcome. Moments where effort and focus and sacrifice come into clear definition — bright, shining bursts that provide in-the-moment context for a season’s worth of effort and practice and sweat and sacrifice.

The final play of this game is that moment for two elite teams. The Auburn player’s no-quit hustle; the Ole Miss player’s not-to-be-denied determination. Two perfect examples of the kind of commitment it takes to compete and succeed at the elite level. It should have been a celebrated play, an example of the energy it takes to give your all — in this instance, beyond the point of physically enduring that singular effort.

Instead, it will be remembered for a horrific scene, overshadowing all that was given in bringing a fantastic game to that final, decisive instance. And that’s a shame. A shame because of the price paid by one young talented man; a shame because the painful end will overshadow the means it took to get to that moment.

 

Biggest online reads are accident and crime scene photos.

 

Totally agree. Photo needs to run. Headline writer blew it.

 

Agreed. Photo isn't even that graphic. It was the biggest play of the game. But the headline was some weak sauce.

 

Sigh.

http://deadspin.com/ole-misss-athletic-director-is-a-smarmy-fuck-1655423167

Quite simply and most disappointing, you showed no signs of remorse for the incredible lapse of judgment.

 

You know, I've got no problem with the Ole Miss AD taking the newspaper to task. So what if he's wrong, rambling or off base in his thinking. That's not the point he's making here.

I mean, heck, fans generally hate the media and I'm sure Ole Miss fans generally hate the Opelika-Auburn News now. What this AD is doing is securing the appreciation and support of the Ole Miss fan base. So he shoots off an email and blasts the Auburn paper. Big deal. I'm sure the Ole Miss folks love it.

Back before the Internet came along, this is the type of thing that made newspapers awesome. Even now, once in a while, it still does, too.

It's just so few and far between times that the impact is miniscule and only lasts for a day or two as people move on to pictures of what their friends are having for dinner on facebook.

 

Wonder how many people took ESPN to task for replaying it? I'd bet the Ole Miss AD didn't.

 

That was my question when this thing blew up.

 

Love the screen name Calvin. My all-time favorite.

 

Thanks, Doc! Mine too. The comic, I mean.

 

Unless they've changed something, isn't that paper done in Hickory, N.C.? That editorial made it sound like it was happening in house.

 

Doesn't this come down to the idea of photographer as photojournalist?

That's something I believe to be the case (and I'm a writer), but often have a feeling editors at our paper (and many others) see photography simply as "art" or illustration and not necessarily as journalism or part of storytelling.

Due to deadlines, the focus on getting photo galleries online, rushing off to other assignments, the opportunities for photographers (at smaller papers, anyway) to stick around and get THE MOMENT, especially in sports seems to be a rarity. And here was one of those moments. It was the story of the game. This photog got it, and the editors recognized that and used it.

I'm sure the paper could have run a big picture of Auburn players celebrating at the end, and it would have been just fine. But this wasn't sensationalism. It was the story.

But I'm also a believer that the entire process, including headlines (which wasn't good in this case) and design and presentation are part of the storytelling process, and in newspapers' fight to be relevant nowadays, we're shooting our own feet every time we scrimp on photography (as our paper does) and send pages to be designed hundreds of miles away at hubs (as we do) where there is little understanding of a story's importance and certainly no institutional memory to guide the presentation.

I go on that little rant because here was the exception. Again, not a great headline, but decisions were made to tell the story in photography and design. (By the way, was the story any good?)