Athletic, Axios talking merger?

Yes, as well as other "star reporters." But with The Athletic acquisition, you're bringing in a ton of people making just as much.

 

This has nothing to do with any merger but scuttlebutt in the business holds that The Athletic is not a happy place to work for many writers, especially the younger ones. They are all judged on their numbers, i.e. clicks or subscriptions or whatever. If your stuff is not getting read enough in the eyes of the bosses - apparently some cabal in the Bay Area - then you hear about it. Some of the "layoffs" in the last couple of years were directly because the bosses decided at least two experienced writers (there may be more but these were the ones my friend knew about directly) weren't drawing enough eyeballs. In a couple of other cases, experienced reporters were put on probation because of their numbers. They managed to survive but remain in fear. A few of the younger reporters have confided in their older colleagues that the constant threat of probation or dismissal causes sleepless nights and much anxiety. So The Athletic is not the journalistic Shangri La it appears, at least if you're not a star.

 

I don't know if the number of comments is a gauge (I'm sure there are other analytics) but some teams just don't have fanbase. A secondary story on the Maple Leafs will get a hundred or more comments, while a more significant story on the Ducks might get 7.
As I posted yesterday, they haven't covered the Angels for 3 weeks and I have seen no ads for an Angels writer. As Songbird pointed out, this is a team that has modern-day versions of Mickey Mantle and Babe Ruth. In a normal year, it would draw 3 million fans.

 

So don’t write about the quality of the hotdogs in the Montreal press box then? I mean what are the writers supposed to be judged by? This isn’t a vanity pet project. Give the readers what they want, not what you want to write about to impress all your online writer buddies

 

Sounds like the academia mantra: Publish or Perish.
My question: If that’s the metric, might you be beholden to the success of the team you’re covering? I’m a subscriber, but my team sucks. I’m not reading as much now as I would if they were decent. (I’ll read more often if and when they get good again.)

 

I will never tire of the Montreal press box hotdogs comment. It makes me laugh every time.

 

If I was paying someone above top of market for their position to drive X amount of subscriptions, and six months in they weren’t delivering on that, yeah I’d be disappointed too. You want big bucks, they want a pound of your flesh. In any industry.

 

Have there been other stories on The Athletic akin to the one on hot dogs in the Montreal press box?

 

Every bloated "oral history." Write a story instead of stringing together a lot of quotes and bragging about your 3,000-word piece.

 

They try just as hard as the teams that have writers.

 

Those oral histories often do better in terms of traffic and engagement than traditional stories.

 

Newspapers stealing talent from The Athletic: