Grantland so far

I get the sense that a lot of people in the business are rooting for it to fail and that kind of bothers me.

 

Right. Exactly. Why would anyone root against an entity that is employing quality writers to write?

And where's the hyper criticism of Rupert Murdoch's 'The Daily'? I'm hearing crickets chirp on that one.

 

Oh, c'mon, they're hiring people who have no trouble being hired anywhere. If they hire some of the victims of Gannett's 104 rounds of layoffs to write pieces, I'd buy Grantland as a beacon for out-of-work journalists. And I could conversely say, why would you want to give a site that aspires to be better an uncritical free pass when its errors and missteps are too plentiful? Somewhere in between those blanket statements (i.e. people are rooting against Grantland) is the truth, or something close to it

 

I've seen a couple stories from The Daily, but I don't think it has a big readership.

 

I don't think anyone wants it to fail. But there's definitely a sense of irritation and disappointment at the perceived arrogance at Grantland's underlying message of 'we'll do whatever the hell we want and you'll just like it.'

I really hope someone takes charge of the editorial direction, which is to say I hope they actually develop some.

 

No, there are people here, in one form or another, who do want it to fail. That is pretty obvious.

 

There's enough jealousy in the business regarding Simmons' popularity that I definitely think a lot of people want it to fail.

 

A correction to a pissy correction.

http://deadspin.com/5821795/close-reading-did-grantland-rice-misquote-grantland-rices-most-famous-quote

 

Well, I don't want it to fail. I don't know what the point in that would be.

 

Amen. Misery loves company on this board.

 

Nobody's feeling miserable about Grantland, or wants it to fail. As Alma said, why would we want that?

We're not being overly critical of the site, either. We're critiquing it, analyzing it. There is a difference, and we're journalists. That's what we do, hopefully, with regard to everything, especially media-related things.

Nothing we post on here would cause that site to fail. Some of the things that are being discussed could, possibly, do that, I suppose. But nothing we write here could.

 

But, right now, it's a quirky, minor light, filled with writers who specialize in being quirky and minor, people who, if you said <i>give me your fastball</i> wouldn't know how to find the extra four miles per hour because they haven't yet bothered to see if they have it. Some of them have spent a whole career in the niche role of “snappy comeback.”

[/quote]

this part is vague. lapses into a cliched sports metaphor when it should strive for clarity. 'niche role of snappy comeback' needs explanation. not saying this critique is off - just that it ended in a cloud of dust.