Inquirer Beat Guy to MLB.com ?

Inquirer has already received permission to hire from the outside. And to address something you mentioned earlier, I'm not sure why they'd get a hire if a combination of the two papers was imminent.

 

If the hire is made, then I've lost my house.
As for the combination of the two papers, it appears to be the next course to follow.
Not saying that it's going to happen. If it does, I won't be surprised.

 

Because mlb.com does most of what newspapers do -- game stories, features, news stories, notebooks. Sure, on controversial stories, mlb.com follows the news rather than breaks it. But, really, how small is the percentage of stories that are controversial?

Call a player in the offseason to check on his contract, or his rehabilitation? A guy like Zolecki will. A newbie wouldn't even think to have asked the player for his number.

 

I beg to differ on that newbie part. Any reporter, be it covering MLB or preps, should know how to get in touch with a player or team representative. As far as getting player phone numbers, it depends on the relationship that reporter has with the player. Some are willing to give it up. Other are not.

 

A full year ago, at the APSE judging, the Philly Daily News was making preliminary contacts to hire an assistant sports editor. The sports editor had gotten the OK to make a hire.

Needless to say, no one has been hired.

 

Smasher; MLB.com restrictions = overblown myth.

 

Nope. Completely and totally accurate. Ask anyone who works there.

 

As you know, dickhead, one of my best friends is a mlb.com beat guy. he is well-paid, has an outstanding benefits package and gets very little interference about what he writes.

In other words, youore totally wrong.

 

Some of my good friends are mlb.com beat guys too. They're not well-paid--in fact, their compensation was just cut, no year-end bonus--and all I hear about is stuff they can't do, or stuff they have to tread very lightly around.

Maybe your guy has a better deal b/c of his track record. But he is not the norm.

 

I know several people at mlb.com who are paid very well ($60K plus).

 

I don't know about the full-timers, but I can relate my personal experience as a former frequent freelancer for mlb.com (I have posted this before on another thread discussing this topic).

At one early-season game, I wrote that the home team was booed off the field following a horrendous performance. When the story appeared on the web site, the reference to the boos was gone. In another game story, I wrote something unflattering about a pitcher who had been shelled. Again, the story was softened on the web.

Not long after that, all of the freelancers received an e-mail called "A few notes on MLB.com coverage." It included this line:

Tone

-- We're not the house organ, but we do keep it off the negative slant. Any questions on that, let me know.

 

I remember the "Everybody was a winner" lede after the all-star game that finished in a tie...

That said, with newspapers where they are today, I would work for the team or the team's website in a heartbeat before going back to a job with no security.