1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Quick parent rant

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by MertWindu, Sep 9, 2006.

  1. sartrean

    sartrean Member

    What is a sport?

    I don't think golf is a sport either, and I sure as shit hate writing about it, but I do it because everyone else thinks its a sport. I don't think hunting is a sport, but I get a lot of calls about killing deer and shit. I print the photos of the kids with bloody faces standing over dead Bambi's daddy, I think it sucks, but printing that shit keeps my email inbox low and my phone from ringing.
     
  2. Platyrhynchos

    Platyrhynchos Active Member

    Hunting is NOT a sport.

    It is a way of life where I live, and I partake in as much of it as I can.
     
  3. sartrean

    sartrean Member

    Oh my gosh. Somebody agrees with me.

    From now on, I'll send hunting photos to the lifestyles editor.
     
  4. I am always working on my definition of what is a sport, and it's hard to define. When I ask people to do it, almost every time, a spelling bee fits the definition (and despite what ESPN might say, that's not a sport).
    I'd argue that motor sports are not truly sports, but where else are you going to put them in the paper?
     
  5. Shifty Squid

    Shifty Squid Member

    I've always thought of a sport as the following ...

    1. It has some sort of concrete scoring system, as in you do X, you receive X number of points/runs/whatever. Preferably, especially at sporting events attended by a significant number of fans, this scoring system should be prominently displayed somewhere where the spectators can see it and should be updated as it changes.
    2. It requires the application of multiple physical skills; thinking does not count.
    3. The outcome can never be turned over to a series of observers, be them officials, judges or anyone else, to decide who wins.

    That's always sorta been my definition, and I'm sure others' would differ.

    By my definition, the sports would technically be (by my count) baseball (and softball), football (and rugby, etc.), basketball, tennis (and similar variations), lacrosse, hockey, volleyball, golf ... and there may be a few others.

    Then there are races, a sort of subcategory by my definition, which would include, well, um, all races. That's pretty self-explanatory, I think.

    As has been mentioned, boxing is iffy.
     
  6. Clever username

    Clever username Active Member

    Here, here. Except the thinking part. I like my quarterbacks and shortstops moderately intelligent. Cuts down on the running the wrong way.
     
  7. patchs

    patchs Active Member

    Tell ya this, cheerleading is more of a sport than poker.
     
  8. slappy4428

    slappy4428 Active Member

    While it is more athletic than poker, neither is a sport.
     
  9. Shifty Squid

    Shifty Squid Member

    Of course, it's not to say thinking/intelligence isn't helpful, almost essential, in any sport. It's just to say it doesn't count toward "multiple skills." Otherwise, you've got poker people and chess people attempting to claim "sport" because they use so much brain power, which -- any rational person would agree -- is among the most idiotic things I'll hear during any given day.
     
  10. mannheimadler

    mannheimadler Member

    One of the big debates here is drill team. Some parents complained it wasn't getting covered in sports, so now we do.

    I haven't had to do it (knock on wood), so I don't complain too much. After all, we cover gymnastics.
     
  11. mose

    mose Member

    You don't determine coverage on the basis of "hard work" -- if you did you would predominantly write about wrestlers and triathletes -- or by what some dumbass caller/emailer thinks. You make decisions based on what the bulk of your readership wants to see in the paper. I'm not saying you totally ignore the other stuff -- well, yeah, blow off cheerleading and drill team -- but base the level of your coverage on general interest. Although I'm sure there are such places, I've yet to see a high school soccer team, even the most successful one, draw a bigger crowd than the football team.

    And if somewants to argue the point, fine. Tell whiny parents/fans they are entitled to their opinion. Then add that doesn't mean you're obligated to agree with them.
     
  12. mannheimadler

    mannheimadler Member

    I doubt anybody here is going to argue with you on those points. Quite frankly, we're in this business to sell newspapers. And what sells newspapers better than local football? In most areas, at least, the answer will be nothing.

    But unfortunately, readers don't always understand that. And even some reporters.

    I've worked with some reporters before who are staunch supporters of the "little guy." That's cool — to an extent.

    But when you're going to Podunk Tech baseball and blowing off Hometown High football (which I've actually seen happen numerous times), that's a big mistake. You risk alientating the base of your readership that lives in Hometown to please Podunk Tech and the 25 readers who live in that area. It's just not smart business.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page