Yeah, I know: An actual journalism thread. I expect one reply, a question mark, a Mizzou96 drive-by....and to be shunted by tomorrow way back on the darkest side of the thread ash heap.
But....
It isn't often, these days, that a deep-dive piece makes conversation, even percolates on hot stove a while -- for reasons that have nothing to do with the piece itself. Kent Babb's fine work on Kim Mulkey in the Washington Post should have done that on its own terms; Babb seems to have turned up new info (estranged dad, woeful, interviewed) and gave us a tough-but-fair portrait of a big-time coach just when everyone was wondering what makes her tick. Yet Mulkey's preemptive, lawsuit-threatening carpetbomb -- based on a coddled coach's paranoid idea of what a "hit-piece" is -- teed up expectations stupidly high, with everyone thinking Babb had "the goods" on some sort of scandal. When the piece landed, it was exactly what it should be -- what Babb intended and his bosses expected -- but even journalists who should know better were sniffing, "nothing-burger," and moving on. All the "gets" Babb got were lost in a collective shrug. I can't recall a deep-dive suffering so bizarre a rollout.
Less sensational is what happened to SI's Tom Verducci. Now, I'm sure Verducci isn't sweating this (he's one of the most self-possessed journos ever), but his recent Ohtani blowout is typically good, though worshipful, and hinges on an -- I think -- unprecedented one-on-one interview with a relaxed SO in a New York hotel room. There's lots of detail about Ohtani's family and dog lust. It's not "What Do You Think of Ted Williams Now?" -- the wife is nowhere mentioned, which is odd, and Ohtani says little of interest. But it's a sterling "get" these days, especially for a "print" journo, because expectations for SO have been beaten so low. He doesn't ever say anything to anyone. I can guarantee Verducci''s SI bosses were ecstatic: They got to slap SO on the cover of their preview issue, puff up and think, "Just like the old days: Ain't dead yet!"
That probably was sometime in December-January. Whatever the lead time of SI stories these days, I can guarantee it wasn't the week before the April issue hit the stands. With Verducci and SO in the hotel room lede are SO's "two most trusted friends" -- Ohtani's dog and translator Ippei Mizuhara. Story gets locked, ship hits iceberg: Ippei is fired for maybe stealing millions of SO's money and the gambling tar is now dripping all over baseball's greatest star. Dog's fate unclear. Verducci's get has gotten ridiculous -- through no fault of his own.
Every feature writer -- and there are about what, six left now? -- has suffered Babb and Verducci's fate at some point: The story changes, someone else published first, the subject gets knocked out for the season two days before publication. Whatever: You're forked. But I can't recall it happening with arguably two of the moment's most compelling subjects and two of this cratering industry's -- and this shrinking sub-craft's -- finest talents.
And I'm writing this, I now realize, because it seems like a topic custom-made for a "Journalism topics only" board. Could be wrong.
But....
It isn't often, these days, that a deep-dive piece makes conversation, even percolates on hot stove a while -- for reasons that have nothing to do with the piece itself. Kent Babb's fine work on Kim Mulkey in the Washington Post should have done that on its own terms; Babb seems to have turned up new info (estranged dad, woeful, interviewed) and gave us a tough-but-fair portrait of a big-time coach just when everyone was wondering what makes her tick. Yet Mulkey's preemptive, lawsuit-threatening carpetbomb -- based on a coddled coach's paranoid idea of what a "hit-piece" is -- teed up expectations stupidly high, with everyone thinking Babb had "the goods" on some sort of scandal. When the piece landed, it was exactly what it should be -- what Babb intended and his bosses expected -- but even journalists who should know better were sniffing, "nothing-burger," and moving on. All the "gets" Babb got were lost in a collective shrug. I can't recall a deep-dive suffering so bizarre a rollout.
Less sensational is what happened to SI's Tom Verducci. Now, I'm sure Verducci isn't sweating this (he's one of the most self-possessed journos ever), but his recent Ohtani blowout is typically good, though worshipful, and hinges on an -- I think -- unprecedented one-on-one interview with a relaxed SO in a New York hotel room. There's lots of detail about Ohtani's family and dog lust. It's not "What Do You Think of Ted Williams Now?" -- the wife is nowhere mentioned, which is odd, and Ohtani says little of interest. But it's a sterling "get" these days, especially for a "print" journo, because expectations for SO have been beaten so low. He doesn't ever say anything to anyone. I can guarantee Verducci''s SI bosses were ecstatic: They got to slap SO on the cover of their preview issue, puff up and think, "Just like the old days: Ain't dead yet!"
That probably was sometime in December-January. Whatever the lead time of SI stories these days, I can guarantee it wasn't the week before the April issue hit the stands. With Verducci and SO in the hotel room lede are SO's "two most trusted friends" -- Ohtani's dog and translator Ippei Mizuhara. Story gets locked, ship hits iceberg: Ippei is fired for maybe stealing millions of SO's money and the gambling tar is now dripping all over baseball's greatest star. Dog's fate unclear. Verducci's get has gotten ridiculous -- through no fault of his own.
Every feature writer -- and there are about what, six left now? -- has suffered Babb and Verducci's fate at some point: The story changes, someone else published first, the subject gets knocked out for the season two days before publication. Whatever: You're forked. But I can't recall it happening with arguably two of the moment's most compelling subjects and two of this cratering industry's -- and this shrinking sub-craft's -- finest talents.
And I'm writing this, I now realize, because it seems like a topic custom-made for a "Journalism topics only" board. Could be wrong.
