• 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!

Passan vs. Ben Verlander: The slap fight you never knew you needed

Back to my point: Do either of these media personalities exist for a customer audience? If, for example, you go to ESPN, are you writing for any one particular group of people outside players, managers and other media? If you're Verlander, what is your audience outside of players?

Huh? Yes, I think that Jeff Passan provides a ton of value to readers and viewers. I'm sure Verlander does to some degree, too.

The idea that media members are faceless bylines disappeared nearly a decade ago. The reason we're talking about this is because media members are more visible now than they've ever been. The most successful sportswriters are the ones who can blend the traditional aspects of the job while also building an authentic persona that enhances coverage.
 
Huh? Yes, I think that Jeff Passan provides a ton of value to readers and viewers. I'm sure Verlander does to some degree, too.

The idea that media members are faceless bylines disappeared nearly a decade ago. The reason we're talking about this is because media members are more visible now than they've ever been. The most successful sportswriters are the ones who can blend the traditional aspects of the job while also building an authentic persona that enhances coverage.

I think both things can be and perhaps are true at once. A ESPN can provide coverage and insight while simultaneously not having to do so to be vital to ESPN. I think ESPN values (as Ben Strauss wrote awhile back) perpetual availability and a good rep among players and front office types.​
 
ESPN is McDonald's. They'll make feints toward quality every so often by hiring Ace Reporter X from a competing outlet, just like McDonald's will offer a "healthy" sandwich from time to time. But ultimately, they only give a shirt about the programs running on time. You're eventually going to be asked to leave if you're an Olbermann, or a Sage Steele or Curt Schilling.
 
ESPN is McDonald's. They'll make feints toward quality every so often by hiring Ace Reporter X from a competing outlet, just like McDonald's will offer a "healthy" sandwich from time to time. But ultimately, they only give a shirt about the programs running on time. You're eventually going to be asked to leave if you're an Olbermann, or a Sage Steele or Curt Schilling.
Curt Schilling was the McRib of the ESPN menu: All sauce, no meat.
 
The idea that writers - including sportswriters - haven't feuded publicly until now, until the advent of social media, is antihistorical nonsense.

If anything, the public feuds have simmered down the last 10 years. But everyone is more public and front-facing than they were in the print era.
 
Yeah, if anything, writers get along better now, probably because of social media and the inside baseball nature of the whole thing. You don't hear very often about people on the same beat going the entire season without talking to one another.
 
Yeah, if anything, writers get along better now, probably because of social media and the inside baseball nature of the whole thing. You don't hear very often about people on the same beat going the entire season without talking to one another.

Yep.

(No one on this thread suggested feuds were new, as far I can tell.)
 

Latest posts

Back
Top