The New Media

Ugh! The gray weather... Will it ever end? I've always entertained the idea of moving north to Toronto, but after the past few winters, I think I'm much more likely to wind up in Palm Springs.

Vince over at Exile in Wrigleyville (part of the MVN blogger network - link at right) did a short but interesting interview for Chicago Sports Review with Sox beat writer for the Daily Herald Scot Gregor, and Cub beat writer for the Tribune, Paul Sullivan.

Before I unload on this one, I think its important to note that I was a member of the Chicago media for a decade, from the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s. Most of that time was spent in the sports department of a variety of radio and tv outlets, which shall remain nameless (I don't want to reveal my true idetity). I interacted with many beat writers over that time, and even called a few my friend, including Brian Hanley, Dave Van Dyke, and Barry Rozner. And I know that being a beat writer is a low-paying, thankless job. That's one reason I got out of the "media" biz.

Sullivan, whom I've never heard of, comes off as a dinosaur with his head in the sand. Check out some of these quotes, with my impressions below:
"Being a baseball beat writer is like being a doctor."
Yes, you are on call 24-hours. I know from experience this is true. But the pay is way less. And beat writing ain't brain surgery.

"I agree that that the Sammy Sosa trade saga was one, long, boring affair, but we had to write constant updates even when there was no real news. "
You HAD to write about it? Why? What could possibly have possessed you? What motivated you? Because some editor told you so? If the writer AND the public aren't interested, how is that news? The media (ie -YOU, Paul Sullivan), MADE it news by your constant reporting of it.

"I never read (blogs). I know some of the other beat writers that read them, but I don't have the time or the desire. Sometimes people will email me a link to a fan site where someone is drilling me for something I wrote. I've learned never to respond. Some of these people are downright nuts. No offense to you, but everyone with a PC and a printer believes they're a writer. That's the worst aspect of the Internet Age -- everyone has something to say and a blog to say it in."
I don't understand why someone in the media would make such a blanket rejection of a new form of information and communication. Sullivan sounds like he's pretty closed minded. Also, PAAAUULL, if I am typing and publishing, like I am right now, guess what - whether you like it or not, that makes me a WRITER! I put fingers to keyboard and I create words (sometimes mispelled) and sentences (sometimes not grammatically correct). Maybe I can't make a living off it, but since when is money a qualifer for good writing? It sounds to me like Sullivan feels just a bit threatened by this new technology and increased competition for his readers' attention. His comment regarding the internet, and his disain of those who use it to express different viewpoints are not consistent with a lil idea we call "freedom of the press". That how it works in America, Paul. People have an opinion, they express it.

"(The internet and blogs) hasn't changed my job at all. I don't pay attention to what's written on the Internet. People can say or write anything when they know they wont have to deal with any of the principals (the players, managers, GMs, etc.). It's easy to trash people when you are anonymous. "
So you walk on eggshells? How does that benefit anyone? You have to pacify your subject to obtain that all important cooperation. What a sad existance.

"I get more annoying e-mails..."
Yeah, I'm sure.

"If you're talking about Bill James and his ilk, no I don't read much of his stuff. "
Agreed. But the angle of the "Bill Jamesians" is a unique one. What's you angle, Mr. Sullivan?

Sullivan worked as an assistant for Mike Royko, but that was 20 years ago, and if his comments are any indication, he's no Royko. Not even close. I've never read Mr. Sullivan, but I doubt anyone out there has a blog devoted to criticzing his writing. Additionally, who needs to read what a beat writer has to say? They're just a part of the marketing machine, the mouthpiece for the team (especially true for Trib reporters and the Cubs). About 99% of the time, player quotes are boring, pointelss, and interchangeable. they don't tell a story, nor reval much of anything. ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.....

Gregor, on the other hand, is smart enough to realize that much of the public is shifting their reading habits consistent with changing technology, and are getting their news from places other than newspapers, or traditional mainstream media - the internet, and blogs, have had an impact on how he does his job. Here are some quotes from him:

Some of the bloggers and fans on message boards know more about baseball and/or their respective team than some of the writers I've run across.

(My internet competition inspires me to) want to write something that jumps out because you can instantly see the reaction.(Traditonal media writers) have to be a lot more thorough and accurate (when writing), because there is a lot of information out there, and people are reading it

I hate getting bogged down in numbers, because you only have so much space.

Personally, I don't read any of the mainstream media, either in paper form, or online. I get my news from the likes of the BBC or Yahoo, and if I'm looking for baseball info, I read blogs - everyday. Reason being is that blogs offer more than a beat writer like Sullivan or Gregor can. They can stretch out, give opinions, analize stats, all without an editor to tell them 'no' , and without space limitations, which can allow the writers to really stretch out.

Funny how this whole issue of writing came up today. Just last night, I was sitting around wondering what happened to Chicago's reputation of producing great, really great, writers. (Maybe the topic was on my mind because of the James Farrell I'm reading.) Bellow, Hemingway, Sandburg, Algren, Farrell, Lardner, Royko...

I'm not that well read, but I have read a number of good things from Chicago writers in the past few years. But the only one that I thought was really good, is Michael Raleigh, who's fine novel In the Castle of the Flynns is fantastic.

If my hit counter is accurate, I had about 1000 reads again this month. Sure its not the Tribune, and I'm no Paul Sullivan, but I thank each and every one of you who've taken time out of their busy day to find some diversion from the daily grind here. During the season, I try to provide information in a clear, concise and occassionally humorous manner, without much opinion. I don't have an editor to censor me (or the benefits of a proofreader), and I can swear if want to, God Damn it!

AL Central preivew is coming. Please check back on wednesday.