The Lost Art of Sports Journalism

[cowboyjoe]

don't think anyones having a go at what is posted on here, certainly i appreciate that you post up all sorts of random stuff. often i pick up stuff that i wouldn't otherwise have spotted as i'm in scotland so don't get to see what the local media is saying.
what passes for journalism in the gutter press though is a joke

thanks

 

[cowboyjoe]

One more time I wanted to post this clip of writing by Blackie Sherrod because it paints such a magnificent picture. I can see this as I read it. The part about staring unseeingly at the horizon rings so true.

"Nearly as I can remember, Dorothy Lamour was not there. But she certainly would not have been out of place, with a red print sarong and a white hibiscus blossom in her flowing dark tresses. She could have padded barefoot through the lush grass carpet under the rusty old palms, stepped around the fallen coconuts, so long on the ground that they had taken root in the tropical lushness and sent fresh young green shoots through the rotting husks. She could have emerged from the shadows onto the narrow beach, a clean, curving blend of white and beige, with hard coral crests on the jutting flanks.

The Caribbean waters, interrupted by occasional long furl of whitecap, were blue as a baby's eyes. On the horizon, there was a dramatic break to a pale sky. The only signal of man was a sort of primitive umbrella, a thatched bowl atop an upright pole. Underneath, in a lawn chair embedded in sand, was a muscular man in flowery trunks, head bent in hypnotic fascination on an object in his lap. Occasionally, the man would lift his eyes and stare unseeingly at the horizon, then bend again in study.

Dorothy Lamour was missing all right, but had she paraded the beach in slinky seduction, she wouldn't have drawn a flick of notice. The man was Tom Landry of, oh, an eon past, and the object in his lap was a thick, looseleaf binder. It was a Dallas Cowboys' playbook."

Personally to me, I always hated that type of writing. I am not bashing the guy, but thats not my type of writing that i like. To me he goes on with too many big wordy words. I like things plain and simple so i can get to the heart of the manner.

 

[goliadmike]

One more time I wanted to post this clip of writing by Blackie Sherrod because it paints such a magnificent picture. I can see this as I read it. The part about staring unseeingly at the horizon rings so true.

"Nearly as I can remember, Dorothy Lamour was not there. But she certainly would not have been out of place, with a red print sarong and a white hibiscus blossom in her flowing dark tresses. She could have padded barefoot through the lush grass carpet under the rusty old palms, stepped around the fallen coconuts, so long on the ground that they had taken root in the tropical lushness and sent fresh young green shoots through the rotting husks. She could have emerged from the shadows onto the narrow beach, a clean, curving blend of white and beige, with hard coral crests on the jutting flanks.


The Caribbean waters, interrupted by occasional long furl of whitecap, were blue as a baby's eyes. On the horizon, there was a dramatic break to a pale sky. The only signal of man was a sort of primitive umbrella, a thatched bowl atop an upright pole. Underneath, in a lawn chair embedded in sand, was a muscular man in flowery trunks, head bent in hypnotic fascination on an object in his lap. Occasionally, the man would lift his eyes and stare unseeingly at the horizon, then bend again in study.

Dorothy Lamour was missing all right, but had she paraded the beach in slinky seduction, she wouldn't have drawn a flick of notice. The man was Tom Landry of, oh, an eon past, and the object in his lap was a thick, looseleaf binder. It was a Dallas Cowboys' playbook."

Where did you find that, Hos? And did LBOH respond to your email?

 

[goliadmike]

Personally to me, I always hated that type of writing. I am not bashing the guy, but thats not my type of writing that i like. To me he goes on with too many big wordy words. I like things plain and simple so i can get to the heart of the manner.

Let me guess, you're a Hemingway fan.

 

[Chief]

This is a good topic, and one that's close to my heart.

I agree that the writing isn't what it used to be, and I think there are several reasons for that. Times change. This is the quick, information age where some (mostly younger folks) want short, USA TODAY-type stories. Fuzzy makes a very good point -- I think some of these guys got into the field because they love sports, but not necessarily writing. You have to love both.

It seems much of the general public wants or responds to short, quick, controversial blasts, either in the form of a TV report or a blog post. So, many of the "journalists" are moving (or have been moved) into the role of being a modern-day town crier.

I just think there are more and more people in this field who are either 1) lazy, or 2) not talented. In the case of people like Calvin Watkins and Tim McMahon, its both. Also, I think the editors (bosses) are letting their readers down by allowing the writers or reporters to produce crap.

JFE was a pretty good features writer before she decided to become "The Little Ball of Hate," with 100-word hack pieces and podcasts. Skip Bayless (I know he's loathed on here) was a talented columnist before he became a circus act on First Take.

Hos mentioned Blackie Sherrod. My favorite writer/columnist was Jim Murray. Sports Illustrated still has some good writers, such as Gary Smith. I would also recommend Rick Reilly as a columnist.

I've been in the business for 25 years. Hos is right ... it's changed, unfortunately. But if you look hard enough, you'll still find good sports writing. When you do, post it. Respond to it. Let the powers that be know that you appreciate it.

 

[Hostile]

Personally to me, I always hated that type of writing. I am not bashing the guy, but thats not my type of writing that i like. To me he goes on with too many big wordy words. I like things plain and simple so i can get to the heart of the manner.

Thank you for proving my point.

 

[Hostile]

Where did you find that, Hos? And did LBOH respond to your email?

http://www.islandremembered.com/excerpt_1.php

She hasn't yet.

 

[Hostile]

This is a good topic, and one that's close to my heart.

I agree that the writing isn't what it used to be, and I think there are several reasons for that. Times change. This is the quick, information age where some (mostly younger folks) want short, USA TODAY-type stories. Fuzzy makes a very good point -- I think some of these guys got into the field because they love sports, but not necessarily writing. You have to love both.

It seems much of the general public wants or responds to short, quick, controversial blasts, either in the form of a TV report or a blog post. So, many of the "journalists" are moving (or have been moved) into the role of being a modern-day town crier.

I just think there are more and more people in this field who are either 1) lazy, or 2) not talented. In the case of people like Calvin Watkins and Tim McMahon, its both. Also, I think the editors (bosses) are letting their readers down by allowing the writers or reporters to produce crap.

JFE was a pretty good features writer before she decided to become "The Little Ball of Hate," with 100-word hack pieces and podcasts. Skip Bayless (I know he's loathed on here) was a talented columnist before he became a circus act on First Take.

Hos mentioned Blackie Sherrod. My favorite writer/columnist was Jim Murray. Sports Illustrated still has some good writers, such as Gary Smith. I would also recommend Rick Reilly as a columnist.

I've been in the business for 25 years. Hos is right ... it's changed, unfortunately. But if you look hard enough, you'll still find good sports writing. When you do, post it. Respond to it. Let the powers that be know that you appreciate it.

Best advice in this thread. The only way it will change is if we demand it. We have to be heard.

 

[Chief]

There are a lot of sports reporters out there, but fewer and fewer sports writers.

 

[goliadmike]

http://www.islandremembered.com/excerpt_1.php

She hasn't yet.

Thanks Hos.

 

[Sonny#9]

I refuse to think that top writing would not be read and appreciated. I do not think we have fallen THAT far into the black hole.

Unfortunately, I realized how dumb the general populace was the day I read this: http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jun/15/sports/sp-profootballtalk.com15

The biggest hack alive today, bought by one of the big four networks...

 

[Zaxor]

That's pretty much was I as saying in a response earlier, that the media outlets have a particular demographic they are targeting and this is what they want. I would venture a guess that most journalists wouldn't take the stand that you did, they would do what was best for their career and give the bosses what they want.

I saw this even in business when I worked for IBM. Management didn't want the details just a picture and a few bullet points and move on. I call it "Comic Book Management", give them a picture/graph/chart and a couple blurbs and then on to the next slide. It is pervasive in all strata of society these days and frankly will only get worse.

Agreed... It may have to do with time....as there is now so much information available it becomes impossible to absorb it all...The time it would take to read a well written article just may not be in the time budget.

thou it is my preferance to have it available to me.

 

[THUMPER]

Personally to me, I always hated that type of writing. I am not bashing the guy, but thats not my type of writing that i like. To me he goes on with too many big wordy words. I like things plain and simple so i can get to the heart of the manner.

I also am not a fan of that type of flowery prose but I can appreciate the talent it takes to write like that. Everything is a metaphor with that style of writing but if you don't know the reference then you miss the point. Not many today know who Dorothy Lamour was let alone have ever seen her in a movie or know why she would be the girl in the flower dress. It would be like referring to a fruit headress and Carmen Miranda. Most folks today would go, "huh?" but 40 years ago everyone would know what you were talking about.

I don't like that particular style of writing and prefer something a lot less wordy but that still tells the story.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Werder is a hack.

He does write articles. In fact, the entire Owens situation last year took part because it was a written article by Mr. Hair Piece on ESPN.com. He's written several articles this year in regards to Roy and Wade.

Plus, I don't think you need to write articles to be a hack. In the comedy world, the word 'hack' is often used to describe comedians that fail to use original thought and use tired, cheesy and uninspired jokes to 'pop' the crowd. Gallagher is considered a hack because it takes no real imagination, creativity and talent to smash watermelons to get a reaction out of the crowd.

If you want to laugh at that stuff, that's more than your perogative. But, it's still 'hack' comedy, nonetheless.

With somebody like Mr. Hair Piece, it's obvious that he's trying to find anything negative about the team. His basic M.O. is to write something negative, quote an 'anonymous source' and when it's later proven to be flat out wrong...he then claims 'well, that's what my anonymous source told me' and he believes that excuses him for writing an inaccurate article.

Just a case of a reporter 'smashing watermelons' to get a reaction.

The Miles Austin case was quite bad. Mr. Hair Piece told the world that an anonymous source told him that Miles would not be productive as a starter because he would be playing the #2 WR position and wouldn't be getting any of the big plays. That notion is ridiculous on many accounts, particularly the fact that all NFL teams will switch the types of routes they have their WR's run in order to throw opponents off. But, there was Mr. Hair Piece excusing himself saying 'a well respected anonymous source told me that.'

You see the same thing from the other reporters as well, particularly most of the local Dallas media gang. Cheap, easy tactics that do not take any talent or inspiration to come up with just so they could 'pop' the audience.

Unfortunately, this has become the norm and I think BSPN has a lot to do with it.

Newspapers are dying hard today and if you're a sports writer for a newspaper, your career is dwindling down to looking for a book to write or more likely...getting your face on BSPN which is an outlet that 'smashes watermelons' to get ratings.

So with that, the best way to get on BSPN is to 'smash watermelons' at your paper. It also doesn't help that the Dallas editors seem to encourage it as well.

Unfortunately, we all get hit with the watermelon debris whether we like it or not.

My signature describes EXACTLY what most of the local media is about. That's great if you're in professional wrestling and want to try a new gimmick in a new territory, but this is professional journalism and you would think there would be some integrity in that profession.






YAKUZA

 

[daschoo]

I also am not a fan of that type of flowery prose but I can appreciate the talent it takes to write like that. Everything is a metaphor with that style of writing but if you don't know the reference then you miss the point. Not many today know who Dorothy Lamour was let alone have ever seen her in a movie or know why she would be the girl in the flower dress. It would be like referring to a fruit headress and Carmen Miranda. Most folks today would go, "huh?" but 40 years ago everyone would know what you were talking about.

I don't like that particular style of writing and prefer something a lot less wordy but that still tells the story.

time and a place really. that style of writing is great for getting across the intensity and concentration of the man and making you almost feel like you were there but a cynic might accuse him of padding. he's basically taken 250 words to say that landry is focused even when he's on holiday.
i personally thought it was a great piece of writing but can you imagine reading a match report written in the same style?

 

[THUMPER]

With somebody like Mr. Hair Piece, it's obvious that he's trying to find anything negative about the team. His basic M.O. is to write something negative, quote an 'anonymous source' and when it's later proven to be flat out wrong...he then claims 'well, that's what my anonymous source told me' and he believes that excuses him for writing an inaccurate article.

Great stuff YR!

Where did the media get the idea that they somehow have a Constitutional right to keep their "sources" anonymous? I've read the U.S Constitution and the Bill of Rights many times and cannot find anywhere this supposed "right" they hold so sacred.

There is a great 80s movie called "Absence of Malice" with Paul Newman and Sally Field where Wilford "Diabeetus" Brimley points out to Field that in the dirt piece she wrote on Newman her sources are NOT protected by law and she can in fact be jailed for refusing to give them up.

 

[Kilyin]

Personally to me, I always hated that type of writing. I am not bashing the guy, but thats not my type of writing that i like. To me he goes on with too many big wordy words. I like things plain and simple so i can get to the heart of the manner.

Sherrod knew how to use words in the proper context for the purpose of engrossing the reader, contrary to a certain person in this thread who uses 'big words' unnecessarily in an attempt to be obtuse. That reeks of smarminess and I've never had much use for people like that.

 

[TheSkaven]

I remember a few years ago someone wrote to one of the local media asking them why they did not do some play by play or give more detailed reports during training camp. The response from the media member was along the lines of ...the average fan does not want that much detail.

Maybe that reporter was right

I don't believe that the reporter was right. All one needs to do is witness how many fans come out to training camp each year. That's right, training camp, where they sit in the bleachers and watch football players practice.

And how many of us would love to be there and take in every detail, but can't be there?

It feels to me like there is a real market for more in-depth journalism. I could be wrong.

Incidentally, I a reminiscing back now to when Chad Peters used to post here and hang with us in the chat rooms on draft day and during training camp. Those were great times...

 

[tyke1doe]

Few things are what they used to be in this country. Welcome to ... progress.

 

[tyke1doe]

I don't believe that the reporter was right. All one needs to do is witness how many fans come out to training camp each year. That's right, training camp, where they sit in the bleachers and watch football players practice.

And how many of us would love to be there and take in every detail, but can't be there?

It feels to me like there is a real market for more in-depth journalism. I could be wrong.

Incidentally, I a reminiscing back now to when Chad Peters used to post here and hang with us in the chat rooms on draft day and during training camp. Those were great times...

Those people who come to camp don't represent the thousands who don't come to camp, aren't interested in every minute detail about the Cowboys like your diehard fans.

If there were a market for play by play, detailed story do you honest believe the press/media wouldn't give the public what it craved?