While recapping the Nuggets loss to the Suns last week – a game I attended in person – I watched several injured Nuggets duke it out against the Suns while Nuggets superstar small forward Carmelo Anthony sat out his sixth consecutive game as the result of an ankle sprain, even though both he and his head coach had indicated that Melo would likely play before tipoff. In fact, the Suns game was the third game in a row before which Melo and his coach indicated he would probably play, but didn’t.
During and after that game a number of fans, me included, were grumbling about Melo’s absence. I mean, he said he would probably play. His coach said he would probably play. And here the team’s other and much older superstar, Chauncey Billups, was playing on a bad ankle himself. And thus, we started discussing Melo’s absence altogether with questions like: "Is he not playing because he’s only 80% and doesn’t want his scoring average going down?" "Does he think by playing it will hurt his MVP chances?" "Is he just saving himself for the marquee games coming up, including the All-Star Game?" In sum, we were questioning Melo’s toughness. That’s what fans do.
In my recap of that game, I attempted to capture the tone among the fans from the game and openly questioned Melo’s toughness, complete with a clearly written caveat that I’m not in the Nuggets locker room, don’t talk to the training staff and it’s not my body being questioned.
In response, a number of my most loyal readers all but revolted against me. In the comments, one reader said I was "speculating, not reporting." Another said "this is irresponsible journalism." And another called my questioning of Melo’s toughness "an unsupported, frivolous claim."
And you know what? They were all 100% correct.
The only catch is, I’m not journalist, don’t pretend to be and don’t really want to be. And this brings me to what I refer to as the "Blogger’s Dilemma."
With more and more sports bloggers – or fans-as-columnists, if you will – being granted access to their favorite teams in the form of one-time press passes, season-long credentials and exclusive interviews (like the one I conducted with Nuggets head coach George Karl), the lines are blurring between what it means to be a blogger versus what it means to be a journalist. And I’m concerned that our attempt to become journalists compromises our ability to be good bloggers. That’s the Blogger’s Dilemma, and I suspect every writer and editor at SB Nation is wrestling with this right now as I am.
As a fan, I can question Carmelo Anthony’s toughness if I feel the signs add up saying so. As a journalist, I can only question Melo’s toughness if I know for a fact that he’s able to play, but is electing not to by confirming the story with multiple sources close to the team or in that locker room.
The catch with access, of course, is that you have to be fair and balanced (and not the Fox News version of "fair and balanced") at all times, which often comes across as being soft and lacking a firm point of view. And it’s that perceived softness – fair or not – from many of our nation’s sports journalists is what turned fans in droves towards sports blogs in the first place. What makes sites like Denver Stiffs immensely popular is that we have no filter, no reservations and can make bold proclamations from our cheap seats view (actually, if you knew how much I pay for Nuggets season tickets, they’re anything but cheap). In the very recent past, our success or failure didn’t depend on our access, but rather our point of view and ability to articulate that point of view in a refreshing, entertaining and, perhaps most importantly, relatable fashion. After all, when was the last time your local tenured sports journalist purchased a game ticket?
Well aware of this Blogger’s Dilemma, in November of last year SB Nation founder and editor-in-chief Tyler Bleszinski sent around a group email to all the SB Nation community editors with the subject line stating: "What would you like me to call you?" The gist of Tyler’s email was that we should no longer label ourselves as "bloggers," as that moniker has a negative connotation with regards to getting press credentials from teams and leagues, but instead we should label ourselves as "editors" or "writers." From a strategic standpoint, I’m in agreement with Tyler here, although I’m not convinced that being labeled a blogger, again really a fan-as-columnist, is such a bad thing. And thus it was at that point I decided not to call myself "writer" nor "editor" nor "blogger," but instead have opted for "fan advocate". Because at the end of the day, that’s what many of us are. We advocate on behalf of the average sports fan whose hard-earned money should be returned with an earnest effort on the hardwood, field, diamond, rink, inside the locker room and coaches’ quarters and all the way up to the owner’s office. Lest we forget that without our dollars and support, there are no multimillion dollar sports franchises.
(On a side note, when Denver Stiffs recently got some ink in the Denver Post and I was referred to – as always – as a "blogger", I wrote the columnist requesting I be labeled as a "fan advocate" in the future. He emailed me back with a tongue-in-cheek response: "You can be a ‘fan advocate’ if I can be a ‘truth seeker’". Touché, I suppose.)
In hindsight, the way I went about questioning Melo’s injury in my game recap last week was inarticulate at best (borrowing a page from President Obama’s "cover your ass" playbook) and somewhat irresponsible at worst. With a sensitive topic like a player’s health being involved, I shouldn’t have posed an argument but rather a question that left the issue of Melo’s toughness open for the readers to debate, just as the fans at Pepsi Center were debating it. But even if I really believed that Melo was sitting out games to keep his scoring title in-tact, shouldn’t I have been able to say so? Or have we at SB Nation and elsewhere in the sports blogosphere crossed the line into real journalism so much that questioning a player’s toughness is no longer on the table unless we have hard facts to back it up?
I’ve always looked at writing Denver Stiffs and engaging with our amazingly passionate community like a conversation/debate you have at a sports bar with your friends and fellow fans. I’ve never pretended to be a deliverer of facts or breaking news.
The problem, however (and it’s a good problem to have, frankly), is that like many of my colleagues at SB Nation I’m looked upon by my community to deliver information in addition to opining on it. In other words, I’m hardly a normal fan. A normal fan doesn’t get asked his opinion on local sports talk radio with regularity. A normal fan doesn’t get to have an exclusive interview with the head coach he once wanted fired. A normal fan doesn’t get to schmooze with team executives and the mainstream media guys who cover the team after games. You know, like actual journalists do. Heck, most normal fans aren’t even season ticket holders (unfortunately due to professional teams pricing true fans out of their arenas), which grants you an additional morsel of respect with the organization because you can always say to a player, coach or team executive: "Hey, give me five minutes…I pay your salary." (And make no mistake about it, I’ve said that many times and it never gets old!)
The Blogger’s Dilemma has been on my mind all season as I’ve been trying to get Denver Stiffs credentialed since training camp. You’d think that a site representing over a full Pepsi Center’s worth of Nuggets fans that gets an uncountable number of page views a month would get a seat at the press table for one of the more under-covered teams in the NBA. You’d think. But the Nuggets have been stingy about handing them over and perhaps with some justification given that I still brand players, coaches and executives as "Stiffs" when they don’t do their jobs. Jobs my readers and I help pay for.
Which begs the question: are credentials even worth it if sports bloggers have to soften our stances in order to procure them? I for one certainly won’t sellout my site’s principles just to get a press badge and be another mouthpiece for my favorite team.
After all, I’m not a journalist. I’m a fan advocate.
Comments
Last time I checked...
The SB in SB Nation stood for Sports Blog, correct? What is it that SB Nation wants to be? On the banner (above) it says ‘Sports News and Fan Opinion powered by 239 Sports Blogs’.
You reported the news & you reported your opinion. Tyler [Bleszinski] shouldn’t have asked you what you wanted to be called. He should have told you what you are. Bloggers. Do you work for the NY Times, Sports Illustrated, Sports Digest, Yahoo Sports or any other entity that purports to be a news delivery organization? No. You work for a blog.
In my humble opinion, SB Nation should be consumed as an OP-ED on all things sports. Nothing more. Stop taking yourself “so” seriously and keep doing what you guys (and gals) have been doing. Providing informational news on the latest happenings in sports and also providing a venue in which people like me, the general fan can spew forth our ideas and opine as we see fit.
Humbly yours,
Cafe Con Leche
by Cafe Con Leche on Feb 10, 2010 5:49 PM EST reply actions
What makes Yahoo Sports more of a "news delivery organization"?
I blog at Ridiculous Upside. I know you'll love it.
by Scott Schroeder on Feb 10, 2010 7:39 PM EST up reply actions
Purports to be
You’ll notice I used the word “purports” in my comment on news organizations reporting information.
Secondly, the banner for the sports section on Yahoo says: “Yahoo Sports”, not Yahoo Sports Blog. Semantics? Perhaps. But if a web site calls itself a blog, why should I, other bloggers or died in the wool journalists consider it or the people contributing to it (the blog) other than “bloggers”?
by Cafe Con Leche on Feb 10, 2010 7:55 PM EST up reply actions
i am both
I write on sb nation, but also cover some Utah Jazz games for a sports radio station. I feel a reporter/journalist can speculate if a player is hurt just as much as a blogger can because even with press credentials that does not mean full access to talk to trainers or injured players what is going on.
I went through speculation last year with Carlos Boozer about if he was really injured as did the on air hosts
Mountain West Connection
by Jeremy Mauss on Feb 10, 2010 6:41 PM EST via mobile reply actions
Noted
I think the person (reporter / blogger / journalist) does himself / herself a favor if he states his / her opinion in the form of a question as opposed to a straight opinion. This was stated earlier in the original post. Mr. Feinstein does recognize the difference between professional journalist and [professional] blogger. (Wow…Blogging ‘has’ become a profession, no?).
I digress…
Perhaps some bloggers are seeking approval from the main stream for what they, the bloggers are posting. Why? If the blogger provides factual reporting via receipt of factual information from quote / unquote “real news outlets” AND has first hand knowledge of information and can back it up with sources, then the bloggers work will stand on its own merit and will be recognized as such.
A blog is meant to provide for and allow ‘commentary’ or ‘news’. Sometimes both.
SB Nation is a wonderful recipe for fans of all stripes to enjoy and digest darn good sports reporting AND opining. We just have to be careful about the ‘grains of salt’ in the dish.
by Cafe Con Leche on Feb 10, 2010 8:08 PM EST up reply actions
i am both
I write on sb nation, but also cover some Utah Jazz games for a sports radio station. I feel a reporter/journalist can speculate if a player is hurt just as much as a blogger can because even with press credentials that does not mean full access to talk to trainers or injured players what is going on.
I went through speculation last year with Carlos Boozer about if he was really injured as did the on air hosts
Mountain West Connection
by Jeremy Mauss on Feb 10, 2010 6:50 PM EST via mobile reply actions
Blogger’s Dilemma
You’ve presented so many valid points here in your article. Ones I have been wrestling with myself. And the more I read other’s thoughts and reasonings I have come to realize…. I am so screwed.
I am not a journalist either. Nor a reporter. I’m a “writer,” and a “story teller.” I do have access, therefore I write about what I SEE and HEAR, but it is woven with what I feel and think. But you now have me so concerned that I just wrote that I want NY Islander Sean Bergenheim to get his eyes checked because he hasn’t been able to hit the broad side of a barn. Was that irresponsible of me?
Guess someone will tell me.
www.7thwoman.blogspot.com Updated almost as often as PointBlank, but not quite.
by 7th Woman on Feb 10, 2010 8:30 PM EST reply actions
Blogging is displacing journalism
And as such bloggers are going to get more access and more responsibility to be sensitive with what they report, just like old fashioned reporters. They will have legal concerns, worries about pissing off advertisers and the ever tiring juggling act of keeping their sources happy while still delivering to their audience.
I think it was because of Andrew’s access that us readers at Denver Stiffs were so quick to take offense to his speculation, or at least the tone of it. Were it uttered by someone in the comments section, it wouldn’t have been such a big deal.
Anyway, as I already said: I’m a big fan of Denver Stiffs and the work Nate and Andrew are doing there.
Member: 10-man rotation for deep playoff push advocacy group
by Fly Agaric on Feb 10, 2010 10:08 PM EST reply actions
It's a really interesting article
And you’ve raised some good points here. Personally, I’d just assume not have access to the people we’re covering. It’s more fun, and it’s what distinguishes us from the competition, and other journalists. If bloggers start acting like journalists, ultimately, we’ll just be bad imitations of journaslists—we don’t have the money to travel to road games, we don’t have a large infrastructure designed to edit our work and fact-check for us, and we generally just operate differently that someone at the local paper.
And that’s a good thing. Why do we need credentials? So we can get monosyllabic answers out of our favorite athletes? I think it’s a lot more fun to view these stars as the fans do, and revel in their every success and failure without the mitigating factor of knowing whether a guy’s a jackass, a nice guy, or a complete moron. It’s more fun to speculate on those things, too.
I could go on, but again, I think it’s just a personal thing. Some people want access and enjoy that aspect of their blog’s influence, and others, like me, think it ultimately winds up detracting from the influence we have.
by Andrew Sharp on Feb 10, 2010 11:22 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
I was right there with you
for several year…right up until I got access
I think it can be a bit of a false choice that Andrew F raises between being critical and a fan advocate and having access.
Of course, all teams are different so we have to be careful not to generalize but I know that having access has greatly informed my opinion on far too many topics to begin to list here.
It comes with some additional responsibilities around behaving professionally in certain environments but it was never (for me) come with limitations on what I say or ever how I say it.
Smart teams understand that any fan discussion is good discussion and that fans will be critical and speculate about the team with or without their participation. The more then can help provide insight the greater chance the team has of getting a fair hearing in the court of fan opinion.
Obviously, not all teams see it this way and some want to try and tightly control their message but that’s a losing proposition in the long run.
I think (I hope) that our fans are better served by getting opinion and analysis that is informed and to me that is the distinction we can provide when we do have access.
The beat writers do a great job w/ the facts and some also do very well with the opinion also but most teams have plenty of room for more coverage so we can provide fans the opportunity to learn more about aspects of their teams that go uncovered.
Instead of just assuming the coach is a moron for not playing some bench guy in a certain situation and going on a rant about it, now we can use our access to ask questions about that decision.
We can present the coaches response in the interest of both being fair and providing depth beyond speculation but than we can also provide our own opinion on top of that. Agree or disagree.
Perhaps I am lucky, but I’ve never once had someone from the Suns question or even comment about a negative opinion I’ve expressed and I’ve done my fair share of that when it’s been warranted.
Blogging Suns Basketball . twitter: @sethpo
by Seth Pollack on Feb 11, 2010 12:38 PM EST up reply actions
The issues you raised here are applicable to political blogs too
Huffington Post for example really had a scoop by providing compilation of twitter feeds from Iranians over the summer during their post-election unrest and scooping all the network news for what was going on in the streets. Obama even calls on them at a press conference.
In the meantime, they post their rah-rah emotional political screeds, and lose their journalistic legitimacy. So, are they journalists or bloggers?
by margabelle on Feb 11, 2010 12:18 AM EST reply actions
Thanks for writing this
As someone who just picked up on Blogging five or six months ago the points delivered in both the article and the comments are very helpful. I started blogging about UB sports (http://bull-run.blogspot.com/) because nobody else was doing it and I am trying to grow beyond what I see on other blogs into something that is ‘my own’.
I was wondering what people here consider the difference between a ‘booster’ and a fan advocate. With the NCAA and Universities starting to crack down on face book groups and bloggers as ‘boosters’ where is the line?
by Tim Riordan on Feb 11, 2010 3:20 AM EST reply actions
The site address is
http://bull-run.blogspot.com/
the comment automatically put the parentheses as part of the link, sorry.
by Tim Riordan on Feb 11, 2010 3:24 AM EST up reply actions
What is wrong and what is right with new media and old media
It is clear from TV news ratings that people have made some clear choices, they are fine with people reporting and commenting on the news if they are honest about their opinions. What they are feed up with is news people who only report things they agree with and claim to call it news.
Having an opinion isn’t wrong it is what the blogosphere is all about, being passionate enough about something that you would spend hour after hour writing about, without financial reward(or very limited at best). It is funny because I just wrote about this issue and how I am not even going to try to get credentials from US Soccer for the US vs. Mexico women’s soccer match in March. How they seem to love people who simply quote facts and stats and frown upon people who actually might question their motives or performance. I would rather cover that event from the stands and have the freedom to say what I want, rather than have to play “nice” and get on the sidelines or in the press box.
by denz on Feb 11, 2010 11:24 AM EST reply actions
If you're a "fan advocate" then I'm a "snark delivery system."
I can’t believe I’m saying this, but I think Andy Feinstein is trying to be too politically correct.
If you look political blogs that also report news, like talkingpointsmemo.com they often call themselves blogger/reporters or editors.
You report news. You also opinionate. Blogger is losing its status as fringe opinion medium. Maybe all you need to be legitimate is to have the reporters quote you as “respected blogger” so that the unwashed masses can take you seriously. But shunning the medium and coming up with a politically correct term ain’t the answer.
by Advodude on Feb 11, 2010 12:18 PM EST reply actions
I went through this dilemma last weekend.
Because of the blog, through a school’s SID I got a media credential to a college hoops game. My problem was that as an alumni of the visiting school, it is one of the few opportunities a year I have to see my alma matter play. Usually for these games I get decked out in school colors (no face painting, but that’s only because of the stigma Seinfeld gave it) and let those sitting around me know who I am rooting for
But because I was now "press" I had to wear unassuming colors and had to tone down my cheering. Admittedly it sucked.
Next year I will fork over the $10 for seats so I can scream my to my heart’s content.
www.Big12Hoops.com
Follow on Twitter
by Evan Pfaff on Feb 11, 2010 12:35 PM EST reply actions
What about Opinion Editorialist?
Basically Blogs are serving as OP-Ed pages that are not owned by major media?
Like major Op-Ed contributors many bloggers skirt the line between ‘reporter’ and ‘windbag’ (I lean more towards the windbag side of things). I think this designation pretty much captures a lot of what I see here on SB nation; informed, strong, usually fair criticism.
by Tim Riordan on Feb 11, 2010 1:53 PM EST reply actions
IMO... it converges and then is based on influence & position
The distinction between blogger and journalist will continue to blur until the lines of separation disappear. Newspapers and magazines already allow user comments as they’ve realized this increases reader engagement and page views. So… the technical separation will disappear IMO. It’s possible that the distinction will be whether the author writes only online or also in print, but the folding of several offline publications in 2009 makes that difficult as well.
My sense, but time will tell, is that bloggers and journalists will converge and press credentials will be awarded to the influence that the authors wield (based on their audience’s size) and whether the team feels that overall the author’s contribution to and position regarding the team or event is positive.
Following the Chiefs more than I should be between late nights at a social networking software start up.
by austinchief on Feb 11, 2010 6:29 PM EST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed