Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell.

[JohnFSilver]

So who decides what is actually published under the espn brand? Not the journalists.

Umm. The journalists do. C suite has almost no role in day to day operations. They can come in last second to kill a story, but that comes at a great cost to the leaders credibility.

The day to day, the SVPs stay away.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

Journalists at espn on talent contracts. Corp has no control over them.

They don’t kiss up to c suite, at all. Journalists are so different than normal employees. They are the product. They could care less what management thinks .

I've never heard that point of view from any journalist. They care, some more than others; oftentimes depending on their circumstance.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

Umm. The journalists do. C suite has almost no role in day to day operations. They can come in last second to kill a story, but that comes at a great cost to the leaders credibility.

The day to day, the SVPs stay away.

Sr Editors/Executive Editors decide what is assigned to writers and what is ultimately published. Corporate leadership exerts "guidance" to the Sr Editors/Executive Editors. To say journalists decide what is written is just not accurate.

 

[Buffett10]

I've never heard that point of view from any journalist. They care, some more than others; oftentimes depending on their circumstance.

Did Schefter care when he posted pics of Pierre-Paul’s x-Ray?

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

Did Schefter care when he posted pics of Pierre-Paul’s x-Ray?

I don't know - why don't you ask him.

 

[ZooCougar]

Assisted <<<

-> … And so these latest rumors went racing down social media channels to the delight or frustration or general curiosity of a fan base. Discussions on Tuesday and Wednesday with numerous people in and around the UConn athletic operation yielded nothing substantially new on the topic, reaction ranging from “haven’t heard a thing” to “it’s all a continuation” and “nothing has changed.”

A lot more with-in the article ^^

Why do we still find Jennifer Aniston attractive? Give me a break horde.

 

[JohnFSilver]

Sr Editors/Executive Editors decide what is assigned to writers and what is ultimately published. Corporate leadership exerts "guidance" to the Sr Editors/Executive Editors. To say journalists decide what is written is just not accurate.

That’s not what happens at all.

That seems like a very corporate structure. Journalists brings stories to the editors. Editors help frame, refine it, then push to get it elevated in the publication.

Just go to a budget meeting at any local newspaper. Editor in conjunction with writer decide what to write and how to write it .

Like, my editor at the old JI would say - go cover the game.

When a player got arrested, it was John, we having a story on that? Not, go do a story.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

That’s not what happens at all.

Ok, you have seen what you have seen and I have seen what I have seen (a handful of big news media companies).

 

[JohnFSilver]

Ok, you have seen what you have seen and I have seen what I have seen (a handful of big news media companies).

Maybe sports is different. But Woj don’t give a xrao about what Jimmy Pitaro thinks. Pitaro got no role in day to day.

And I have worked at the biggest one and gone to those meetings before. It’s more of “Thamel, what you working on?”

hell, some writers are downright hostile to the editors and management.

 

[Kolumbo]

That’s not what happens at all.

That seems like a very corporate structure. Journalists brings stories to the editors. Editors help frame, refine it, then push to get it elevated in the publication.

Just go to a budget meeting at any local newspaper. Editor in conjunction with writer decide what to write and how to write it .

Like, my editor at the old JI would say - go cover the game.

When a player got arrested, it was John, we having a story on that? Not, go do a story.

espn is in the entertainment business, not the news business. I am pretty sure all stories are spun to espn's liking. Or the authors get canned.

 

[JohnFSilver]

espn is in the entertainment business, not the news business. I am pretty sure all stories are spun to espn's liking. Or the authors get canned.

No that isn’t it. Lol.

 

[Ha Who]

espn is in the entertainment business, not the news business. I am pretty sure all stories are spun to espn's liking. Or the authors get canned.

Just like the “news”

 

[Chin Diesel]

espn is in the entertainment business, not the news business. I am pretty sure all stories are spun to espn's liking. Or the authors get canned.

Writers get canned when no one reads their material.
That's the corporate element to news media as a business.

In the "old days" it was tougher to decide how much each section of a paper was read and how much each inch of print was read. And how much each of that was worth for revenue compared to cost to print.
You could go by phone calls and letters to the editor, or mess around with advertisements to see if moving ads to different locations drew more business for advertisers.
Internet blew up that model. In a few seconds any bean counter can not only tell how many people read each article but how much time they spend reading it. They can also check how many times readers click on ads embedded in those articles.

 

[Chin Diesel]

That’s not what happens at all.

That seems like a very corporate structure. Journalists brings stories to the editors. Editors help frame, refine it, then push to get it elevated in the publication.

Just go to a budget meeting at any local newspaper. Editor in conjunction with writer decide what to write and how to write it .

Like, my editor at the old JI would say - go cover the game.

When a player got arrested, it was John, we having a story on that? Not, go do a story.

As a former neighborhood news carrier for the Courant in the morning and JI in the afternoon during middle school and HS, let me ask you this.
How did JI decide to cut up space in the sports section for how much print each section got and what was the process for determining which ads went in which sections and how much the JI would charge for ads based on location?
It's been about 40 years since I last slung the JI around and I may still having lingering trauma from the Thanksgiving Day edition of the JI.

 

[JohnFSilver]

As a former neighborhood news carrier for the Courant in the morning and JI in the afternoon during middle school and HS, let me ask you this.
How did JI decide to cut up space in the sports section for how much print each section got and what was the process for determining which ads went in which sections and how much the JI would charge for ads based on location?
It's been about 40 years since I last slung the JI around and I may still having lingering trauma from the Thanksgiving Day edition of the JI.

Thank you for your service!

It wasn’t brain surgery. Sports editors would plan ahead and make a space request. The managing editor and publisher decided the size of paper and what pages each section gets.

As far as ads. Sports is a popular section of the paper so car dealerships loved being in our section. We would sacrifice news for an ad any day of the week.

Day before print, we would get how many pages and how many ads there were. We’d worn around them.

Thanksgiving Day was awesome. I became the second man on road race coverage in my later years. One of my favorite events to cover. My family hated me though. Always screwed up dinner.

 

[Kolumbo]

No that isn’t it. Lol.

I think we can all agree that espn played a major role in destroying the Big East, however way you want to call it. Has there been one news article written and published by espn placing blame on espn? That was and continues to be a major news event. How has espn the great news center reported it?

 

[JohnFSilver]

I think we can all agree that espn played a major role in destroying the Big East, however way you want to call it. Has there been one news article written and published by espn placing blame on espn? That was and continues to be a major news event. How has espn the great news center reported it?

Blame? No one forced schools to get greedy. There was no need for these huge television contracts and realignment.

Blame the schools.

 

[uconndogs]

Blame? No one forced schools to get greedy. There was no need for these huge television contracts and realignment.

Blame the schools.

Totally agree with this. Everybody wants to be the victim and identify a villain. College athletics has been devoid of leadership for decades. The mess that is currently in place could have been avoided with such leadership. We went from an NCAA that investigated whether a coach bought a kid a hamburg to a complete open market compensation scheme in recruitment and retention of talent. It now has absolutely nothing.....nothing at all to do with the academic mission of these schools.

 

[CL82]

Blame? No one forced schools to get greedy. There was no need for these huge television contracts and realignment.

Blame the schools.

Yeah, I'm not sure that that's the point you think it is John. If ESPN doesn't bankroll the evisceration of the big east, the conference that we all know and loved still exists. The fact that they did bankroll the evisceration of the big east and didn't carve out a spot for the university of Connecticut has literally, Connecticut taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars. Your point is essentially like saying don't blame the drug cartels, they don't make anyone take drugs.

 

[Kolumbo]

Blame? No one forced schools to get greedy. There was no need for these huge television contracts and realignment.

Blame the schools.

Oh the irony

 

[jostar1]

I think we can all agree that espn played a major role in destroying the Big East, however way you want to call it. Has there been one news article written and published by espn placing blame on espn? That was and continues to be a major news event. How has espn the great news center reported it?

I watched a youtube video with the former President of ESPN (the cocaine user) and he was basically laughing about it.

 

[JohnFSilver]

Yeah, I'm not sure that that's the point you think it is John. If ESPN doesn't bankroll the evisceration of the big east, the conference that we all know and loved still exists. The fact that they did bankroll the evisceration of the big east and didn't carve out a spot for the university of Connecticut has literally, Connecticut taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars. Your point is essentially like saying don't blame the drug cartels, they don't make anyone take drugs.

I am not gonna disagree on the culpability of the people with money.

But while I get the metaphor I think you are really downplaying the power the presidents have here. The power isn’t in espn hand. It is in the conferences hands because espn wants the content.

Maybe presidents should have thought about the sport than about their bloated budgets.

football was always so decentralized. The consolidation was never thought out. You got leagues fighting each other and we get stupid conferences that make no sense.

 

[UConnJim]

Writers get canned when no one reads their material.
That's the corporate element to news media as a business.

In the "old days" it was tougher to decide how much each section of a paper was read and how much each inch of print was read. And how much each of that was worth for revenue compared to cost to print.
You could go by phone calls and letters to the editor, or mess around with advertisements to see if moving ads to different locations drew more business for advertisers.
Internet blew up that model. In a few seconds any bean counter can not only tell how many people read each article but how much time they spend reading it. They can also check how many times readers click on ads embedded in those articles.

It's more complicated than this. You are correct, companies can now measure which articles are read and how long people stay on the page, but that is not necessarily how reporters are allocated. One of my friends who is a reporter at a large newspaper that has a union told me it is very difficult to fire the writers that don't get read. The union reporter salaries are capped by the union contract so many of the popular writers will leave for a better opportunity if they can. Those that don't have better opportunities stay. I asked how the most popular writers stay and he told me the very top writers are promoted to management (like asst editor,...) so they can be paid a higher salary.

 

[JohnFSilver]

It's more complicated than this. You are correct, companies can now measure which articles are read and how long people stay on the page, but that is not necessarily how reporters are allocated. One of my friends who is a reporter at a large newspaper that has a union told me it is very difficult to fire the writers that don't get read. The union reporter salaries are capped by the union contract so many of the popular writers will leave for a better opportunity if they can. Those that don't have better opportunities stay. I asked how the most popular writers stay and he told me the very top writers are promoted to management (like asst editor,...) so they can be paid a higher salary.

Where do we start with metrics….i know this very well.

Using views and engagement, on a news story, to determine the worth of the writer is such a bad way to manage (places do it). Usually it is corporate managers who don’t understand news’ place in society. Places like the Courant have turned to this model, letting free market decide what is relevant, and that has predictably devolved into lessening quality and more click bait stories.

I don’t have time to really get into this, could be a Masters Thesis, but the best thing a journalist and editor can do is ignore what “rates” and concentrate on doing relevant and good content.

Chasing clicks devolves into less quality, more content, more click bait.

Views are valuable metric, the most, but your CPMs on click bait content is god awful.

 

[huskymedic]

Bubble leaking…