the great bissinger-leitch debate

In case you missed it, Tuesday night's episode of Costas Now on HBO featured a fascinating exchange between noted author Buzz Bissinger and blog maverick Will Leitch. The topic? Something near and dear to the life of kings and all it stands for: The future of journalism, specifically sports journalism, in this here Internet age.

Costas, the host and moderator, is truly an admirable sort: an intelligent, enthusiastic commentator who speaks clearly and with an informed voice. He takes his subject matter seriously and is interested in genuine, open discussion -- though he's not above having a little fun even when having to ask a tough question. Such qualities seemed to make him the perfect guy to officiate this hair-pull, even if it's obvious where his bias lies. Alas, at least this time, he came up small. Bissinger, meanwhile, has written Friday Night Lights, a bestselling book about high school football culture in Texas, and A Prayer For the City, a remarkable account of then-mayor Ed Rendell's efforts at rescuing the city of Philadelphia in the post-Wilson Goode era. And Leitch? He's the founder of Deadspin.com, a blog site devoted to covering sports in a way you won't necessarily find in your local newspaper. He basically represents the young, attitude-driven future of this business. Also appearing was Braylon Edwards, a wide receiver for the Cleveland Browns who was there to offer the perspective of the professional athlete.

Some thoughts:

1. Bissinger, quite frankly, comes across as a crotchety old coot. You'd think a guy with his intelligence and ability would know better than to open a discussion with a guy he thinks is dragging sports journalism into the toilet by saying something other than, "I really think you're full of shit." Unfortunately, Bissinger rarely gets any better from there on out.

2. What gives Leitch, and those like him, the advantage on this topic is that they know their audience. I know a lot of newspaper people who have the attitude that their way is the only way, to hell with however the world might be changing. But as Leitch makes clear, the pony express, the abacus and the horse-drawn buggy once had their place, too.

3. Bissinger scores points with his suggestion that blogging is hurting the quality of writing and contributing to the "dumbing-down" of our collective culture. What he overlooks, however, is how much bad writing and dead wood currently exists at newspapers. And our strange obsession with celebrities and our fascination with the prurient and the trivial certainly didn't begin with the Internet.

4. There is far too much attack-type stuff on the Internet, far too many cheap shots being taken by those with little or no accountability, but there's a clear distinction between reader-generated comments and writer-generated content.

5. Leitch was wrong to suggest (with a straight face) that he was bringing out "the human side" of pro athletes when he publishes photos of them boozing and cavorting with women. (The opening segment includes shots of Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger from Super Bowl week a few years back; Big Ben can be seen pouring drinks into women's mouths while wearing a shirt that says, in a play on Notre Dame's famous motto, "Drink Like a Champion Today." I found it funny then and still think it's funny now. But still.) Athletes are entitled to their privacy, and I do think journalists should respect that. I don't know how many times I've been out drinking in Doylestown only to have a person I'm introduced to freeze upon meeting me, as if I'm going to chronicle their entire evening for the next morning's paper. I didn't, I don't, and I won't.

6. Leitch is also wrong to openly "be a fan." One can be a fan -- Go Pens! -- and no one can be 100 percent objective, but readers deserve an effort at objectivity and honesty. A lot of journalism is credibility, and while personal relationships with players and teams can result, the only way to honestly convey information to the average reader is to honestly try to be as completely objective and detached as possible. Frankly, it's part of the reason I don't work in Pittsburgh.

7. Costas takes a swipe at a musing about Rick Reilly authored by A.J. Daulerio, a Deadspin writer. (Disclosure: Daulerio and I went to college together and once covered the same suburban news beat for competing newspapers. Just a few weeks back, we even indulged our shared taste for beer and tequila by having One of Those Nights in Center City.) Daulerio criticizes Reilly for essentially taking advantage of the access he is granted as a sports writer, suggesting that it's wrong because the average fan doesn't have such access. But A.J., bro, that's the point: The access allows the writer to see up close how an athlete talks, what his mannerisms are, what he thinks and how he's feeling just after the heat of battle. I, for one, have often found these sort of exchanges to be the best way to bring out the drama of a sports story, as with this. That access, however, should not be taken too far, and it's troubling to hear stories of journalists playing golf with subjects they cover, to cite just one ethically-challenged example.

8. The bottom line: The answer lies somewhere between Bissinger's Luddite desire to see newspapers survive "just because" and Leitch's more bare-knuckles approach. The Internet is the future of information, and if Bissinger and others like him don't wish to cede any ground to Leitch and his gang, they at least better start figuring out a way to do it better. And soon.

Check out the entire exchange on Deadspin's site here.

CLARIFICATION: Not long after this post went up this afternoon, I got a phone call from A.J. Daulerio, who wanted to point out that Costas had incorrectly attributed the Reilly-bashing piece to him, when in fact "Big Daddy Balls" is someone else. That Costas would come into this so unprepared is at once striking and revealing. Anyway, A.J.'s own reaction to the whole shebang can be read here. His references to the days when he covered zoning board hearings and the like harken back to a time when we worked together, and it was fun to relive those days when we threw a few back at Locust Bar and the P&P a couple of weeks ago. A.J.'s a good guy and a good reporter and writer with good intentions. Our own talk about this stuff was enlightening and cordial, and it's a shame the Bissinger-Leitch debate wasted so much time and energy bickering like a bad afternoon of programming on WIP.

harvey araton unloads on notre dame

Wake up the echoes: This one pretty much speaks for itself. I give you the fantastic lede paragraphs from Harvey Araton's column on the arrogance of Notre Dame football in today's New York Times:

For self-importance on the grandest of delusional scales, there is no entity in sports quite like Notre Dame football, winner of three games last season, routinely whacked like a piñata in recent bowl games and not a national championship to its name in 20 years, or since the Gipper was about to hand off the presidency of the United States to George H.W. Bush. How humble of Notre Dame to have visited Ronald Reagan in the Rose Garden at the White House on Jan. 18, 1989, resisting all temptation to call for a meeting at a neutral site more to its grandiose liking.

Ouch. The rest of the piece can be read here.

bill lyon is back!!!

Some good news and a pleasant surprise in this morning's Philadelphia Inquirer: Retired columnist Bill Lyon, a man who has authored some of the best-written stuff (sports or otherwise) in the history of Philly newspapers, is back. He covered last night's stunning upset win by the 76ers in Game 1 of their playoff series against the Pistons in suburban Detroit, and just as he so often used to do, Lyon provides us with a delectable treat of gentle, elegant prose. Just click this link, sit back and enjoy.

when women entered the press box

Just got around to this Pohla Smith story from Friday's Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. It's a first-hand account of what she encountered as a woman working in the male-dominated world of sportswriting back in the 1970s. Fascinating to see how times have changed.

death by blogging

The dissemination of news and information ain't what it used to be.

what's wrong with the newspaper business

In a word -- or three -- it's stuff like this, which, to me, anyway, epitomizes the sort of journalistic laziness and all-around dead wood that permeates the business. Bob Smizik has been writing for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette since Pittsburgh was a French and Indian War battleground, and he often takes a contrarian stance with regard to much of the city's conventional sporting wisdom. Fine and fine. But three observations regarding that complete piece of crud he authored today:

1. Smizik is not in Atlanta for the Pirates' season-opening series against the Braves, something that would provide him the opportunity to observe the team up close and, you know, actually interview somebody to help broaden the perspective of what he writes. In other words, to do his freakin' job.

2. I counted four spelling and/or grammatical errors. This is as much the fault of the P-G's copy desk as it is of Smizik, but still: It's not like he was rushed by having to shag quotes from the clubhouse after the game or anything.

3. How in the world can he write that the Pirates ought to keep, rather than trade, Xavier Nady based on just two games out of what is a 162-games season? Sitting on his couch watching the game on TV, he obviously had no column idea as his deadline approached, so he winged it.

Bottom line: Readers today are more discerning, and those of us in this business owe it to them not to insult their intelligence. Problem is, newspapers might be the only industry in the country in which one's overall job performance is not tied to one's ability to keep a job, even when younger, hungrier, better talent is out there to replace him. Not that I'm jaded or anything.

the meaning of fewer reporters on the campaign trail

Fascinating story on the front page of today's New York Times about what the economic reality of the journalism business is doing to campaign coverage -- namely, that fewer print media organizations are sending reporters on the road to cover the candidates full-time. As the story notes, the effects of this are obvious:

Traveling campaign reporters say they try to do more than just regurgitate raw information or spoon-fed news of the day, which anyone who watches speeches on YouTube can do. The best of them track the evolution and growth (or lack thereof) of candidates; spot pandering and inconsistencies or dishonesty; and get a measure of the candidate that could be useful should he or she become [sic] president.

With more and more newspapers cutting back on expenses and relying on wire services for on-the-road coverage, there are fewer eyes and ears to offer any kind of additional perspective. And competition, at least in the world of ideas, is good for consumers -- especially educated discerning consumers of news and information. The Times' story rightly notes that there is a lot of "pack journalism" out there -- those clusterfucks where everybody's asking the same question and getting the same answer. Sometimes, of course, clusterfucks can't be helped. But the best in the business find a way to mine for more -- talking to a candidates' advisers or other sources away from the fray, paying attention to non-verbal cues, making an extra phone call, etc. The increasing reliance on wire services, or on bloggers not getting a first-hand glimpse of the candidates on a day-to-day basis, does not, at least to my mind, bode well for us. All of us.

UPDATE: I changed the word "educated" to "discerning" above, since, upon further review, discerning readers need not necessarily be educated. The importance of editors can never be underestimated.

"newspapers are still far from dead, but the language of the obituary is creeping in"

The reality is grim, to be sure, but I still believe there is hope. We have to adjust, that's all. Online enterprises -- and their varying deadlines -- are a must.

banning bloggers?

We're going to see more of this in the future, I'm afraid. Not only are more newspapers using bloggers to supplement their print coverage, but more and more newspaper people are actually leaving newspapers to blog on their own full-time. How much can sports teams (and, by extension, other organizations) limit the access of those who wish to cover them? It's not so clear-cut. On one hand, teams and other organizations have always issued credentials to working members of actual news outlets. But if, say, the life of kings sought access to a given event, would a team or organization be obliged to grant it? Not so simple, huh? Perhaps I should just try to walk into the Super Bowl or the Final Four in the future. I'm willing to bet I get my ass kicked by security accorded the utmost respect for all of my fine work.

more on buckley & cope

Given that two of my all-time favorite public figures, William F. Buckley Jr. and Myron Cope, died on the same day Wednesday, I feel compelled to pass along some additional reactions:

* The Philadelphia Inquirer has a nice tribute of an editorial today that acknowledges exactly what it was that made Buckley so appealing: "Through it all he perfected the art of disagreeing without being disagreeable."

* Then there's George F. Will, ever eloquent, closing out his piece in The Washington Post with this: "Bill's distinctive voice permeated, and improved, his era. It will be forgotten by no one who had the delight of hearing it."

* I especially liked David Corn's blog at The Nation, a magazine about as ideologically at odds with Buckley's conservatism as any out there. Corn was particularly fond of the humorous approach Buckley brought to his longshot campaign for mayor of New York City in 1965. "I'd demand a recount," Buckley replied when asked what he'd do if he actually won. And when granted the opportunity to offer a rebuttal in a debate during that campaign, Buckley chose not to repeat what he had already said and replied simply, with his trademark arrogant wit: "I am satisfied to sit back and contemplate my own former brilliance." He will be missed.

* All of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette's tremendous Cope coverage can be accessed here.

* Chico Harlan, recalling a personal encounter he had with Cope during the run-up to the Steelers' unlikely run to Super Bowl XL two years ago, concludes his P-G piece with a gem of an anecdote.

* And Gene Collier, whose wonderful obit on Cope from the P-G I had linked to earlier in the week, also wrote a column chock-full of lively stuff that also includes the following two sentences: "Entrances and arrivals were unforgettable, but this final departure stings like hell. The withering roster of people who really know how to live, how to enjoy life's every minute, is down one today." A fitting epitaph.

some myron cope links

Alan Robinson, the Associated Press' longtime Pittsburgh correspondent, has a detailed obituary that can be viewed here.

Gene Collier's lively obit in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, which pegs Cope as "[o]ne of the last of the great sports characters, a genuine oasis in a sea of ever homogenizing media-ocrity," is here. Collier's lead is perfect: "Myron Cope, the much-decorated master of the written word, the ever-celebrated sand-blaster of the spoken word, and a pre-eminent Pittsburgh symbol of not only our selves but of our hopes and our innate joyfulness, died today."

And for the uninformed, this web site offers numerous hilarious links to snippets of Cope's one-of-a-kind work as a broadcaster.

myron cope, r.i.p.

Myron Cope was Pittsburgh, simple as that. He was a little man with a big, screechy voice, and while he's viewed as something of a clown because of many of his antics in his later years, he was in fact anything but. A graduate of Allderdice High School and Pitt, he worked for a while at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, where on his first day an editor shortened his last name from "Kopelman" to "Cope" because, he was told, the paper already had too many Jewish reporters. He eventually set out on his own as a freelancer, working for such luminous publications as Sports Illustrated and the Saturday Evening Post, for whom he penned colorful, well-written profiles. He later returned to Pittsburgh and began a broadcasting career, and before long he was doing color commentary for Steelers games, a job he held for 35 seasons until his retirement in 2005, a time in which his fame exceeded that of many of the players', even as the team won four Super Bowls in six seasons in the 1970s. In '75, at the urging of a team sales executive, he developed an idea he called the Terrible Towel, still to this day an internationally known symbol of the Steelers, a talisman of yellow cloth that can be seen waving wherever there's a Steelers fan. Cope hosted a sports-talk radio show in the days before everyone else did, and the program's popularity was as much a credit to his hard work and feisty opinions as it was to his schtick. His 2002 memoir, Double Yoi!, is filled with wonderful anecdotes about what was really a very full life, told with modesty, humor and (best of all) regular-guy charm. He eventually received offers to broadcast for teams in bigger cities, but he just couldn't leave Pittsburgh, just couldn't watch a team other than the Steelers. His son, Danny, was born autistic, and Cope saw that all proceeds -- every penny -- from Terrible Towel sales went to the Allegheny Valley School, a group home for mentally retarded children in the Pittsburgh area. A devoted journalist and a bigger-than-life character from the chain-smoking and hard-drinking old school, Myron Cope died this morning at age 79. Pittsburgh and its extended Steeler Nation mourns. R.I.P.

a rich hofmann interview

Some outfit called sportsmediaguide.com has posted an interview with Rich Hofmann of the Philadelphia Daily News that's quite interesting, at least to me. Hofmann's a great writer and an even greater guy to have a beer (or six) with. Money quote:

Everybody has a different standard for [what makes a successful column]. I have to like it, on some visceral level. To me, that's the standard, always. I know there are website hits and some columns generate more than others, and people talk about your stuff on the radio. But to me I have to like it. Generally, there has to be an idea in there I really like. Short of that, turn a phrase or two I really like. Sometimes it's a simple as me being the only one in town who knows I wrote in 32 minutes on deadline. And I'll say, 'not bad for 32 minutes'. Those are the things I look at.

Then there's this:

I caught [Dick Young's] act at the end. I'll never forget seeing him at an Ali fight. He wore a headset and dictated round-by-round. He was fascinating to watch -- barking into the headset, 'a left and a big overhand right, oh, he's down'. I imagined the guy in his office, typing furiously, graf after graf, sending out an edition with half the fight done. Those were newspapers. I remember getting the News on the lawn and it would say 'after four innings the Mets were ahead, 4-3'. Or, 'Yanks and Senators go into extra innings'. I laugh at it now.

Now that's cool. Check out the entire Q&A here.

another reason why the ny post is the best paper in america

Just look at this video they made. Outstanding.

i've seen the future...

...and it looks like this. Within the next few years, most newspapers will no doubt be doing something similar. Call me old-fashioned, but physically holding a newspaper is preferable to staring at a computer screen. But the business model is changing, and we have to adapt.

long live jimmy breslin

What better way to start this blog, which will be about things of interest to me, than by pointing you to last Sunday's New York Times profile of the one and only Jimmy Breslin, that grand, grizzled old New York reporter and writer. It concludes with the following money quote:

Jimmy Breslin stood there, his hands at his waist, his glasses at the far edge of his nose, frowning, nodding, making soft uh-huh sounds, listening to yet another loser, another one of them, of him.

Awesome.