In the wake of the Costas townhall, (too?) much has been written already about blogs vs. mainstream media, so I'm going against my better judgment here and chiming in.
I am an obvious homer for newspapers. We got four delivered to our house when I was a kid. The day I got my drivers license, I put in my first day of work at a newspaper.
After a year or so, they even started paying me, and except for mowing lawns and one dreadful summer at Walgreen's, every dollar I've ever made (outside a casino) has come from being a journalist. I'm approaching 30, so that's 14 years working at newspapers, which, damn, when it's put like that is almost half my life.
Newspapers and the brilliant people running them have taught me the value in hard work, in honesty, and making deadline.
Some of my best friends have been made through this business. Some of my best memories have been made through work, from the day a high school tennis player big leagued me ("he's not talking today," his coach said) to covering the World Series.
And now I'll stop procrastinating and say what's been on my mind all day: I'm worried about my business. Oh, sure, the financial signs are everywhere, and have been since before I took my first journalism course.
But as my wife would tell you, I'm not much for finances, never wanted in this wonderful business to get rich, and have always been sure that the innovative and creative and tireless minds running newspaper shops would prevail.
I still believe that, but I'm more worried about the beliefs and reason of people in my business than ever before. Last night, Buzz Bissinger -- a Pulitzer Prize winner and first-ballot Hall of Fame journalist and author -- went nuts on Deadspin editor Will Leitch, and if a legend like him is saying stuff like "blogs are dedicated to cruelty," well, hell, the shine is off my optimism.
Leitch and the bloggers he was unfairly forced to represent were blamed, far as I could tell, for all kinds of things that have been around way longer than blogs, a list that includes profanity (even though Bissinger's language would've made Pat Jordan jealous), sexism, racism, broken English, poverty, cancer, and the inevitable downfall of society.
To make his point, Bissinger (who claimed he "never" reads Deadspin) and Costas (who I think I still think is one of the most reasonable people in the business) read a couple lines that ran on Leitch's site and then, at some point in this mess, started quoting comments left by the site's readers.
We've been over why that's unfair, and Bissinger went on to make several other (at best) wrong points about Leitch and Deadspin and blogs and society, but a larger realization has been beating me over the head all day:
Oh. Damn. That's how a lot of people assume much of the mainstream media (and others of a certain generation) feels and thinks about blogs.
And even worse: that is how much of the mainstream media (and others of a certain generation) feels and thinks about blogs.
Maybe it's because I'm young enough that I grew up with video games and cable TV and eventually the internet (thanks Al Gore!) but it drives me crazy to see this stupid divide.
I do believe that far more people in the mainstream media embrace the internet than want to scream at it, but the exceptions to this rule are loud and easy to find.
Leitch, I thought, took the high road both on the show and on his website, but there are plenty of bloggers who see the mainstream media as intentionally dishonest, outdated, stuck-up, and as necessary as a pet rock.
They ignore the essential value of the hard-working beat writers (and others), dispensers of the first line of information about any team, breaking news and telling stories that nobody would otherwise hear.
And on the other side, it's like (some) old-guard newspaper people are afraid of the future, terrified what it means to their own security, and decide to belittle the messenger.
They ignore that these internets ain't going away, that it can put their work in front of more eyes than ever before, and that it makes it easier and more enjoyable to follow sports because it provides a forum for like-minded people to talk.
Look, I understand the frustration of old-guard journalists. I understand the threat of people moving in, the anger when your stuff is lifted without attribution, or your hard work piggy-backed by someone who ends up writing that you're an idiot.
But just because someone writes the c-word on some internet message board doesn't make all blogs a threat to society anymore than Jayson Blair being a total fraud makes all newspapers dishonest.
Someone (I think it was Leitch) made the needed point that the internet is a meritocracy, that if a blog or website continues to put out crap, if it continues to lie and/or make stuff up, its message will die because people will stop listening.
The internet will always have nastiness and sexism and racism and stupidity because it is a reflection of our society.
The internet will also always have endless information and insightful stories and moving opinions and places to argue about the crappy economy and Barrack Obama's chances and Brian Bannister's fastball and everything else people are interested in, because it is a reflection of our society.
And I still believe that the bulk of the most important and impactful journalism being done is being done in the mainstream, particularly in print, and particularly in newspapers.
But I also believe some of the most interesting breakdowns and opnions I read regularly come from online-only publications -- mainstream and otherwise.
I just don't understand why it needs to be us vs. them, no matter which of those sides you would choose.
(And I guess we're back with the longer posts now, huh?)
Well-thought-out article, Sam. I've grown up with newspapers all around, but the Internet offers *different* ways of presenting the news and opinion. I know college students half my age (soon to be 53) or younger who wouldn't pick up a newspaper if it were delivered to their house - for free. And some of these are journalism majors.
Bottom line, people want to be informed and entertained, and those who offer the best information and the most credibility will win out in the end.