What are the brightlines or boundaries among sports beat writers, journalists covering govt/higher education, and media working for non-traditional or fan-oriented entities in terms of what subjects are fair game vs. off-limits in college sports programs?
Example: Nebraska football beat writers have taken flack for not digging into rumors about distractions undermining HC Scott Frost in his job as the state's highest paid employee. Some could have been investigated rather easily by talking to employees at local businesses (eg, golf clubs or bars) while others venture deeper into personal territory. Some fans have suggested that shedding light on this sort of thing is part of holding public institutions accountable, especially when the coach's superiors seem to be abdicating their responsibility. Theory being, sunlight might prevent the rot from spreading to the point that a university has to spend $20MM+ to change out a coaching staff rather than just tell the old guy to knock it off years earlier before it gets out of hand.
The situation with coverage of UGA football player legal and disciplinary issues is another example at the other end of the spectrum.
So...... Is this probing work anyone's job in sports media, and, if so who? I think I understand that beat writers depend on collegiality that makes it difficult, but it really feels like college sports programs, esp football, are growing so powerful that almost no one can go there.
P.S. Any photo of 2+ adults should be taken by a 3rd party, preferably with neither looking at the camera. If that's not possible, then the photo isn't worth taking.
I'm not sure this is a new journalist, old journalist thing. I mean writers rode the trains with the teams, drank, played cards, all that back when only the owners made the money. It seems this professional divide happened alongside the time the athletes obtained the ability to earn way more than those covering them. I do understand the challenge of writing for lack of a better phrase a "hit piece" on someone you took a photo with or had them pay for your lunch.
I worked a red carpet event for a movie premiere in New Orleans. I got around this dilemma by making a gentleman's agreement with another journo I knew who was standing next to me in the red carpet line. When he was interviewing an actor, I'd take action photos of him during the interview and when I was interviewing said actor, he'd take action photos of me. I don't think I'd ask for a selfie or a posed picture though (I'm also 45, so I'm old-ish).
My question:
What are the brightlines or boundaries among sports beat writers, journalists covering govt/higher education, and media working for non-traditional or fan-oriented entities in terms of what subjects are fair game vs. off-limits in college sports programs?
Example: Nebraska football beat writers have taken flack for not digging into rumors about distractions undermining HC Scott Frost in his job as the state's highest paid employee. Some could have been investigated rather easily by talking to employees at local businesses (eg, golf clubs or bars) while others venture deeper into personal territory. Some fans have suggested that shedding light on this sort of thing is part of holding public institutions accountable, especially when the coach's superiors seem to be abdicating their responsibility. Theory being, sunlight might prevent the rot from spreading to the point that a university has to spend $20MM+ to change out a coaching staff rather than just tell the old guy to knock it off years earlier before it gets out of hand.
The situation with coverage of UGA football player legal and disciplinary issues is another example at the other end of the spectrum.
So...... Is this probing work anyone's job in sports media, and, if so who? I think I understand that beat writers depend on collegiality that makes it difficult, but it really feels like college sports programs, esp football, are growing so powerful that almost no one can go there.
P.S. Any photo of 2+ adults should be taken by a 3rd party, preferably with neither looking at the camera. If that's not possible, then the photo isn't worth taking.
I'm not sure this is a new journalist, old journalist thing. I mean writers rode the trains with the teams, drank, played cards, all that back when only the owners made the money. It seems this professional divide happened alongside the time the athletes obtained the ability to earn way more than those covering them. I do understand the challenge of writing for lack of a better phrase a "hit piece" on someone you took a photo with or had them pay for your lunch.
I worked a red carpet event for a movie premiere in New Orleans. I got around this dilemma by making a gentleman's agreement with another journo I knew who was standing next to me in the red carpet line. When he was interviewing an actor, I'd take action photos of him during the interview and when I was interviewing said actor, he'd take action photos of me. I don't think I'd ask for a selfie or a posed picture though (I'm also 45, so I'm old-ish).
liked the Tanya Tucker part :).
Oh, dear. I hope Isaacson isn’t dying too! I’m hoping that she was dying to. Otherwise, love your stuff. Big fan. David Carzoli
Also pretty crazy you looked up at former A's columnist around the same time as he published on his blog for the 1st time in 10 years.