Media

[cuseinseattle]

I was watching the game yesterday and telling my wife how stupid ESPN is and she brings up how much I talk about how bad the sports department of the Post Standard is. She then asks me a great question, "Who do you hate more ESPN or the Post Standard?" What a great question. I'm still trying to figure out my answer. Thoughts?

 

[Marsh01]

Espn. The paper did what papers are supposed to do. Investigate and report facts. Espn failed miserably at that.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

 

[A Clockwork Orange]

I was watching the game yesterday and telling my wife how stupid ESPN is and she brings up how much I talk about how bad the sports department of the Post Standard is. She then asks me a great question, "Who do you hate more ESPN or the Post Standard?" What a great question. I'm still trying to figure out my answer. Thoughts?

Why do you hate the Post Standard sports department?

 

[OttoMets]

The Post-Standard can't even do basic things right (like proof-reading and copy-editing). Worse, they don't seem to care. Even writers beloved by the good folks on this board routinely make ridiculous mistakes, and those mistakes somehow make it through some editorial apparatus and into print.

The broadcast side of ESPN is all style over substance, filled with empty-headed young people saying inane things about sports. And they were irresponsible with the Fine thing. I hate them. But they are at least a professional organization that strives to put out a good product.

It's not even close.

 

[Bortukal]

The Post-Standard can't even do basic things right (like proof-reading and copy-editing). Worse, they don't seem to care. Even writers beloved by the good folks on this board routinely make ridiculous mistakes, and those mistakes somehow make it through some editorial apparatus and into print.

The broadcast side of ESPN is all style over substance, filled with empty-headed young people saying inane things about sports. And they were irresponsible with the Fine thing. I hate them. But they are at least a professional organization that strives to put out a good product.

It's not even close.

It's not just the sports department. The publication as a whole suffers from the sloppy editorial practices you've mentioned. It's gotten steadily worse during the past few years, and they don't really seem to care. Makes me wonder if Advance's other outlets have the same issue.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Bud Poloquin

 

[A Clockwork Orange]

I think Mike Waters and Donna Ditota do a very solid job at reporting on the basketball side of things. If you want to blame editorial mistakes on editors that's fine, but the truth of the matter is there aren't many editors anymore. That's part of the problem why those type of mistakes make it into the paper anymore.

The Post Standard is what it is, a middling newspaper published to a middling, decaying city.

ESPN is a multinational organization that has the money and power to influence millions. It still has editorial procedures that it chooses not to follow when a story is juicy enough and can be marketed across platforms. To me, that complete lack of ethics on a major scale is inexcusable, and makes the network much, much worse than the Post Standard.

Both have an obligation to the public good. The Post Standard screws up because its reporters are overtaxed without much editorial control. ESPN screws up because it is constantly looking for a way to brand its new and sports department. It also is looking for ways to improve revenue streams. The fact they have good reporters, and a lot of money and still things up for financial gain (and to be first with the story) is much more reprehensible in my mind.

Neither fulfill their journalistic duty all the time -- but ESPN's scope and power make its narrative almost infallible once it's out there. That's not just unethical, it's also dangerous.

 

[OttoMets]

It's not just the sports department. The publication as a whole suffers from the sloppy editorial practices you've mentioned. It's gotten steadily worse during the past few years, and they don't really seem to care. Makes me wonder if Advance's other outlets have the same issue.

Yep, they're horrible (and unrepentantly so) as far as technical things go, and that's not even touching on substantive matters (where they're every bit as biased and irresponsible as ESPN).

Advance definitely has better papers than the Post-Standard (the Oregonian and Star-Ledger come to mind), but I'm afraid it is a company-wide and industry-wide trend. We just see one of the worst examples of a mid-sized city daily.

 

[OttoMets]

I think Mike Waters and Donna Ditota do a very solid job at reporting on the basketball side of things. If you want to blame editorial mistakes on editors that's fine, but the truth of the matter is there aren't many editors anymore. That's part of the problem why those type of mistakes make it into the paper anymore.

The Post Standard is what it is, a middling newspaper published to a middling, decaying city.

ESPN is a multinational organization that has the money and power to influence millions. It still has editorial procedures that it chooses not to follow when a story is juicy enough and can be marketed across platforms. To me, that complete lack of ethics on a major scale is inexcusable, and makes the network much, much worse than the Post Standard.

Both have an obligation to the public good. The Post Standard screws up because its reporters are overtaxed without much editorial control. ESPN screws up because it is constantly looking for a way to brand its new and sports department. It also is looking for ways to improve revenue streams. The fact they have good reporters, and a lot of money and still things up for financial gain (and to be first with the story) is much more reprehensible in my mind.

Neither fulfill their journalistic duty all the time -- but ESPN's scope and power make its narrative almost infallible once it's out there. That's not just unethical, it's also dangerous.

One can't blame all of one's mistakes on editors. These folks are professional writers. They should be putting out professional content. It's what they do.

I don't have editors, but if I don't know how to spell, say, "Rubik's cube," I'm going to take enough pride in my work to look up the proper spelling before submitting it.

 

[A Clockwork Orange]

One can't blame all of one's mistakes on editors. These folks are professional writers. They should be putting out professional content. It's what they do.

I don't have editors, but if I don't know how to spell, say, "Rubik's cube," I'm going to take enough pride in my work to look up the proper spelling before submitting it.

You missed the point. Not paying as much attention to your copy is part of the problem. If you can find me egregious errors on a daily basis in the Post Standard's sports department (specifically the basketball writers) please show me. When you're working on deadline -- have a 750 - 1,000 word story to write in less than an hour, and then have two other stories after that to write, mistakes are bound to be made. Editors used to be the fact checkers/buffers for grammar and spelling errors when a reporter was writing quickly to get the story done. They aren't there anymore.

Point is, in the heat of the moment, when you're doing things quickly, you're going to miss something (even you Otto). It's easy to sit here and say "I would never do that" when you've never done the job and don't understand the unique pressures you're under.

With that said, I'll give you that writers do need to be their own fact/spell checkers, and take more responsibility for their work. In the real world though, that doesn't always happen. If it's a grammatical error, I'll roll my eyes. When a network is supplying the story and supplying the facts that fit its version of the story (while willfully ignoring its duty to stay unbiased, and to investigate the other side of the story), that's much, much worse.

 

[Col. Bleep]

I think Mike Waters and Donna Ditota do a very solid job at reporting on the basketball side of things. If you want to blame editorial mistakes on editors that's fine, but the truth of the matter is there aren't many editors anymore. That's part of the problem why those type of mistakes make it into the paper anymore.

The Post Standard is what it is, a middling newspaper published to a middling, decaying city.

ESPN is a multinational organization that has the money and power to influence millions. It still has editorial procedures that it chooses not to follow when a story is juicy enough and can be marketed across platforms. To me, that complete lack of ethics on a major scale is inexcusable, and makes the network much, much worse than the Post Standard.

Both have an obligation to the public good. The Post Standard screws up because its reporters are overtaxed without much editorial control. ESPN screws up because it is constantly looking for a way to brand its new and sports department. It also is looking for ways to improve revenue streams. The fact they have good reporters, and a lot of money and still things up for financial gain (and to be first with the story) is much more reprehensible in my mind.

Neither fulfill their journalistic duty all the time -- but ESPN's scope and power make its narrative almost infallible once it's out there. That's not just unethical, it's also dangerous.

Well stated.
I'm not taking a position on the underlying P-S v. ESPN question that started the thread.
But I'd argue that the Post-Standard's impact in the Syracuse area is far greater than ESPN's impact on a national or global basis.
If the P-S publishes something significant, practically everyone in Syracuse (who cares) will know about it.

For a number of reasons the quality of reporting in both broadcast and print media is generally in decline.
One major reason is that over the past few decades the focus of managers has shifted.
It's not the public interest any more. It's not even covering news. And it's certainly not quality.
It's the bottom line.

 

[OttoMets]

You missed the point. Not paying as much attention to your copy is part of the problem. If you can find me egregious errors on a daily basis in the Post Standard's sports department (specifically the basketball writers) please show me. When you're working on deadline -- have a 750 - 1,000 word story to write in less than an hour, and then have two other stories after that to write, mistakes are bound to be made. Editors used to be the fact checkers/buffers for grammar and spelling errors when a reporter was writing quickly to get the story done. They aren't there anymore.

Point is, in the heat of the moment, when you're doing things quickly, you're going to miss something (even you Otto). It's easy to sit here and say "I would never do that" when you've never done the job and don't understand the unique pressures you're under.

With that said, I'll give you that writers do need to be their own fact/spell checkers, and take more responsibility for their work. In the real world though, that doesn't always happen. If it's a grammatical error, I'll roll my eyes. When a network is supplying the story and supplying the facts that fit its version of the story (while willfully ignoring its duty to stay unbiased, and to investigate the other side of the story), that's much, much worse.

I understand (very well) that the 2012 beat writer is more put-upon than the 1982 beat writer. The decimation of copy desks has been bad for copy editors, writers, and readers alike.

But the buck does stop with the person writing the material. And I consider a misspelling of a common word to be an egregious error for a professional wordsmith, under deadline or not.

I'm not equating technical errors and lack of journalistic integrity. I do know that the Post-Standard trades in both; ESPN is mainly guilty of the latter. To me, the Post-Standard is much worse at what they do.

 

[A Clockwork Orange]

I understand (very well) that the 2012 beat writer is more put-upon than the 1982 beat writer. The decimation of copy desks has been bad for copy editors, writers, and readers alike.

But the buck does stop with the person writing the material. And I consider a misspelling of a common word to be an egregious error for a professional wordsmith, under deadline or not.

I'm not equating technical errors and lack of journalistic integrity. I do know that the Post-Standard trades in both; ESPN is mainly guilty of the latter. To me, the Post-Standard is much worse at what they do.

Well of course they are. They have less staff, worse reporters, worse pay, little editorial control, etc... I'm not arguing that as a media organization, ESPN is better equipped and better at that job. I would say that the Post Standard sports department (basketball in particular as that is what I believe we're talking about) does a fine job, and doesn't lack in journalistic integrity at all. Levying that comment is pretty damning, and not one that I think is very well placed when discussing the sports department of the Standard. You can call them hacks, but I don't think it's fair at all to say they don't have integrity.

Meanwhile, with a much larger viewership, and much more reach than the Post Standard, Mark Schwarz and Outside the Lines convicted a man who may or may not be innocent without a shred of real evidence. It was a he said-he said, and they painted Fine as a monster. The Post Standard basketball writers didn't touch that story, the news department did.

End of the day, ESPN can sway NATIONAL public opinion because they have no national competitors with the reach that they have. The Post Standard has a very localized readership, and while it can ruin someone's life, it can't do so with as swift sword stroke as ESPN.

The problem with ESPN when it does news stories, is it has bosses that tell them to cover that news as if it's entertainment. That's just awful, and much more morally corrupt in my mind.

 

[OttoMets]

I'm casting the paper with a broad brush; I don't intend to say anything about the integrity of the sports desk as a distinct entity.

Don't agree that ESPN's responsibilities are different than those of the paper due to its greater reach. They should be held to the same standard that every news organization is (though maybe I use "news" loosely here, because ESPN is pretty phony in that regard - it's an entertainment group that pretends to report and investigate news).

 

[DoctorBombay]

ESPN tried to willfully injure our program by targeting JB through his proxy, Bernie Fine.
They played up the "similarities" between PSU & Syracuse, and reinforced, repeated, and focused on it relentlessly.
In the final analysis, due to our short-attention span society, there will always be a segment that equates SU with "some scandal that happened with an assistant coach and some ballboys".
It'll always be out there, and for that...I blame those unethical, unprincipled POS in Bristol.
Damn them, damn them ALL to hell!!:bang:

 

[cliftonparksufan]

End of the day, ESPN can sway NATIONAL public opinion because they have no national competitors with the reach that they have. The Post Standard has a very localized readership, and while it can ruin someone's life, it can't do so with as swift sword stroke as ESPN.

What is very sad is that people take ESPN's word like it is gospel. Especially in the Bernie Fine case. People who only saw that part of the story had no way to know better. They had no reason not to believe that Fine was as guilty as Sandusky. I remember almost a year ago listening to family and friends who didn't really know the story but because of ESPN thought Bernie was a sexual predator.

Now, in full disclosure, I have no way of knowing what Bernie did or didn't do, but based on past and current investigations, nothing has ever come out to charge Bernie of anything. If this was the Wild West, Bernie would have been hanging in the gallows last December.

 

[bevosu]

ESPN tried to willfully injure our program by targeting JB through his proxy, Bernie Fine.
They played up the "similarities" between PSU & Syracuse, and reinforced, repeated, and focused on it relentlessly.
In the final analysis, due to our short-attention span society, there will always be a segment that equates SU with "some scandal that happened with an assistant coach and some ballboys".
It'll always be out there, and for that...I blame those unethical, unprincipled POS in Bristol.
Damn them, damn them ALL to hell!!:bang:

And to follow that up..I think it's pretty clear that while some may not like the way that the Post Standard or ESPN covered the Fine mess, ESPN did the much more irresponsible reporting job.

I watch games on ESPN.

When I'm channel surfing I check out ESPN..with the volume muted. If it's Sportscenter or one of their talk shows I'll read the closed captions. Unless it's a score I almost always quickly change the channel. It's sports reporting/entertainment for adolescents.

 

[Col. Bleep]

ESPN...It's sports reporting/entertainment for adolescents.

If you paint with a broad brush you can get a sloppy job.
ESPN has an excellent reporter in Tom Farrey. Some others, as well.

The ultimate responsibility for a story rests with the people reporting it.
(In TV this can mean off-air producers).
Not editors or managers.
Of course, good editors and managers can make a piece better.
Bad ones can ruin it.
But the people doing the reporting are responsible for gathering the facts.
Those are the people who have to say "We can say this but we can't say that."

A major problem with the media is that there often are no consequences for bad reporting.
People rarely are fired for it.
Witness the guy who just got fired in Miami for editing the Trayvon Martin 911 tape.
Within weeks he was hired in Seattle.

Unfortunately, people rarely recognize shoddy reporting unless it directly affects them or their immediate interests.
"Quality of reporting" is not a major reason the majority of us watch and read the things we do.

 

[AlaskaSU]

I was watching the game yesterday and telling my wife how stupid ESPN is and she brings up how much I talk about how bad the sports department of the Post Standard is. She then asks me a great question, "Who do you hate more ESPN or the Post Standard?" What a great question. I'm still trying to figure out my answer. Thoughts?

Really? We just changed to a one party socialist insolvent Nation which has been aided and abetted by mainstream media and you rant about sports jounalism?

 

[longtimefan]

Really? We just changed to a one party socialist insolvent Nation which has been aided and abetted by mainstream media and you rant about sports jounalism?

Take it to the other board, Rush.

 

[cuseinseattle]

Why do you hate the Post Standard sports department?

I don't care for the Post Standard for many reasons. One as people have already pointed out they are incapable of editing their own stories. Two Bud Poliquin works there and is a complete fool that rights meaningless crap stories with titles like, "Jim Boeheim has no comment on Fine charges being dropped." Third I think they consistently try and bait Boeheim into being upset and then when they get their desired result they act like victims. There are many examples of this one of them being the Boeheim vs Pitino record. They wrote an article saying another coach is better than Boeheim and then acted liked they were being picked on when he fought back. Don't throw rocks if you live in a glass house. I think other local paper back the team while the Post Standard seems to do the opposite and think that means they are better journalists. We think Syracuse will lose to Butler look at us we are objective. Well good for you go yourself!

 

[OttoMets]

Really? We just changed to a one party socialist insolvent Nation which has been aided and abetted by mainstream media and you rant about sports jounalism?

You seem to take a certain pride in waving your ideological flag on a couple of sports message boards, despite the fact that you're usually told that this isn't the appropriate venue for that.

Forgetting for a second your unwillingness to respect your fellow-posters by keeping that stuff out of here, that apparent pride is misplaced: no one's impressed with your shtick. Far from it - you show off a bizarre worldview and a seeming misunderstanding of words such as "socialist" and "insolvent."

 

[armory]

ESPN

ESPN had an agenda, and it clearly wasn't to report the truth. They spent all their resources reporting conjecture while hoping the truth would come out to support their conjecture. They took far too much liberty in drawing conclusions that fit that agenda and willfully ignored any elements that seemed to support an opposite conclusion. Meanwhile, they threw journalistic objectivity out the window to make things appear to fit their narrative... specifically when Mark Schwarz put Bobby Davis in touch with Tomasselli allowing them to align their stories, the result of which prompted the warrant for the federal investigation. That's not journalism, that's a witch hunt.

 

[A Clockwork Orange]

Really? We just changed to a one party socialist insolvent Nation which has been aided and abetted by mainstream media and you rant about sports jounalism?[/quote

This is a sports forum Chester, not a political forum.

 

[A Clockwork Orange]

I don't care for the Post Standard for many reasons. One as people have already pointed out they are incapable of editing their own stories. Two Bud Poliquin works there and is a complete fool that rights meaningless crap stories with titles like, "Jim Boeheim has no comment on Fine charges being dropped." Third I think they consistently try and bait Boeheim into being upset and then when they get their desired result they act like victims. There are many examples of this one of them being the Boeheim vs Pitino record. They wrote an article saying another coach is better than Boeheim and then acted liked they were being picked on when he fought back. Don't throw rocks if you live in a glass house. I think other local paper back the team while the Post Standard seems to do the opposite and think that means they are better journalists. We think Syracuse will lose to Butler look at us we are objective. Well good for you go yourself!

If I can take these one at a time:

1) Incapability of editing their own stories.
2) Bud
3) They "bait" Coach Boeheim
4) They don't back the team

1) We've already covered editing. Absolutely an issue, and becoming more and more of one at newspapers the size of The Post Standard across the country. These reporters are asked to do more with less time. Mistakes are bound to happen. This is not unique to newspapers the size of The Post Standard. Definitely a legit gripe though, and something every newspaper (not just the P-S) needs to address.

2) I'm not a fan of Bud's writing either, or his take. He's a columnist, he's supposed to make you think, I don't think he does that enough. I'll agree here.

3) They "bait" Coach Boeheim. I remember the Pitino story. They never made a conclusive "he is a better coach than Coach B." You may have inferred that from the FACTS that they stated, and that's fine. It may even be true (heavens to betsy no!). Either way, they have a right to write that story, as they both are amazing coaches in the same league and the game was being played the next day. Not once did they state "Pitino is a better coach." That's your takeaway. In any case, why shouldn't they do a story like that? Are they not allowed to write anything that in any way should be taken as critical of the team or coach? Should they just write puff pieces constantly about how delicious Rak's biceps are, and how shiny coach's bald head is? That's what the SU Athletics website is for, not the newspaper. And by the way, coach has every right to lambast them for it at the podium. That's his right. When did the members of the P-S act appalled that he did that? That's kind of how Coach Boeheim is; I'd be surprised if anyone on staff was upset about that.

4) They're journalists, not backers of the team. Their job is to cover the team for better or worse. If bad things are happening they cover that, if good things are happening they cover that. That's their job. If your thoughts are that "The Post Standard should back the team" then I don't need to read any more. You obviously don't understand what a journalist's job is, so I get why you would hate their coverage.

Listen, I'm not saying the sports department at the P-S is infallible. They have made mistakes before. Big mistakes. But if these are your reasons for hating them, I suggest you just go on over to the SU Athletics page and get all of your Syracuse related news from them. They will be much more biased for you.