It's Time to Move On
A response to Kerry Eggers' Unprovoked Attack on Bloggers
In a recent interview with writer Wendell Maxey, The Portland Tribune's Kerry Eggers was asked for his thoughts regarding blogs. As recently as last week, on this very blog, I commended Eggers for an "insightful" piece on the developing sports radio battle between 95.5FM and 1080AM. Indeed, I have been a long-time reader and fan of Mr. Eggers' work and I consider his behind-the-scenes books about the early 1990s Blazers to be must-reads.
With that said, in the wake of his recent comments regarding bloggers, Mr. Eggers can no longer count me as a member of his readership. Here is the portion of the interview which I found to be so dismaying.
Mr. Maxey: So how do you adjust to the blogs and growing media pool?
Mr. Eggers: I don't like blogs at all, and I'll tell you why. I don't think they have the integrity of a newspaper or a website. Bloggers don't necessarily have the credentials that a real accredited journalist has - some of them do but some of them don't - so you don't know what you're getting. Anyone can sit at home with their computer and write and consider themselves an expert while they are out there in the world having people read their stuff. They lack accountability and credibility as well. But people think they can throw anything out there in a blog, and they aren't accountable. One columnist we both know told me once he likes the blog because "you don't have to be quite as responsible." Say what? Therein lies the problem. It's a lot of opinion and that opinion is not backed by much fact. I would like to think in our business at least we have a pretty good background of facts in what we are writing. So that part discourages me with bloggers.
Mr. Maxey: It's a fine line though because you have many newspapers and beat guys who have their own blog as well....
Mr. Eggers: I think many of them write about their own personal experiences, it becomes "me-me-me". I don't know. As a reader I'm not interested in that. I want to read what they are writing about, not about the troubles with their rental cars.
Mr. Eggers discounts blogs on many fronts so each of his arguments will be taken in turn.
Integrity
While Eggers, and many sportwriters, argue that their work is different from bloggers because they have "a pretty good background in facts," it is quite clear that Mr. Eggers' understanding of blogs is not grounded in such facts. To wit:
I don't think [blogs] have the integrity of a newspaper or a website.
All blogs, by definition, exist online and are, therefore, websites. If a blog is a website, and websites can have integrity, why can't a blog have integrity?
Apparently, there must be some clear distinction between integrity-having websites (like, perhaps, his website, PortlandTribune.com) and non integrity-having blogs.
To clear up this distinction, I contacted the editor of the Portland Tribune, Dwight Jaynes, who informed me that the Tribune currently employs a blogger, Chris Snethen ("who is extremely good"). He went on to say that "as a paper, we are searching now to add other bloggers to Chris [and] we’ve been close to adding others." The centre cannot hold: either Mr. Eggers' website doesn't have integrity because it has a blog, or blogs are indeed capable of having integrity.
I think most people would lean towards the latter.
Credentials
Bloggers don't necessarily have the credentials that a real accredited journalist has - some of them do but some of them don't - so you don't know what you're getting.
Here the assertion is that all bloggers, by virtue of sharing a medium, lack authority because some members who employ said medium do not have the credentials of an accredited journalist.
To dismiss an entire group of writers on the merits of its least successful and accomplished members has no precedent in the real world. Try out this line of reasoning: "Freelance graphic designers don't necessarily have the credentials that a real accredited artist has -- some of them do but some of them don't - so you don't know what you're getting."
Like bloggers, you do, in fact, know exactly what you're getting because the end product is staring you in the face. It's either art that you appreciate or art that you don't; it's either writing you enjoy or writing that you don't. Over time, over a career, over dozens of art shows and millions of pageviews, a reputation is developed or it isn't. Your work comes to matter, or it doesn't.
Credentials don't mean jack on the internet or in an art museum. The most important factor is the quality of the work. Bloggers necessarily trust the audience to make the quality-of-work determination for itself; Mr. Eggers would prefer that his credentials allow him to make that determination for everyone.
Accountability
Anyone can sit at home with their computer and write and consider themselves an expert while they are out there in the world having people read their stuff. They lack accountability and credibility as well. But people think they can throw anything out there in a blog, and they aren't accountable.
Later in the interview, Mr. Eggers states that he enjoys reading the New York Post's Peter Vecsey with the disclaimer that, "I'm not saying I always think his stuff is solid or true." Ironically, in a recent podcast with Bill Simmons that was published on ESPN.com, Mr. Vecsey states that he prefers to write about the NBA from home and watch games on TV because the access to players in stadiums has been restricted in recent years. Mr. Eggers, therefore, lauds a man whose stuff "isn't always solid or true" and who prefers to write from home, yet says bloggers "lack accountability and credibility" for doing exactly the same things.
To make matters worse, Mr. Eggers misfires on the basis of this argument: increasing numbers of bloggers are not, in fact, "sitting at home." Many bloggers are making a concerted effort to "get off the couch" and to obtain press access. Bloggers do so based primarily upon the merits of their writing, not on the reputation that their publication bestows upon them, deserved or not. With some teams, like the Portland Trail Blazers, bloggers are met with open arms. With others, like the Dallas Mavericks, bloggers are literally met by security guards. So why bother?
The best or most ambitious bloggers bother because, like their journalist predecessors, they want to have the best articles and opinions; the best articles and opinions, as journalists have long known, often come from having access to their subjects through press credentials and networking with media/team officials to create reliable sources. To assert that all bloggers wouldn't care about such things, and would prefer to navel-gaze at home on their couches, seriously underestimates the ambition and determination of an entire generation of young writers. Take a look around, Mr. Eggers, and you'll see bloggers who care about the exact same things you do.
Responsibility
One columnist we both know told me once he likes the blog because "you don't have to be quite as responsible." Say what? Therein lies the problem. It's a lot of opinion and that opinion is not backed by much fact.
Here Mr. Eggers' argument turns in upon itself. Without naming a name, Mr. Eggers asserts that classically-trained and credentialed columnists, who presumably have credibility, hold themselves to one standard in print and hold themselves to a different (lower) standard online. If this is true (an important "if"... as presented this story is hearsay), this argument invalidates the credibility of the writer, his credentials and the training that he received, not the blog form. Blaming blogs here is like blaming a concrete wall for having graffiti written on it.
Personality
I think many of them write about their own personal experiences, it becomes "me-me-me". I don't know. As a reader I'm not interested in that. I want to read what they are writing about, not about the troubles with their rental cars.
Mr. Eggers states, apparently in all seriousness, that as a reader, he does not like blogs because he is "not interested" in the writer's personal experiences. Presumably, Mr. Eggers is therefore also not interested in reading memoirs, watching documentaries and engaging in conversation.
Whether he realizes it or not, Mr. Eggers reaches a key conclusion about blogs: those written only about one's experiences do not get read. The best blogs, on the contrary, cultivate an active community of readers that add further layers to the discussion, transforming an article from a lecture-like dissertation to a communal conversation. The fan base's shared knowledge, therefore, creates a classic "whole is bigger than the sum of the parts" dynamic. Any reporter who believes his perspective has more value than those of the general public is sorely mistaken. Blogs, through their interactive format, are more accomodating and accessible to their readers than a print newspaper could ever hope to be.
Ironically, a recent column by Mr. Eggers, published in the print edition of the Portland Tribune, consisted entirely of a dream Mr. Eggers had in which he was playing pickup basketball with Tribune Editor Dwight Jaynes and former NBA All-Stars Charles Barkley and Hakeem Olajuwon. It is unclear how a column about a dream is different from a story about a rental car. Writing about one's dream, in which one plays pickup ball with celebrities, is as "me-me-me" as writing gets. So, it seems, Mr. Eggers reserves the right to opine about his own personal experiences but prefers that other "credentialed" writers and all bloggers avoid doing the same.
(It should be noted that Mr. Eggers, with his rental car line, takes a not-subtle-at-all jab at The Oregonian's Paul Buker, without naming him. For a man who demands accountability from bloggers, Mr. Eggers exhibits none in this anonymous attack. I'm sure Mr. Eggers has little time for Hip Hop, but listening to 50 Cent would do him some good; at least Fiddy has the decency to call out his adversaries by name when taking unprovoked jabs and assaulting the quality of their work.)
Final Thoughts
It is disheartening to find out that a writer whose work I have long enjoyed is dead wrong on a topic that is so near and dear to my heart, the rise of new media and the role of blogs. Upon reading Mr. Eggers' interview, I immediately contacted Mr. Jaynes in hope that he might help provide some context for Mr. Eggers' remarks, as Mr. Jaynes recently published a much more reasonable take on blogging. Ever the stand-up editor, Mr. Jaynes defended his writer, stating that "Kerry is a valued employee and he's entitled to his opinion." Mr. Jaynes also stated, without qualification, "I don't agree with Kerry's comments."
And how could he? As the head of the Portland Tribune, a paper that has been gaining readership by increasing its online presence in the wake of trimming down to a single weekly print edition, Mr. Jaynes cannot possibly endorse Mr. Eggers' lack of understanding and respect for the online world. Doing so would be completely counterproductive to his publication's stated goals and current vision.
What's worse, Mr. Eggers' statements stand directly in the way of good sportswriting. In attempting to delegitimize all bloggers he, in turn, moves to silence them. Recently, I happened across an essay by David Halberstam (writer of arguably the greatest sports book of all time) published in The Best American Sports Writing 1991. Halberstam wrote,
"I think of men like Smith, Cannon and Heinz. They were the writers who we as young boys turned to every day, and they were the ones experimenting with form. They were all very different, they were all very good, and what made reading them exciting for a generation of young men and women wanting to go into reporting was that they were changing the rules, not accepting the bland, rigid, constricting form of journalism."
Unencumbered by word counts, page restrictions and newspaper politics, bloggers (or columnists doubling as bloggers, or reporters doubling as bloggers) are responsible for some of the best sportswriting today and are fighting the same battle against bland, rigid, constricting form that great writers have always fought.
To entirely dismiss the collected work of bloggers, as many sportswriters have done recently, is a tragedy. Blogs are to media what Wilt was to basketball: game-changing. Every writer must change with it, or risk irrelevance.
In the Tribune column mentioned above, in which he imagines himself playing pickup basketball with Charles Barkley, Mr. Eggers writes, "At some point in one’s life, with the toll that basketball takes on your body, it’s time to move on." After reading his recent interview, one is left wondering whether Mr. Eggers (along with any sportswriter who willingly casts off blogs without consideration) is best off taking his own advice.
-- Ben (benjamin.golliver@gmail.com)
8 recs |
102
comments
Comments
Ben
Any man that uses the phrase “Say what?” is clearly more responsible a journalist than you. You can tell, because he gives specific sources for his anecdotes. His “some friend” thinks you’re not responsible. Therefore, you’re not. Really, what don’t you understand?
Eggers and Mark Cuban should get together and have a party. I dare either of those men to make less sense.
Kevin Pritchard is a 4.0 Draft Day Student
by rmcdougall on Jul 6, 2008 7:36 PM PDT 0 recs
I support you Ben
I will not read him anymore.
President of the Petteri Koponen fan club.
by Sabonis4Ever on Jul 6, 2008 9:08 PM PDT 0 recs
Me too
Except…well…I never read him in the first place. Why eat McDonalds when you have steak dinner right here, ever day?
How do I set my laser printer to stun?
by prezofdeath on
Jul 6, 2008 11:03 PM PDT
up
0 recs
"Change"
Gets harder to accept as the years go by, plain & simple.
Writers in all facets of print media are now bias/agenda driven. We all know this. That is why we turn to blogs. And why I no longer trust/rely what the main street media tells me.
Too bad for you Kerry. Get used to it., or get out of the way.
The Oden Era, Day 375
by Heymoe on Jul 6, 2008 9:09 PM PDT 0 recs
Woops
Day 2901 = 7+ years = 2+ rings = many happy nights falling asleep….
and then waking up.
The Oden Era, Day 376
by Heymoe on
Jul 7, 2008 6:35 AM PDT
up
0 recs
This is part of a larger overall backlash against new media by "traditional media"
The truth is that recent generations are rejecting the notion that print media and other forms of media are in any way responsible or unbiased. As it turns out, we are seeing more and more traditional media sources becoming the lapdogs of those maintaining the status quo, pretty much across the board.
Just look at the “objective” reporting leading up to the Iraq invasion. The one chance mainstream media had to make a difference and show off their “responsible journalism” they completely screwed the pooch and left us holding the bag.
Traditional media, now forever linked to maximizing profit margins with the formation of media conglomerates, is dying before our eyes. They will never hold the relevance they once had because the conditions that created that relevance in the first place (public service on the airwaves, etc.) are no longer in place.
The newer generations are much more media savvy than our masters would think.
by BlazerD on Jul 6, 2008 9:39 PM PDT 1 recs
Dead on
The traditional media has been revealed as corrupt, staunch supporters of the status quo. Blogs and internet journalism (and netroots political action and fund raising) scares the bejabbers out of people whose paychecks depend on the peepul being willing to lap up whatever they serve.
True, sports bloggery may not be all that significant in the scheme of things, but there was time, when one of the best parts of my day was to buy a newspaper and a cup of coffee and waste the first half hour of my boss’s time at my desk having a good read.
I haven’t bought a paper in over 8 years. They know this and it scares them. And I’m not one of those trendy youngters, I’m right in the heart of the old guy demographic that used to butter their bread.
by raoulduke on
Jul 6, 2008 10:10 PM PDT
up
2 recs
Yep.
"Besides, AnntheFan will be here any minute to #25 you." T Darkstar
by annthefan on
Jul 6, 2008 10:15 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Me too
At 46 I am part of the bridge generation. I should still have some sort of allegiance to print media ….but I don’t. I get my news right here on the “interweb” and rarely read a newpaper or magazine. Books? Hell yeh….but print journalism? No way
"Some of Dave’s greatest gifts are unanswered posts."
by 92wastheyear on
Jul 6, 2008 10:30 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Annthefan is in the heart of the old guy demographic??!!
I’m shattered.
by raoulduke on
Jul 6, 2008 10:38 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Chronologically speaking, I think he means, hon. Honest, I'm not an old guy. But,
if I’m in old guy’s hearts that’s okay too! Hmmm. Or young ones for that matter.
For a long time we had newspapers delivered. Eventually we realized it was only because of the crossword puzzles and canceled the subscriptions.
"Besides, AnntheFan will be here any minute to #25 you." T Darkstar
by annthefan on
Jul 7, 2008 1:23 AM PDT
up
0 recs
LOL, but its for the comics
"We will do nice things!" - Rudy, 07/01/08
by jorga on
Jul 7, 2008 10:23 AM PDT
up
0 recs
he's just defensive
which is likely a losing posture. I think you can afford to take the high road here - he’ll likely write interesting stuff in the future, why deprive yourself of reading it? His remarks all sound like knee-jerk, uninformed opinions, but then I never read him for his insight into media, rather for his insight into basketball. Take it with a grain of salt and keep on doing what you’re doing - you’ve got a strong presence here, and nothing he says can take that away.
by BrailleTaser on Jul 6, 2008 9:44 PM PDT 0 recs
worse, Mr. Eggers’ statements stand directly in the way of good sportswriting. In attempting to delegitimize all bloggers he, in turn, moves to silence them.[/quote]
I was completely on your side until you slipped in this remark, Ben.
We all know that there is no going back to the pre-blogging era. At the same time, we all know that the blogging process, along with the comments from yay-hoos such as myself, can be greatly improved (which is to be expected - it’s still in its infancy).
Critiques such as the one by Eggers, wrongheaded and broadbrushed as they are, will ultimately help to make blogging better and more accepted. To the extent that he is incorrect, this will shine a light for those who are blindly ignorant. To the extent that he is correct, the medium is certainly young and versatile enough to adapt.
Eggers is just giving his opinion. Show him he’s wrong and leave it at that. Let’s not make him out to be an Al Campanis or a Joseph Goebbels, for crying out loud.
MLB2PDX!!! (someday...)
by The Cactus Leaguer on Jul 6, 2008 9:54 PM PDT 0 recs
Correction (1st paragraph)
What’s worse, Mr. Eggers’ statements stand directly in the way of good sportswriting. In attempting to delegitimize all bloggers he, in turn, moves to silence them.
MLB2PDX!!! (someday...)
by The Cactus Leaguer on Jul 6, 2008 9:55 PM PDT 0 recs
Ben,
your writing is first rate. You shouldn’t be too concerned about this. Sometimes a person has to say something out loud, or in the case of a journalist perhaps, read it in print to see how silly it is.
Old media is quoting new media all the time. That is evidence enough of its quality and worth. As example I give you Dave’s work on player salaries.
Your own writing is a very enjoyable read. Your piece about the bunker during the draft reminded my of my favorite sports writer, now deceased, Hunter Thompson. More of the same please.
I thank both you and Dave for the pleasure you have both given me in reading your stories. I am older than most Edgers and grew up newspaper in hand. The writing here is easily as good and probably better than ninety percent of what I have previously read.
They consider themselves forward thinking in Portland from what friends tell me. Apparently they have this global warming issue handled. They’ve found ways to end your life as a profit making venture. And they’re hip to counter culture icons.
by NBA Observer on Jun 27, 2008
by Kampeska on Jul 6, 2008 9:56 PM PDT 0 recs
Good post Ben
I wouldn’t stop reading Eggers. You can disagree on an issue and still respect his writing. Perhaps someday he’ll realize that his position on blogging is off base.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Jul 6, 2008 10:04 PM PDT 0 recs
i agree, you don't have to stop reading someone's works just b/c you disagree with them
I read Canzano, not b/c i love him or hate him, but to get a different view point that i may have not seen
Woof
by Charles Barkley McLovin on
Jul 6, 2008 10:57 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I agree with you Charlie. Sometimes I listen to Rush Limbecile, Michael Weiner or even pitiful Lars Larsen
to get that other perspective. Yep, I’m brave. Abby Hoffman said you have to watch 4 hours of TV a day in order to know what the enemy is doing.
"Besides, AnntheFan will be here any minute to #25 you." T Darkstar
by annthefan on
Jul 7, 2008 1:32 AM PDT
up
0 recs
When Kerry Eggers
can give me as much insightful commentary as this site does, he’ll get as much support as this site does.
Even if the magical newspaper credibility fairy has given him “special credibility”, as he believes.
by Timmay! on Jul 6, 2008 10:07 PM PDT 0 recs
Ben
Your argument that “It’s either art that you appreciate or art that you don’t; it’s either writing you enjoy or writing that you don’t.” seems somewhat contradictory to what your entire essay is about. He doesn’t like bloggers and he wont read them. You don’t like him and you will stop reading his articles. He may be wrong, but blogging is just art that he doesn’t care for.
Most of your other arguments could be construed as correct, though. Also, try to cut the length down on your writing, it would have turned this from a B- to a B+
by PippenAintEasy on Jul 6, 2008 10:10 PM PDT 0 recs
Blogging isn't an art
It’s just writing, delivered in a certain form. I think what Ben saw is that Eggers is trying to defend his business by defaming the opposition. In keeping with that attitude, Ben challenges Eggers where it is most appropriate: his business.
Logic appears to have failed Eggers, so Ben threatens him in a much more primal way.
Kevin Pritchard is a 4.0 Draft Day Student
by rmcdougall on
Jul 6, 2008 10:22 PM PDT
up
0 recs
That's not to say
Writing isn’t an art, just that blogging and writing are inseperable. To say that one does not like blogging is to say that one does not like writing, in my humble opinion.
Kevin Pritchard is a 4.0 Draft Day Student
by rmcdougall on
Jul 6, 2008 10:23 PM PDT
up
0 recs
A+ for me. I like Ben´s work more and more.
And when he´s a little furious his work is even better. I wouldn´t change a word.
Kerry Eggers´ statement is a show of prejudice, where he calls the whole by the part.
This attitude discredits him because it´s exactly the same principle on which the discriminatory ideologies (racism, sexism, xenophobia, etc.) are based. Ben has done a great classy work avoiding the obvious cliche “you are like Hitler” and using the art analogy. When I read something I try to see what the author decided not to write, because it shows a lot, it shows a lot.
The Midnight Rambler
by amlmart1 on
Jul 7, 2008 12:28 AM PDT
up
1 recs
+1
"I think it’s going to be very beautiful game next year."
-Batuuuuuuuum!
by rockingharder on
Jul 7, 2008 1:03 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Exactly
This is a well written piece for sure. I too have enjoyed pretty much the totality of Ben’s work on the site. I snorted when I saw someone say B- or B+. This is most definitely a strong A.
by BlazerD on
Jul 7, 2008 4:04 PM PDT
up
0 recs
The great A.J. Liebling
famously said that "Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one."
Up until recently, that freedom was the province of a select few. Nowadays, anyone with a keyboard and an internet connection can set up their own virtual printing press.
And thank god for that. No longer am I solely dependent on the likes of John Canzano or Dwight Jaynes for their pronouncements from on high in regards to the Blazers. I can now reliably find insightful, well-reasoned analysis of the Blazers – or any other team that I care to read about – on at least a half dozen blogs that I regularly visit.
In his hastily decreed condemnation, Eggers makes a fundamental error when he says:
Bloggers don’t necessarily have the credentials that a real accredited journalist has
In effect, he is comparing the proverbial apples to oranges. Journalists (presumably) deal in facts. Bloggers deal in opinion, just as columnists (such as Eggers’ boss, Jaynes) do. Condemning bloggers because they are not journalists is as patently ridiculous as condemning Jaynes for not being as “objective” in his writing as beat reporters Eggers or Jason Quick.
Once that distinction is made clear, the discerning reader can than begin to identify the qualities that differentiate the best bloggers and commentators from the rest of the pack. As for me, I appreciate those who (1) are fans whose passion for a team or sport is their primary motivation for writing and (2) possess the necessary writing chops to convey that passion to the reader. Although I’m not a Blazer fan, I keep coming back to this site because Dave has those qualities. I rarely read Jaynes or Canzano because they seem to be more enamored with their own words or their presumed role as arbiters of public opinion than they are with the subjects they cover.
On some level, guys like Eggers and his old guard media cohorts feel this tectonic shift occuring beneath their feet and they don’t like it one bit. They’re not used to sharing the limelight with writers like Dave who are their equals – or better – in both talent and smarts.
by knickfan on Jul 6, 2008 10:44 PM PDT 0 recs
Blogs>Newspaper
The interactivity of digital media in which a writer can write a post that can then start a conversation between people all over the country in real time is something that paper-and-ink media just will never be able to do. Write a letter to the editor and hope the gate keeper prints it next week and doesn’t edit all my best stuff? Forget that. Blogs are better than newspapers. Just like cars are better than horses and buggies. Now cars have their own problems and nasty side effects and blogs definitely do too. But the answer is better cars and better blogs, not going back to buggies and newspapers. Eggers can whine about blogs and make up anti-blog propaganda all he wants, blogs will win and his paper (I hear it went from two issues a week to just one recently, no?) will lose. It’s simple technological darwinism.
by Jumbo on
Jul 6, 2008 10:51 PM PDT
up
0 recs
you make an excellent point
about the value of blogs.
while defending that fact that blogs are not as reliable as the newspaper, you brought up the point that while this may be a weakness, blogs do allow the expression of thoughts that are NOT guided by the media of the newspaper and may even, in fact, be less biased.
“Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one.”
I really like that quote. It’s become more true as more mergers have taken place over the past 20 years and yellow dog journalism really feels to be making a come back but with less “official” sources to denounce it.
Ford: Bill, you're claiming victory already? Have you had a "Mission Accomplished" banner printed yet?
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/columns/story?page=DraftDebate-080624
by ratbastird on
Jul 7, 2008 10:20 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Certainly there are excellent bloggers
...and engaging communities, like this one, as well as poor bloggers and unappealing communities. I don’t like Mr. Egger’s conclusions or his perfunctory dismissal of an entire medium (probably because it is threatening his industry, if they refuse to change).
However, part of what would make for better blogging is a little bit more structure, as well as possibly better editing and some writing guidelines. I think BlazersEdge does a good job of “self-editing” (mostly because Dave and Ben are good writers) but also because the readers of the blog have such immediate input and say. Take, for example, the “Anatomy of a Pritch-slap” the other day. The community immediately let Ben know that his article had opened up a huge can of worms, and he revised it to clarify his position. That only happens if the community is an intelligent one.
And while I’m at it I might as well throw some constructive criticism Ben’s way…I, like PippenAintEasy above, do think Ben could trim his articles down a lot. He could probably make his point in about half the words. Dave does a very nice job of that, which is impressive considering he’s not a 9 to 5 writer. But I enjoy Ben’s writing too, just think he could cut out some of the verbosity. That also goes for some of the commentators here too….
by jamon51 on Jul 6, 2008 10:47 PM PDT 0 recs
Anyone who reads BE
religiously knows that this is the best site of all for following the Blazers. Sure there is some off the wall stuff but if you scroll through the postings you will quickly form the opinion that over all its pretty good. I for one am proud to be a tiny part of it and this site is the only site that I go for Blazers news and comment.
by lethaldose on Jul 6, 2008 11:04 PM PDT 0 recs
Great post Ben
I love David Halberstams writing, he is my absolute favorite. I’m reading Playing for Keeps and the book is nothing short of amazing. I can honestly say there are bloggers on Yardbarker.com that are better than the ESPN “experts”. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had to stop reading in the middle of a sports column because of sheer boredom. I also believe Mike Barrett’s blog on the Blazers official website is one of the best. He may have the credentials of a journalist but it is still called a “blog”. I really hate how the egg head tries to turn the word blog into a bad word.
by BRoyInThe4th on Jul 6, 2008 11:27 PM PDT 0 recs
egg head?
referring to people who are educated and smart?
Smart is bad?
Education is bad?
You may not have meant that but it hit a button and so I’m now expressing.
It really irks me how often I see intelligence put down and education put down.
McCain AND Hillary mocked “the so called expert economists” when they stated that the gas holiday plan was a bad idea. The “so called experts” ARE experts. There’s a reason they’re an expert. While they may be wrong, to dismiss while not addressing seems EXTREMELY inappropriate. I use that as an example because it’s recent, but the usage of such put downs are amazingly wide spread.
Intelligence is good.
Education is good.
Those two things are not EVERYTHING, but they’re a lot.
In regards to the rest of your post. Entertainment value and quality value of a blog are two different things. Mike Barrett’s blog is extremely biased, very superficial, and definitely entertaining. Dave may have drier posts, but then tend to be much more informed and valuable if you’re looking for actual information.
Ford: Bill, you're claiming victory already? Have you had a "Mission Accomplished" banner printed yet?
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/columns/story?page=DraftDebate-080624
by ratbastird on
Jul 7, 2008 10:15 AM PDT
up
0 recs
But neither
education nor intelligence equal common sense. Not that they are mutually exclusive, but I’ve seen some intelligent educated people make some stupid decisions.
But yes, I agree, that they are a lot. And Eggers seems to think that bloggers are neither. I quite sure that there are educated journalists out there who have blogs (not counting those on their paper’s web sites.) They may not be credentialed at the moment, but maybe they were and have retired. I’d like to think that Walter Cronkite would have a blog today in order to keep commenting on the world.
Mike Barrett’s blog is biased because he is employed by the Trail Blazers. I don’t know if they have editorial control or he just “knows his place”. But he gets to see things that even the credentialed press doesn’t (like on the team plane) and can use them as anecdotes or in assessments of players or events.
"We will do nice things!" - Rudy, 07/01/08
by jorga on
Jul 7, 2008 10:34 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I think the third ingredient
is thoughtfulness.
Thought needs to be applied with education and intelligence.
As for Mike Barrett, he never bad mouthed Zach until he was gone. He wasn’t honest. Not that you don’t get that in standard media as well, but circling around to my point above, I wanted to note that Mike Barrett is biased and that effects the news that’s being reported as well that entertaining doesn’t mean good, accurate, in depth, reliable, and so on. Talk radio is entertaining, but seldom accurate from the few times I’ve listened.
Ford: Bill, you're claiming victory already? Have you had a "Mission Accomplished" banner printed yet?
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/columns/story?page=DraftDebate-080624
by ratbastird on
Jul 7, 2008 12:19 PM PDT
up
0 recs
You forgot love, the most important ingredient of all.
"Man I want to rec it again." - pualo talking about jscot's long comment
by tominhawaii on
Jul 7, 2008 2:14 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I obviously interpreted
“bias” as a negative. But I still think it is because of MB’s employment rather than him personally. Who knows what he said about Zach off the air. I did start learning about some of Zach’s shortcomings by listening to MB. Maybe he was simply reporting the facts, but it seemed to me that he was pretty upfront about Zach not being good fit/role model for the new kids. And he certainly pointed it out when Z-bo lingered under the opposing basket too long.
OTOH, we are all biased because we look at all things Blazers from the viewpoint of a Blazer fan.
I know I am biased against talk radio. It’s probably as unjustified as Keggers bias against blogs. I just never found any that made me want to return … it was always the same questions/comments day after day. And certainly my experience trying to find a place in online Blazer discussions … 15 years from the time I first logged into a discussion till I found Blazer Thoughts … was the same. I guess I’m just not interested enough in talk radio to persevere. And someone somewhere on some blog will rant against me for that.
"We will do nice things!" - Rudy, 07/01/08
by jorga on
Jul 7, 2008 7:08 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Unfair
Ben, I think you’re being unfair on this one. Traditional media sets the table from which bloggers feast. In Eggers’ world, there’s a bar of accuracy that must be cleared to keep a job. This bar is higher or lower, depending on the publication. It’s entirely possible for an individual to go through life reading only blogs and websites that support one’s biased viewpoint. Working journalists have some rightful scorn reserved for blogs that appear lucid, but are really playing fast and loose with the facts.
For subjects we know well, it’s mostly moot, as we have developed our own filter. I can have a discussion about an Iraq blog post, but if we’re talking about Zimbabwe, I’m going to read the consensus media before opening my mouth.
Eggers didn’t seem to be directing his comments at sports blogs in particular. New media has some serious questions to answer regarding its ability to effectively disseminate unbiased factual content in a way that allows the casual consumer to feel confident they’re getting an approximation of the truth.
Maybe we can give Eggers’ the benefit of doubt that these issues are what he was addressing? Here, we’re drawing a conclusion without giving the subject of a story, Eggers, the opportunity to respond. As long as we do this, our medium will not be considered journalism.
That said, keep blogging!
by Engineering Problem on Jul 6, 2008 11:35 PM PDT 1 recs
You know what Eggers doesn't like?
He says blogs because of “no editorial review”. I suspect that what he doesn’t like is us. You say he, Eggers, doesn’t have a chance to respond but that is patently incorrect. Not only does he have a chance to respond, it is built into the fabric of a blog. All he would have to do is come on in here …identify himself… and respond away (add to that, the fact that Ben and Dave would bend over backward to allow him to come in and write a rebuttal or allow him to come on and submit to another interview). I bet he won’t though. Even if he became aware of this and chose to respond, he likely wouldn’t. I suspect he would not like what real people would have to say about what he wrote (or answered in an interview). See….that is what makes a blog unique. We get to respond to the topic(s) of the day. The piece doesn’t live in a vacuum …we comment on it and respond to the comments and the story really grows. The traditional media (especially the older members) love to put out a story and really just ignore who it is meant for ….namely us.
"Some of Dave’s greatest gifts are unanswered posts."
by 92wastheyear on
Jul 7, 2008 8:41 AM PDT
up
0 recs
interesting
I’m amused that you’ve gone from “editorial review” , and you’ve turned it into it being about the commenters (us)... in your opinion.
I suspect that this is INDEED a part of what Egger doesn’t like about blogs, but I believe that he’s referring to the ability of the main bloggers to do exactly what you just did.
Blogs are an extremely easy media to do that in, much like talk radio.
Ford: Bill, you're claiming victory already? Have you had a "Mission Accomplished" banner printed yet?
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/columns/story?page=DraftDebate-080624
by ratbastird on
Jul 7, 2008 10:08 AM PDT
up
0 recs
You find my rightious indignation amusing sir?!!!
Seriously though…I really suspect that most of this anti-blogging stuff is due to the fact that the traditional media memebers do not want to have anything to do with yahoos like you or me, regardless to their stated reasons. It is one of the reasons I enjoy blogs so much. I have a voice.
"Some of Dave’s greatest gifts are unanswered posts."
by 92wastheyear on
Jul 7, 2008 10:17 AM PDT
up
1 recs
Either or
What we have here is different mediums serving different purposes. As an example, I’m a software engineer, which is a profession with wide variation in skill and competance. I breath a heavy sigh when folks who can write an Excel macro or some basic HTML refer to themselves as “engineers”. This does not mean that what they do isn’t “good” or “valuable” – it just means that it’s apples and oranges.
I can see someone like Quick feeling like his opinions are just plain worth more, as he’s travelling with the team, attending the games in person, talking to players on their cell, etc. He’s okay to feel that way.
by Engineering Problem on
Jul 7, 2008 10:46 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Nicely stated
Ford: Bill, you're claiming victory already? Have you had a "Mission Accomplished" banner printed yet?
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/columns/story?page=DraftDebate-080624
by ratbastird on
Jul 7, 2008 10:08 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Ratatouille
My wife and I rented Ratatouille over the weekend. One of the main themes of that movie is that “Anyone can cook”. This doesn’t mean that everyone can be a great cook, but that great cooks can come from anywhere. It seems that some newspaper-people haven’t realized that the same thing applies in sports-bloggery.
by tingeyga on Jul 7, 2008 12:10 AM PDT 0 recs
He sounds defensive...
...I wouldn’t stop reading Eggers. The time’s they are a changin” and Eggers sounds threatened. Without getting too much into it, he can have his opinion about Blogs and Bloggers and so what? It’s the times and technology which we are simultaneously blessed and cursed. With the proliferation of media outlets and forms of opinion the internet allows of course you are faced with a almost infinite scope of quality, Of course there are standards and protocal that a print journalist must follow that a casual blogger does not necessarily have to follow. I think this “freedom” threatens some old school journalists that now see the “breaking” story leaked in blogs and forums before they can get the message out. But there’s no going back. Blogging Lives! I really think neither entity should be threatened by the other, I think there’s room and need for both. It’s communication and I have faith in the readers and journalists and bloggers.
"Mother Nature started this fight, I think it's about time we ended it!"
by Krang on Jul 7, 2008 12:23 AM PDT 0 recs
There is some truth to what Kerry Egger's said
I’ll give an example.
I recently applied for a job with a company and before I did I thought I would google them to see if there was anything negative written about them. Little did I know there would be message board after message board both pro and con.
What was disappointing and also enlightening was that it was pretty obvious that many of the negative posts were clearly from competitors or bitter ex employees.
I did my due diligence and got to the bottom of each and every claim and eventually took the job. I won’t go into details but it really angered me that anyone could go on these message boards or blogs and spread whatever lies they wanted with complete anonymity, and with it no accountability. I asked my employer if they were aware of all of the negative message boards and they said that they figured that those message boards cost them roughly a million dollars a year in canceled orders. Due to the lack of accountablity they cannot sue for slander. Me working there I delved deeper to get the truth. A would be customer sees that and run for the hills.
I too wish there was more accountability with blogs or anything posted on the internet as it is just too easy for “posters” to start a rumor and really hurt someone.
Like that picture of me wearing my wifes bathing suit. Totally photo shopped.
I'm a little confused by your tactics
by oderiferous emanations 74 on Jul 7, 2008 12:52 AM PDT 1 recs
In next years we will see some people prosecuted because their behavior in blogs. Just wait.
Enforcement of accountability isn´t applied easily to masses behavior but can be done. It starts attacking some guys to give an example upon them, more or less as has happened with the authors of viruses propagated in internet. The notice will be spread by the media, threatening to whom have those behaviors. There will be always mistakes and even criminals in all places.
The Midnight Rambler
by amlmart1 on
Jul 7, 2008 3:05 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I've had that problem with online shopping...
...when reading the reviews of a given product (often computer or musical instrument-related), I’ll being trying to weigh the pros and cons of the thing, and I can’t help but think that quite often the reviews are plants, that an employee or competitor is putting forth great effort to encourage or discourage potential consumers. It’s rather maddening.

