Journalism 2016
Oh, the irony.
As I delved into Jason McIntyre’s piece, “Low Morale at CBS Sports.com as it Eschews Reporting in Favor of Aggregation,” published on USA Today’s web sports platform thebiglead, I couldn’t help but to be slapped by hypocrisy.
I scan the left-hand bar of suggested stories, posted under the same banner, the same brand as McIntyre’s, and read:
“Peyton Manning is Lucky Social Media Wasn’t Around in 1996 When He Allegedly Sat on a Female Trainer’s Face”
“Beyoncé Almost Fell, but Rocked It With Bruno Mars During Super Bowl Halftime Show”
“Roundup: Rob Lowe Takes a Shot at Cam Newton; Watch Two Alligators Fighting”
Yes, a story warning all about the apocalyptic demise of sports journalism via the hostile takeover of mindless, fluff material, is flanked by the very content it criticizes.
Rewind the hands of time, and one will also find yet another bit of irony. USA Today, now prominent as it may be, was considered to be the usher of print journalism’s downfall – the “McPaper” of reporting.
But enough conversation about hypocrisy, because I truly believe that the point the article makes, and the one that was discussed in class by Jen McCaffrey and Jason Mastrodonato is one of particular importance, especially for me and my peers.
As was discussed, there seems to be a universal consensus about the importance of accuracy, one that I unwaveringly subscribe to. There simply isn’t room for error. There is, however, a point that I contend with: the growing trend of clickbait/fluff pieces and page views.
In his CBS feature, McIntyre laments the laying off of experienced veterans for “untrained bloggers” who primarily focus on aggregating information from other sources.
While I wholeheartedly agree that “untrained bloggers” should not be taking the jobs of professionals many, many years their senior (and experience), I object to their classification as such because, well, we aren’t “untrained.”
I use the term “we” because I, by these definitions, would be classified as the precisely the kind of person who CBS Sports would be looking for to aggregate or curate material. The only difference is, rather than CBS Sports, I provide those services to Bleacher Report. My colleagues are all upperclassmen or graduate students, studying journalism, grasping at every work opportunity and rigorously held to many guidelines. So many, in fact, that the preparation, the training is nearly four months long.
My objection arises not from personal offense, but because, in my mind, I see these sorts of programs, not as the death of journalism, but simply as a new means to cut one’s teeth – much like covering high school sports. Many, however, do not.
Some may call this practice of pumping out fun, pop-culture/sports hybrid stories selling out, having a lack of integrity or any other combination of those sentiments. The simple fact is that people want to read it. Period. McCaffrey has turned to identifying her page view totals on her resume. I, myself, find, just like all those who voiced their opinion, this practice shocking because it indicates the weight that those numbers have. Obviously, those numbers shouldn’t represent a writer or reporter’s worth, but they do represent lucrative advertising, which, much as my classmate Gabbie Chartier remarked, is not all that different from newspaper circulation. These fluff pieces, the articles about David Ortiz’s haircut, may temporarily be the lifeblood of income that will fund greater, more in-depth journalistic pursuits. B/R’s totals in this area are massive. My own contributions for the month of January alone eclipse three million.
And that clearly means, once again, that the interest exists. So rather than consider these categories of work a necessary evil, I happen to enjoy them. Who decided that a world with fun, light-hearted stories was a bad one? All things, of course, should exist in moderation, but society will not devolve into a mindless void because I occasionally pass on the news that yet another athlete has chipped in to support Flint, Michigan. In fact, I think it only helps an athlete’s brand, making them more three-dimensional (to continue last week’s conversation).
Sports are largely forms of entertainment. It would therefore follow that, occasionally, some of the writing that pertains to them would also be entertaining. As Mastrdonato said during a conversation about Super Bowl media day, “Sports have become everything.”
As frightening as it may be, it’s a trend that websites will be forced to embrace. Just as websites today would call the idea of trying to sway readers back to reading primarily print versions of their work ludicrous, so too will the idea of getting “breaking news” from full-time reporters become. Someone, usually only a select few, will post that kind of information to Twitter (or whatever other service/site will then be prevalent), and it will be passed on. Notifications will continue to be pushed to phones, and within the span of 20 seconds, I’ll know that the New York Knicks fired David Fisher. “Sad” as it may be, there truthfully doesn’t need to be a legion of people fulfilling that role.
To begin my conclusion, I’ll refer to a quote from McIntyre that particularly struck me. He stated, “If you talk to enough people in the industry, you’ll hear sad but true statements like this: It’s more important to be successful on Facebook than it is to break news.”
A comment made by Mastrodonato best leads my discussion of this quote’s importance to me: “These are all things that journalists have been doing for years. They just used to be handled differently.”
Interesting. Could it be that Facebook, Twitter and social media are simply the USA Today’s of, well, today? What was once regarded as a devolution is now regarded with prominence. What is today regarded as shameful could potentially be regarded as an achievement. Is this not an evolution?
The man who was once looked down upon for ushering in an era of sensationalism in journalism is now the namesake of its most prestigious award.
Mastrodonato is correct. The state of journalism is not so “bleak.” For those who embrace it, pioneer its available avenues, seek out ways to convey their messages, carve out a niche, I’m confident it will prove lucrative.
Telling stories is as old as time, from the spoken word tradition and Homer’s epics to 140 character headlines. It will never die. Those who steadfastly grip to yesterday’s methods, however, might.