Quantcast
Friday, March 20th, 2009 at 2:09 pm  |  18 responses

Print Media Dying With the Wizards

As the team continues on its four-game road trip, neither the Washington Post or Times have sent reporters to cover the 16-53 Wiz. The L.A. Times stopped sending writers back in January. Be ready: Beat reports are quickly moving away from newspapers and heading in YouTube’s direction.

  • Add a Comment
  • Share
  • RSS

Tags:

  • http://slamonline.com Tzvi T

    (Tear drops off face)

  • http://slamonline.com/ Justin Walsh

    this does suck but this also just reminds me at how most papers have ignored the internet for far too long.

  • http://thesportsdiaryonline.blogspot.com Roy

    Co-sign Justin Walsh.

  • https://twitter.com/TheDiesel Anton

    I’d still take a job at the worst NBA team. No complaints.

  • WhaHuh

    rocky mountain news died last month. they usually had good nuggets info

  • jose

    yea i mean its basketball(sure its an underachieving team)but id work for them to watch the game.

  • Nate James

    ya, i would also.

  • http://WWW.Yahoo.Com The Kandi Raver

    bad times for a one D.C, team

  • James aka…

    ITs a big deal when a paper stops covering the local sports team, because sports are the largest revenue generator for any paper. If you’re scrimping on eating, your death is near.

  • Mark Z

    What’s the point? The Wiz are riddled with injuries, saddled with huge contracts and are gunning for a lottery pic.

  • L33tSauce

    When was the last time a news paper was relevant? I lost faith in news paper long ago when the Sunday NY Times broke the $5 mark. I’ll take my internet over the paper.

  • chintao

    Watching “The Wire” brings to mind a few issues with the death of newspapers. No disrespect to anyone who posts here, but trained, professional journalists were taught a code of ethics. As we move deeper into the internet age, it seems that these ethics seem to be losing relevance. Without an accountable class of professional journalists, how do we establish credibility? With everyone reporting whatever he wants, how do we sift through the avalanche of information and assign values to each story’s relevance and importance? My fear is that we all will be awash in nonsense, as some nefarious shadow organization lays control to every facet of our futures.

  • donovan

    L33 — Where do you think most of the stuff you read online comes from, originally?

  • L33tSauce

    Yes, Donovan, so if it is online, something i will pay for regardless, why bother with overpriced news papers? Yes, credibility is lost online, but where is the credibility in television anymore. We can never forget Dan Rather and his unreliable sources. And the news papers, just like all other media outlets, mold the truth to what they want. So pick your poison. I choose my internet.

  • donovan

    Well the CREDIBILITY argument with newspapers doesn’t hold much water with me, anyway; Stephen Glas, Jayson Blair, etc. Corrections? Things happen all the time. Just because something’s printed doesn’t make it more credible. I’m not of that mind.

    What does bother me, though, is the erosion of standards, punctuation, grammar, AP style and so forth. (“w00t Bron Bron mess around n drop a triple double!!111!!!!11″ doesn’t really do it for me.)

    What I especially don’t think many people get, though, with the “I-just-go-online” attitude, is that most of the stuff you see online is derived from full-time reporting, one way or another. How much stuff on this site do you see attributed along the lines of, “According to the Sacramento Bee…” You think the Sac Bee reporters just rolled out of bed and got secretly informed of that news? That they didn’t work to get it? That the sources trusted them because they’d worked together, full-time? Because they knew they cultivate other sources and work phones all day?

    I couldn’t care less about whether newspapers find a way to survive in print. Ever heard of the Voice of San Diego model? Things like that could be the future.

    “Newspapers” being online actually makes waaaaaay more sense, for many reasons — including timeliness and that you don’t have to worry about picas and boxes and a bunch of other pagination concerns that are generally a waste of time unless you’re trying to make something look really pretty (which, most of the time, newspapers aren’t).

    People always blame newspapers for “ignoring” the Internet — how about blaming advertisers? That’s the problem. Most companies still think a print ad is worth far more than an online one, and they don’t have any clue how to effectively advertise online.

  • chintao

    I understand where you guys are coming from, with the Dan Rather, Jason Blair, et al. Still, it seems like these credibility issues are more commonplace than they used to be. I can’t make a direct connection, but I believe that the erosion in standards is an outgrowth of the increasing reliance on the internet as a viable and trustworthy source of news.

  • donovan
  • chintao

    ^ Thanks for that. It was a very interesting treatment of something that will become a serious problem before anyone realizes. In fact, I’ll go one better. The death of professional journalism is designed to obsfuscate the agenda of prime movers in government and business. With nothing but fuzzy noise masquerading as news, nobody will have any clue what is going on.

Advertisement