The new normal in sports media coverage

pennstatenews via flickr

I usually enjoyed chatting with John Fox when he was coach of the Carolina Panthers. He was always congenial in our conversations and occasionally thoughtful and articulate.

Fox was easy to like. But only when he was talking off the record.

On the record? Fox was one of the more difficult coaches to cover. He wasn't as belligerent as some. He wasn't a jerk like others. But Fox was deliberately and maddeningly vague, bland and unresponsive to even the most obvious questions one might ask a head coach of a major professional sports team. He said nothing. For years. He offered no insight to even the most banal questions. I think if I had asked Fox on the record what time it was, he would have said, "it is what it is."

So I can't say I'm particularly surprised by the restrictive new rules for media covering the Chicago Bears during training camp with Fox now in his first year there after stints with Carolina and Denver. According to reports out of the Bears camp, all interviews with players must be requested 24 hours in advance. And reporters aren't allowed to write about what they see in training camp -- even though fans are allowed to tweet whatever they want.

The excuse offered by the Bears is that this will somehow prevent scouts from learning about opponents. Hogwash. If coaches are motivated enough to learn another team's secrets, they don't need the media to help them. See Bill Belichick.

So this isn't about helping the team win. It's about controlling and limiting the media. And whether this was Fox's idea or not, I suspect he doesn't give a hoot if the media's job is suddenly a lot harder.

In Europe, it happens all the time, as The New York Times reported today. One professional soccer team even banned the local media because the owner didn't like the coverage received.

The phase out of independent media coverage of sports teams isn't quite that extensive in the U.S. But it is happening here. Chicago shouldn't be viewed as an aberration, but more likely a trendsetter.

It didn't use to be this way. For years, sports teams and leagues had a symbiotic relationship with the media. Teams needed media coverage for marketing to build interest and sell tickets. Newspapers needed the coverage to help drive readership. It was a win-win no matter what the tone of the coverage. Back in the day, the New York Giants used to provide travel arrangements for some reporters. When I covered the Hartford Whalers years ago, I occasionally took the team's charter flight and the Whalers routinely booked a hotel room for me on the road (the flight and hotel were paid for by the newspaper).

Of course, the internet changed all of that. Teams now create their own content for marketing and can bypass the media to reach directly to the fans. And they are increasingly limiting independent media in favor of their marketing partners like ESPN, Fox Sports, etc., where coverage is more friendly and controlled.

The media still needs sports content to drive readership. But teams and leagues now seemingly view independent media as parasites. So there is a pressure on reporters to build strong relationships with teams through positive coverage. Those who don't adhere to the company line will be increasingly cut out of access to athletes and coaches.

It's even happening in sports like Nascar, which used to be media friendly but has drastically reduced access to drivers in the last year or two. These days, stories need layers of public relations approval before interviews are even scheduled. And it's not unusual for PR reps to ignore emails from media deemed unfavorable.

This is the new normal.

Michael Sam, the media and that shower question

A reporter I respect immensely called the ESPN story on Michael Sam’s shower habits as “nothing more serious than the death of journalism as we know it.”

I hope somebody can explain that to me, because I’m not sure I understand the kerfuffle that has erupted over Tuesday's report from the St. Louis Rams training camp.

Here’s what I know: For years, the fear of a gay athlete in the locker room and shower has been at the center of arguments against acceptance of a gay teammate. It is such an important issue that out former football player and executive director of the You Can Play Project Wade Davis addresses it directly when he meets with teams.

And it’s enough of a question that the noted gay sports website Outsports.com ran a full column from a gay former football player explaining why straight athletes need not be concerned about gay teammates in the shower. That ran in February.

So now we finally have the arrival of Michael Sam, who is hoping to make the St. Louis Rams roster this season and become the first openly gay player in the NFL. The team has been in training camp for about a month, long enough for both Sam and his straight teammates to get comfortable around each other.

Isn’t it appropriate for a reporter to ask how it’s going? Isn’t it worth reporting that the fear surrounding the shower issue for so many years turned out to be completely unfounded? Isn’t it a good idea to let people know it’s a non-issue in the Rams training camp as several players indicated in that ESPN report?

Are we suddenly so evolved on this issue that has roiled sports for so long that it is now verboten to even ask about it? 

If the reporter hadn’t asked the question, then Rams teammate Chris Long never would have tweeted this:

And from now on, that single tweet is going to be referenced every time the issue of professionalism in the locker room comes up.

Here’s why I think that’s important: There are no doubt other gay football players who are watching and waiting to see how Sam is treated by his teammates, organization, fans and the league. If teammates come out in support of Sam, that sends a powerful message to those closeted athletes that they might be supported, too. And perhaps it is a step forward for those who would like to come out as well.

Shouting down the reporter for asking the question inhibits conversation rather than fosters it. And we need to keep talking about these issues. Because this isn’t over. Sam’s arrival is a beginning, not an ending. The more Chris Long’s who come forward to tell their teammates it’s not an issue, the more welcoming the locker room will be for gay athletes. And the sooner we will be done with this as an issue once and for all.

But we're not there yet. We're not even close.

When ESPN reporter Josina Anderson asked the question, she got the answer that every gay or straight person who cares about acceptance should have been thrilled to finally hear: The shower is not an issue.

So thanks for asking …

Why Jimmie Johnson's surgery is news

Amy K. Marbach/Flickr

Six-time Nascar champion Jimmie Johnson revealed on Sunday that he underwent offseason surgery to repair three non-sports related hernias, a procedure that he acknowledged affected his preparation for the 2014 season.

New information on a popular public figure? By any measure -- in just about any newsroom in the country -- that would qualify as news. And yet, on Monday there was some dispute among fans, Johnson and even a few members of the media as to whether it should have been viewed that way.

Here's what Johnson told the media after he won the Sprint Cup race at Dover on Sunday: "I didn't realize it was one, a secret, or two, public information. Have you had any surgeries lately? Is there any procedures -- when did you have your teeth cleaned?"

To which I would answer ...

The wrath of Tony Stewart

Tony Stewart via flickr/AmyKay1974

Back when I was a hockey writer in Hartford, Conn., I once inspired an entire arena to laugh at me.

I was covering a minor-league championship on a night when I didn't have time to wait for players to get to the locker room for interviews following the game. As they lingered after the celebration was mostly over and my deadline quickly approached, I decided to go out onto the ice to talk to them.

You can probably imagine what happened next. I slipped and fell on my backside and the fans roared. 

Fortunately, a very kind player named Joe Day skated over and helped me back on my feet. I tracked Joe down recently to thank him once again and he actually thanked me back for treating him well during his professional career.

For some reason, his email made me smile and think of Tony Stewart.

ESPN, suicide and a story I've never told before

I was once assigned to write a feature story on a high profile, nationally known professional athlete who kept getting into trouble. What was wrong with this guy? I talked to former coaches and anyone in his hometown who knew him back when the athlete was in high school.

Through that reporting, I learned a shocking family secret.

The athlete's mother had attempted suicide back around the time he was becoming a local star with a big future. Not only that, but it was the athlete who had actually found his mother following the attempt.

The information may have shed some light on why this athlete had been so troubled. It also turned what was going to be a good feature into a great story.

But before I published it I wanted to find out something about this woman who was not a public figure and was about to have her personal agony exposed. That was a problem because I was not able to interview her. The athlete was refusing all media requests at the time, too.

So I tracked down the brother of the athlete and I asked him the one question I needed an answer to before writing this story:

A fitting postscript to 'The end of a career in journalism'

I received a lot of responses and retweets from yesterday's column on media companies that refuse to pay writers for their work or expertise, and why it would eventually mean the end of my journalism career. It was almost all very supportive and for that, I am grateful.

There was an interesting discussion on sportsjournalists.com -- a site populated by sports journalists, one presumes -- where many argued that the market had simply declared there was no value to our work. That is far too simple an explanation for the massive transformation within the industry, from the horrific decision years ago to give away the product for free to the inevitable decimation of independent media sports staffs that followed and the rise of journo-marketers at stakeholder sites from nfl.com to ESPN.com. There are a lot of reasons why the industry is where it is today and why it is forcing me out.

But perhaps the most telling response to my column came via a personal message that showed up in my Facebook inbox. A radio host named Dennis Michelsen from RaceTalkRadio wrote that he enjoyed my column on media outlets that refuse to pay people for their expertise, but he really liked another one I had written about fewer independent voices in Nascar. He wanted to talk about that column on his radio show and asked me to email him to set up a time for an interview.

I wrote back and asked what he would pay me to appear on his show.

His response: "Guests appear for free on our radio show to publicize their work ..."

The end of a career in journalism

Shortly after I wrote a jersey/slant column last July titled, "Nascar, Kyle Petty and the future of sports coverage," I received an email from an editor of a major metropolitan newspaper's editorial board. He wanted permission to reprint the column for the op-ed page. I responded, in part, with a request for information on the newspaper's compensation rate.

He quickly wrote back that they had chosen a different column instead. I've always wondered if it was because I dared to ask for money.

Not that I would be shocked if that was the reason. I've been asked too many times in my career to provide my work or expertise for free. And I'm hardly alone. Here's Tim Kreider's piece in The New York Times about the absurdity of this surprisingly commonplace practice. It's called "Slaves of the Internet, Unite!"

It would almost be funny if the truth wasn't killing my career.

Stakeholder journalism bias, Pete Prisco edition

Is it just me, or did Pete Prisco's CBSSports.com column on the $765 million concussion settlement with players read like an old NFL talking-points memo?

Prisco wrote that NFL players who sustained brain damage from the game shouldn't be compensated for their suffering because they knew what they were getting into when they agreed to play football. Of course, that doesn't mesh with the accusation that the league misled players about the danger of concussions. But that side of the lawsuit somehow wasn't mentioned in Prisco's column.

Look, if Prisco wants to announce to every player in the NFL that they get what they deserve for playing the game and shouldn't receive a dime in disability compensation, that's his prerogative. It's hard to believe players are going to have an ounce of respect for him after that column. But that's his choice.

Nor am I going to suggest Prisco might have brain damage, as Keith Olbermann did in his otherwise expert takedown of Prisco's relative indifference to the hardship and tragedy of former players like Junior Seau, who committed suicide like others who were found to really have brain damage.

I prefer to focus on the most obvious reason why Prisco would write such a conveniently dismissive, pro-NFL column about potentially thousands of irreparably damaged human beings:

ESPN and the pretense of journalistic integrity

Back in December, 2011, The New York Times ran a story about the risk of brain damage for soccer players who frequently head the ball. At the time, I was a contributing writer for espnW.com -- the female-focused ESPN Web site. So I pitched a story, suggesting we ask Abby Wambach and others about the danger.

After all, there had been so much discussion of concussions among football players. Here was an important news story about brain trauma that could impact female athletes as well. Wasn't that exactly what this fledgling sports site would want? I was certain the story would be approved.

But later that very same day, espnW.com featured

The merry Jews of Nascar

Somebody with a sharp wit and way too much time on his hands created JewsWhoLikeNascar.com. Go ahead, click on it. You'll laugh.

Yes, Nascar was born in the Bible Belt South. And racing and religion are inseparable. Each weekly driver's meeting ends with a prayer and every pre-race ceremony includes an invocation.

Goyishe sport, right? Oy! Would you believe there are enough Jews in Nascar to fill an Adam Sandler song? And then some.

No, they're not the ones driving the racecars, so you're not going to read about them. But here's the thing: You probably will read them. That's because we're all in the press box and media center. It's one of the oddities of Nascar:

The locker-room debate revisited. Again and again.

I pushed the door open as if I belonged and tried to ignore the sudden discomfort the first time I ever walked into a locker room as a professional sportswriter. I felt empowered and nervous. I certainly wasn't the first woman ever to go into the New Jersey Devils locker room. And to their credit, they didn't seem to notice or care that I was in there.

I still feel that discomfort every time I go into a locker room. But I'm forever grateful for the opportunity as one of the many reporters who benefited from the battles in the 1970s and '80s to allow female sportswriters access to locker rooms. That story was retold in "Let Them Wear Towels," this week's installment of ESPN's excellent "Nine for IX" series on women and sports. Watch a replay if you can.

Equality won all those years ago. And because of that, I've been fortunate to have a career as a sportswriter with very few locker-room incidents involving athletes or coaches. The overwhelming majority I've encountered over the years have been professional, and most of my issues have been about what I wrote, not who I am. Fair enough.

Nascar, Kyle Petty and the future of sports coverage

Back in May, while covering the Nascar All-Star race and Coca-Cola 600 at Charlotte Motor Speedway for The New York Times, I conducted a little independent study. I made a list of the reporters who asked questions of five-time Cup champion Jimmie Johnson in a pair of press conferences held in the media center.

Of the 16 questions asked over the two weeks, 15 came from reporters or broadcasters who work for media outlets that have a financial relationship with Nascar, from the Motor Racing Network to Nascar.com. Only one question came from a reporter who works for an independent television station.

That's meant mostly as an observation and not a criticism of Nascar, which decides who gets to ask questions of drivers during press conferences. I think it's partly a function of who is in the media center these days. And why they are there.

Time to start outing athletes? I don't think so, LZ

In all the years I've been a sports reporter, I've rarely had a good reason to ask an athlete, coach or administrator this question:

"Who are you shtupping?"

Apparently, LZ Granderson thinks we should start asking those hard questions of sports figures who might be gay. Granderson, who writes for ESPN The Magazine and is one of the few out gay sportswriters in the business, believes it's time reporters treat gay athletes the same as straight athletes and write about their private lives:

The negative writers of Nascar

Ricky Stenhouse Jr. used to be only a racecar driver. Whether he realizes it or not, that changed the day he became romantically involved with a celebrity. When Danica Patrick announced in January that they were a couple, that made Stenhouse a bit of a celebrity, too.

Which is why it was news -- racing news and celebrity news -- when Stenhouse was part of an on-track incident at Charlotte Motor Speedway that led to a crash between Patrick and defending Cup champion Brad Keselowski during the Coca-Cola 600 on May 26. The story was picked up by national entertainment news outlets E! News and Us Weekly, prompting Stenhouse to blame the Nascar media for creating a firestorm.

Today's Journalism: Better to be first than right

Wednesday was a bad day for journalism, whether you were covering the Boston explosions or following the news from your computer or mobile phone. Depending on which media outlet you were clicking on, you could have read that a suspect had been arrested. Or was close to being arrested. Or was going to be arraigned in federal court. Or none of the above.

For those who thought we had learned a lesson from the mistakes of Newtown (remember the brother who was reported to be the shooter?), nothing has changed. And it won't change.

Here's why getting it first is always going to matter enough to risk

Tony Stewart, Tim Tebow and using the media

For all the battles he fights on the track, Tony Stewart is known almost as much for his clashes with the media off of it. I'm guessing more than a few reporters who have spent time in the Nascar garage over the years have stories about confrontations with Stewart.

Including me.

It was last year at Darlington Raceway when Stewart told me after a media session that he didn't need my newspaper coverage -- among many choice words he directed my way that day. And yet Stewart continues to make himself accessible to me or any other reporter who covers the sport. I imagine it's in part because he understands the importance of media coverage to Nascar -- and to the companies that give his race team millions of dollars -- whether he personally likes us or not.

When I heard about Tim Tebow's fan appearance at Whataburger Field in Corpus Christi, Texas, last Wednesday, I couldn't help but think of Stewart.

Te'o, Tia and sports journalism today

When Deadspin reported that Manti Te'o's deceased girlfriend never existed, some high profile sports journalists scrambled to quickly offer an explanation for why they wrote the emotional story of his loss without first confirming she was real.

No such mea culpa took place last week when it was reported that

Sports media and the white male scorecard

I once asked Tom Sorensen, the longtime sports columnist for the Charlotte Observer, why his newspaper wouldn't hire a woman to cover the Carolina Panthers back when the beat job came open in 1999. I've never forgotten his response.

The media and #Danicky

There seems to be an ongoing debate among Nascar media whether the relationship between Danica Patrick and Ricky Stenhouse Jr. is a story that should continue to be pursued or should be dropped now that it has been dutifully reported.

Should we write about the reaction of others in the Nascar garage? Should we analyze the risks? Or should we let it go?

The answers: Yes, yes, and that depends.

It is our job as beat reporters to write what people are reading about and discussing on Twitter, Facebook and message boards. Patrick is one of the most popular drivers in all of racing. And right now, #Danicky is a part of the ongoing Nascar conversation. To ignore that would be to ignore your own readers, and ultimately send them to your competitors.

That's not to say we should mine this story ad infinitum at the expense of other storylines. And based on the headlines I see, plenty of other topics are being written about right now from the new generation racecar to Brad Keselowski's empty fountain of love.

But remember, too, this is the offseason. There aren't races to cover and on-track incidents to scrutinize. The Busch brothers haven't pissed anybody off today (well, as far as we know).  The relationship between Patrick and Stenhouse is the only head-turning news story to come out since Keselowski won the title in November.

So yes, it's interesting and pertinent to hear what Dale Earnhardt Jr., the most popular driver in the sport whose love life has been internet fodder for years, has to say about Patrick's new relationship. And it's worth the time to explore the issues on the track raised by the relationship. Even Jeff Gordon, whose messy divorce years ago was once headline fodder, acknowledged the reality of news coverage of celebrity athletes.

"I may not have liked it but understood it was a story," Gordon responded on twitter when I asked him about it last week.

Will it continue to be a story? You can blame Patrick and Stenhouse for making sure it will be in Daytona. By waiting until after the annual Nascar media tour in Charlotte to confirm the relationship, they have avoided answering any questions about it. Those questions inevitably will come up during future tests and at Daytona.

Beyond that, the longevity of this story depends on Patrick and Stenhouse. The way they race each other will be closely scrutinized. If there are more stories, it's because of what they do on the track and in the garage to create them. At least to some degree, it's up to them.

I don't know what Nascar thinks about all of this. But for a sport that desperately wants to be part of the mainstream conversation, few drivers have given fans more to talk about than Patrick since she arrived in 2010. And now she has found love in the Nascar garage.

I'm sure they're already working on the screenplay. You think they can get Kristen Stewart to play Danica?