Tag Archives: USA Today

Q/A with Sports on Earth execs: Why it isn’t Grantland; Luring Posnanski from SI as signature hire

Posted on by

Sports on Earth is another Grantland, right?

Like Grantland, SOE features a daily offering of select stories by top writers. It has a similar look. Grantland has Bill Simmons; Sports on Earth has Joe Posnanski. Both are the endless salad bowl when it comes to going long, longer, longest.

Yet Sports on Earth isn’t Grantland.

A veteran scribe put it to me this way: “The Grantland writer will write about his experience getting to the game. The Sports on Earth writer will write on the game.”

OK, that may be stretching it a bit when it comes to Grantland. The site does have quality writing about sports. But it also veers in pop culture and other areas that go beyond the arena.

Sunday, Grantland’s main headlines included posts on Adele, Tim Burton and Liam Neeson. All three couldn’t have been worse Sunday than my fantasy quarterback Cam Newton (you were horrible, Cam), but that’s about it when it comes to sports parallels.

Sports on Earth is just about sports. It will write on Coco Crisp (also had a rough day) getting a poor break on a ball as opposed to Breaking Bad.

SOE, a joint venture between USA Today Sports and MLB Advanced Media, debuted in August. The site features Posnanski, the headliner lured over from Sports Illustrated, Tommy Tomlinson, Gwen Knapp, Dave Kindred, Leigh Montville, Will Leitch, Shaun Powell, Chuck Culpepper, among many others.

With that kind of lineup, the content couldn’t help but be strong. But will it make for a successful site?

And looking to the future, has Sports on Earth secured the domain name for Sports on Mars?

I did a Q/A with SOE general manager Steve Madden and editor Larry Burke.

How did it happen that USA Today and MLB joined forces here?

Steve Madden: The idea for a sports site, and not just a sports site, but one very specific to the best writers on all kinds of sports news, is something that had been discussed on (MLB Advanced Media CEO) Bob Bowman and (MLB.com editor) Dinn Mann. It had percolated along here for a while.

The way the world works, Bob Bowman got to know Tom Beusse (president of USA Today Sports Media Group) because their sons go to school together. They started to kick around ways to work together. It seemed to make sense. BAM has this new technology and USA Today has been aggressive about building a sports destination. It seemed like a good idea to work together to do it.

How do you explain this site?

Larry Burke: I say it is built around great writing. Columns and quick analysis. We do some deeper dives. We’ll do some enterprise writing, like the piece Selena Roberts did on Floyd Landis and Lance Armstrong.

We look at it as the idea of less being more. We all aspire to be a news site per se; a place where you come to check scores or headlines. We want to be on the news without a lot of clutter. You’ll find 5, 6, 7 things to read each day, and it’s easy to navigate through it.

We’ll have some surprises. As you develop a relationship with the site, you’ll say, ‘There’s something I didn’t expect to see. I’ll give it a shot because I like what I saw last time.’

You talk about clutter. Is there a feeling that some of these sites are too overwhelming and people stay away? Is this the counter to that idea?

Madden: I’m not sure that’s a counter to that idea. We don’t think people will say, ‘I’m just going to go there and not go to other sports sites.’ It’s just that a lot of sites are a mile wide and in some spots, an inch deep. We think there’s a real value proposition to providing a lot of focus on sports and the sports of the day.

Voices seems to be a key word There are so many voices out there. Talk about the important of having good voices that people want to read.

Burke: The phrase we kicked around a lot was ‘great writing with a point of view.’ Joe brings that unique voice. We looked for writers who didn’t have that quote-unquote take, but were able to step back and look at things in interesting, smart and sometimes different ways. When you’re writing on pieces in the news, there are a lot of choices. We know people have choices. Why would they come to us? How do we get our place in the universe? The bar is set high.

Joe Posnanski had a good job at SI. You must have done a good sales job to get him to come over.

Madden: The only other sales job I did better was on my wife. It wasn’t so much that I needed a big name. I wanted a name people would recognize because of the quality of his work. That’s why Joe has a following. Joe’s work is emblematic of what the best sportswriting can be. It is insightful, analytical. It’s really well done. He makes an emotional connection that’s really, really important. How can you go wrong? The other writers who have come along are also like that.

(Steve was told) Joe’s piece on Steve Sabol was the single best thing he read on that topic. That’s our goal, to deliver the single best piece on that topic. If that’s the goal, then you need to hire people like Joe Posnanski.

What’s your response when people say you want to be another Grantland?

Burke: It seems to come up a lot more outside these walls than inside. I can see why. Structurally, Grantland is a site about great writing existing in a larger entity: ESPN.com. In a simplistic way, you can say we’re the Grantland of USA Today.

I never thought of it that way. I don’t think anyone here did. I personally feel the writing at Grantland is terrific. I feel there are a number of sites and publications that are doing great work. We’re not trying to knock anyone out of the way. We’re trying to pull up a seat at the table. Everyone here felt that there was a place for something like this.

Grantland does more with pop culture.

Madden: There are a couple of differences. They have the latitude to write about pop culture. We decided one of the things that makes us different is that we focus just on sports. Second part of it is the newsiness. Writing off news is pretty important to us.

What are the goals here? What’s reasonable to expect in this market?

Madden: We’ve only just started. One of the things I’m pleased about is the average time spent on the site. It’s 7 1/2 minutes. Because of the way we designed this thing, the central experience is about reading. Now we have an engagement story to tell, which is great.

The other encouraging metric is direct load. People like what they see and they’ve bookmarked it. They’re coming back daily. Those numbers are pointing in the right direction.

 

 

 

 

 

 

New role: Former USA Today reporter launches new sports business blog

Posted on by

Michael McCarthy is the latest installment of journalists looking to reinvent themselves in the new media age. Welcome to the club, Mike.

A veteran sports business and media reporter, McCarthy saw his 12-year career at USA Today end last spring. However, he saw no reason to change what he had been doing at the paper.

Last week, McCarthy unveiled a new site, Sportsbizusa.com. The site will examine all facets of sports business, from sponsorship to rights deals and beyond.

Here’s Mike on USA Today and his new endeavor:

On covering sports business: It’s something I’ve always been interested in. For two years, I worked on the Game On blog for USA Today. I saw the great reaction to sports business news. Sometimes, it was the most read posts on the entire website.

I saw a real market for the game within a game, looking at the many sides of why things get done.

On leaving USA Today: Nothing was a surprise. The only surprise was who was going to stay and who was going to go. I felt fine. I felt a lot worse for the people who had been there 30 years and helped build the paper. I knew I’d be able to do something else.

On his hopes for his site: I want to focus on opinion and original reporting as much as I do on the news. It’ll be my take on sports business. I’m going to do my best to beat the competition, but I’m also looking to be a voice in this business. I think I’ve got the track record to do it. I’ve shown I have the track record to do it.

On what currently interests him in sports business: I think it is the whole social media thing. Athletes have become their own newspapers, their own PR men. Half the time, it winds up blowing up in their faces. Vince Young sent out a tweet that he was released from Buffalo before the team announced it. Is that a smart move? It’s all going to be interesting to watch.

 

 

 

 

 

 

School daze: Long-time USA Today sportswriter makes transition to high school English teacher

Posted on by

The first day of school also marks the first day for scores of new teachers throughout the country.

However, only one of them is a 57-year-old who had a 30-plus year as a distinguished sportswriter at USA Today.

What in the world are you doing, Steve Wieberg?

“I’m terrified,” Wieberg said on the eve of his new life as a high school English teacher. “I feel like I’ve been dropped out of a helicopter right into the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.”

The new media landscape has seen many long-time sportswriters transition into new roles in life. Fortunately, Wieberg is making this lifestyle change out of choice and not because he lost his job due to newspaper cutbacks, as has been the case with so many others in the profession.

Wieberg was one of the most respected members of our fraternity, noted for his solid and reasoned coverage of college sports. He covered 29 straight Final Fours and 15 NCAA Conventions.

The grind, though, was taking its toll of Wieberg. He was getting tired of phone calls at 6:30 in the evening, telling him to take the next plane to Dallas or somewhere else.

I definitely can relate. It was one of the reasons why I left the Chicago Tribune in 2008.

“Your life is subject to the whims of breaking news,” Wieberg said. “You get a phone call and you’re off and running. That’s the job. I’m not quarreling with it. But I thought I had lost the balance between work and life in the last couple of years, and it only was going to skew further in that direction.”

Wieberg is referring to a major restructuring of the USA Today sports group, which is putting an increased emphasis on breaking news and setting the agenda. He said he was asked to be part of the investigative and enterprise team.

Wieberg, though, already had made up his mind. He was ready to walk away from the only career he had ever known.

*******

Wieberg always enjoyed working with kids as a long-time coach for his son’s various teams. Last year, he did some substitute teaching.

“When I got through the Final Four, I decided I wanted to do something different,” Wieberg said.

Wieberg accepted a full-time position at Lawson (Mo.) High School. Despite working for the large circulation USA Today, he always maintained his small-town roots. Lawson, located 35 miles from Kansas City, has 2,400 people. And Wieberg says most of them know he is in a panic about his new job.

“I’ve become known as the town’s basket case,” Wieberg said.

Wieberg said he lost the “romantic notion” of teaching almost immediately once he began to digest all the material he had to teach.

“I won’t be uncomfortable standing in front of a classroom,” Wieberg said. “I will be uncomfortable if I can’t get through 50 minutes of a class. I’m telling the students that this will be the most collaborative class they’ve ever had. They’re going to help me get through this.”

I told Wieberg not to worry. He’s a pro’s pro and that will carry over from journalist to being a teacher.

Besides, putting up with Bob Knight all those years should make Wieberg well prepared for dealing with any obnoxious kids.

My words didn’t calm Wieberg’s nerves.

“School starts tomorrow,” Wieberg said. “I just want to make it through this week and then go from there.”

*******

Steve, here are a couple of tips. Show your students this post and the Chronicle of Higher Education story about your move. Name another teacher at Lawson High who is getting this kind of press. They should be impressed.

And if things get derailed in the classroom, just entertain them with stories about Knight.

 

 

 

New York Times’ Longman in center of storm after Jones’ article

Posted on by

Jere Longman is an accomplished writer and a veteran of many Olympics. Yet I’m fairly certain he will have a different set of memories from this year’s Games.

The New York Times reporter has been a target after writing a fairly scathing piece about LoLo Jones. He said she was more hype than substance.

He wrote:

 Jones has received far greater publicity than any other American track and field athlete competing in the London Games. This was based not on achievement but on her exotic beauty and on a sad and cynical marketing campaign. Essentially, Jones has decided she will be whatever anyone wants her to be — vixen, virgin, victim — to draw attention to herself and the many products she endorses.

The piece ran last Saturday. However, it exploded on Wednesday when a tearful Jones called the column unfair in a Today Show interview.

I sent Longman an email asking for his reaction to Jones’ reaction. He sent the following reply: “Thanks for writing. I’m going to let the column speak for itself.”

Several of Longman’s colleagues in the sportswriting fraternity stood behind Longman. I received this email from Christine Brennan of USA Today:

“There is no male journalist I know who has done more thoughtful, introspective and respectful work on women in sports than Jere Longman. He brought up some very valid points in his piece on Lolo Jones. It’s because of his time spent covering women and women’s sports issues that he writes with such authority on the subject.”

On Twitter, Fox Sports’ Jason Whitlock called the story, “Good stuff.”

Runblogrun said: “A tough but honest piece by Jere Longman not hatchet job, LoLo Jones is everywhere.”

Yet predictably, most people sided with Jones and aimed their Twitter arrows at Longman.

CNN’s Roland Martin tweeted: “I just read Jere Longman’s piece on LoLo Jones in the nytimes. She’s right, it was a nasty, spiteful piece. The Times should be ashamed.”

Darren Rovell, in his first week at ESPN, defended Jones in a piece on ESPNW.com.

He writes:

If you think her name is cheapened by some strategy to be relevant, to constantly be in the news — most prominently the open talk about her virginity  — then shouldn’t she get some credit for the fact that it worked?

Credit for the fact that in this world of clutter, she got into the heads of marketers who, for whatever reason, wanted to attach their brands to her?

Credit to her creating her own relevancy. Is that cheap? Is that undeserving?

Rovell writes that Jones made you look at her when she appeared on TV. He is right there, but that also plays into Longman’s point.

As a casual fan of this kind of stuff, I was more than a bit surprised to learn Jones wasn’t the favorite in the hurdles. In fact, she received a ton of attention for someone who wasn’t even the top American contender in the event.

Longman makes valid arguments. However, people were turned off by the mean-spirited nature of the piece. He writes:

She has played into the persistent, demeaning notion that women are worthy as athletes only if they have sex appeal. And, too often, the news media have played right along with her.

In 2009, Jones posed nude for ESPN the Magazine. This year, she appeared on the cover of Outside magazine seeming to wear a bathing suit made of nothing but strategically placed ribbon. At the same time, she has proclaimed herself to be a 30-year-old virgin and a Christian. And oh, by the way, a big fan of Tim Tebow.

If there is a box to check off, Jones has checked it. Except for the small part about actually achieving Olympic success as a hurdler.

Harsh, yes. But this is big leagues. If you put yourself out there, you better be prepared to take some shots, especially if you don’t deliver.

Luckily for Longman, Jones finished fourth Tuesday. It served to validate his story.

 

Newspaper Olympics coverage varies: Philly papers cut back; LA Times, USA Today all-in

Posted on by

Special Report:

Staffing the Olympics used to be a no-brainer for major newspapers. The Games are a major worldwide event and you air-mail as many reporters as possible.

I was among 15 staffers for the Chicago Tribune during the 2000 Games in Sydney.

Obviously, times, priorities, and most importantly, economics have changed. It’s no longer automatic to send an army of staffers to cover an Olympics.

In fact, the Philadelphia Daily News and Inquirer initially decided skip the trip to London. They returned the five credentials issued to the papers. However, at the last minute, the editors decided to send Phil Sheridan.

Said Josh Barnett, executive sports editor for the Philadelphia Daily News on the overall decision: “It’s exclusively a financial decision. It’s a significant commitment (to staff an Olympics). With dwindling resources, you have to make decision of how and where to best use your people. It was a choice we didn’t want to make, but it was something we had to do.”

Barnett added, “I hope this is an anomaly for us as opposed to the norm.”

The St. Paul Pioneer-Press also made the same decision, electing not to send a staffer to London. Meanwhile, the Pioneer-Press’ main competitor, Glen Crevier of the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, has two writers and a photographer in London.

Mike Bass, senior editor/sports for the Pioneer-Press, explained:

“There’s the realization that our reporter/columnist would likely make a greater impact covering local teams and issues than at the Olympics. There is a risk in all this, of course. If a major story breaks that involves an athlete from our market, we wouldn’t be there to cover it. Then again, if the story is big enough, the wires would certainly cover it in some way and we could try to supplement it. With the size of staff we have, these are the decisions we have to make all the time.”

*******

On the other side of the spectrum, there’s the Los Angeles Times and USA Today. The Times isn’t cutting back. It has 13 staffers in London.

Sports editor Mike James said the Olympics have been a staple of the Times’ sports coverage through the years.

“We think of the Olympics as one of our franchise opportunities,” James said. “It’s a chance for us to broaden our readership. You get a lot of interest from people who don’t normally read our section during the Olympics.”

James added, “I didn’t have to do a sales job (to upper management). They recognize the Olympics are an important thing we do during two-plus weeks.”

USA Today also is applying full-court treatment. Dave Morgan, senior VP for content and editor in chief for the USA Today sports media group, noted the staffing breakdown:

“We have about 48 reporters/editors, about 20 photographers, 11 attached to video and 5 for office administration and support (which includes circulation of our International edition). So 84 in all.”

That’s up from 60 in Beijing, he said:  “With the growth of the USAT Sports Media Group, we now include US Presswire (all-sports photo agency that we bought last year) and are fully coordinated with our Broadcast team on the video side so that’s where the growth is.”

However, even though it is increasing its digital presence, Morgan said the newspaper remains the prime focus.

“We see the newspaper as the sizzle reel for all the work appearing across our digital platforms,” Morgan said. “We will be creating much more content on a daily basis than we can hope to publish in print, and of course we don’t print every day, so the newspaper can’t be our only focus. But it is still our flagship product that best differentiates our content for the audience.”

********

Those appear to be the extreme cases of high and low. Most papers are somewhere in between, probably more on the low side.

For example, the Chicago Tribune has dropped from 15 staffers in 2000 to 9 in Beijing to 5 (all writers) in London this year.

The reason? “Economics. Like so many,” said Mike Kellams, the Tribune’s associate managing editor for sports.

However, Kellams stressed the Olympics remains a priority to the Tribune.

“I’m also trying to strike the balance between news (not just events) and analysis,” Kellams said. “For the first time, we’ll better exploit Phil Hersh’s Olympic expertise (covering his 16th Olympics) by allowing him to write columns each day from the Games. I expect those to be smart and insightful as we know Phil’s work to be. I also expect it will be the kind of Olympic stories that only someone with his vast experience can first recognize and then tell to our readers.”

Minneapolis’ Crevier said the modern newspaper has to play the role of looking ahead in its Olympic coverage.

“I think it is important for print publications to look ahead to what is happening today,” Crevier said. “With a five-hour time difference, results and game coverage will seem stale in the daily paper the next day.”

********

When asked about staffing for the games, Mark Jones, director of communications for the USOC, said interest remains strong in coverage for the Olympics.

“No one is immune to the changes that have occurred in the media landscape, but interest and coverage of the Games seems to continue to be a priority,” Jones said.

The difference, he said, is that more sports web sites are staffing the Games than ever before. FoxSports.com has a made a big commitment for the first time.

“We continue to see changes in the media landscape and certainly have more and more Internet-only news organizations accredited for the Olympic Games and covering the Games,” Jones said.

 

 

 

 

 

Times still tough, but APSE president says mood improved for nation’s sports sections

Posted on by

I heard more than my share of gallows humor when I attended the Associated Press Sports Editors annual meeting last month in Chicago.

I listened to a group of editors discussing their coverage for the upcoming Olympics in London. When somebody mentioned the 2014 Winter Games in Sochi, Russia, an editor for a major paper said, “I just hope we’re around in 2014.”

It wasn’t the only time I heard a crack of that nature.

Indeed, it isn’t easy to be a sports editor these days. For many, it is a matter of survival with painfully dwindling resources. Even today, there is news about Sports Illustrated making staff cuts.

Yet despite the adversity, an APSE survey reported: Sports editors “remain confident in the future of the industry by a 2-to-1 margin as they cope with new technology, changing reader habits, and a sluggish economy.”

To get sense of the mood of the association, I did a Q/A with new APSE president Gerry Ahern, director of news content for the USA Today Sports Media Group.

More than a few times at APSE, I heard editors say, “If we’re still around….” in an upcoming year. Gallows humor, to be sure. What is your sense of the mood of sports editors these days?

I think the mood of many sports editors in 2012 is far more positive than it has been in recent years. Some papers and websites are actually replenishing staff and other resources. Opportunities, at least in some markets, seem to be growing. Certainly, there are exceptions. When you see what’s happening in markets such as New Orleans you have to scratch your head. When you see media companies embroiled in bankruptcy you naturally and legitimately worry about what’s next. Clearly, the days of the one-trick, print pony are long gone.

Reporters and editors have to have quick-twitch, digital skills and focus on delivering original content distinct to their markets. Advertising support on all platforms has to pick up. The folks who are doing that are seeing gains. The thirst for sports news and information isn’t dwindling, it’s expanding. But readers/users want the information delivered in the fashion they want, when they want it. Our ability to serve their needs, on tablets, mobile devices, etc. will ultimately determine who succeeds.

How difficult have the last few years been for editors, especially the aspect of having to let go of staff?

It’s been quite difficult. It’s never easy to have to let go of staffers, especially those who have contributed to past successes. But again those journalists who have adapted to the digital-first landscape and demands given to us by those who consume media are the folks who give us all the best chance to thrive and survive in an ultra-competitive era.

What are the biggest challenges going forward for sports sections?

One huge challenge is to maintain proper professional and ethical standards in a time where the news cycle is 24-7 and the field we compete against is not all playing by the same rules. There have been incidents, such as with Joe Paterno’s death, where some outlets let their zeal to be first outweigh taking proper steps to vet and verify information and sourcing. That should never happen. Not in print, not online, not with social media. Our credibility is at stake and if we lose that, we are sunk.

Given the rapid rise of websites at newspapers, what is the sports editors’ emphasis on these days? Print or Internet?

I think the best sports editors maintain focus on both. You can break incremental news on your site, provide some instant reaction and analysis, then add depth, perspective and exquisite storytelling in print and in later incarnations online.

Just how relevant is the newspaper sports section these days, given all the various platforms these days?

The relevance is in the brand, not necessarily the print product vs. the digital product. Who can readers/users count on to be credible, to be accurate, to be timely, to be fair? The outlets who continue to breaks news, provide informed commentary and analysis, investigate and uncover malfeasance have bright futures. I’m convinced of that.

 

 

 

USA Today sports editor on changes; Expanding, not cutting

Posted on by

It’s never fun to let go of employees, and it’s even less fun being portrayed as the bad guy on Twitter and elsewhere.

“It’s a difficult process. I’m not getting around it,” said Dave Morgan, the editor-in-chief for USA Today’s sports group in an interview Friday morning.

A total of 15 sports staffers were trimmed this week, including Michael McCarthy, who wrote on sports media, Tom Weir, Tom Pedulla and Mike Dodd.

Morgan said the moves were made as part of a reorganization of the USA Today sports group among its many platforms, and that includes a dramatic upcoming renovation and upgrade of its website.

“This is about us resetting our priorities and redefining our roles going forward,” he said.

Among key points, Morgan stressed, “This isn’t a cost-cutting exercise. We’re probably adding 20 positions over where we started.”

He said this move isn’t a case of dumping old, expensive journalists in favor of young, cheap journalists.

And finally, reacting to Pedulla’s disappointment in an interview with me yesterday that he didn’t receive a face-to-face interview, Morgan said others were hired who also didn’t get a face-to-face interview.

Here’s my Q/A with Morgan:

What was behind what you did this week?

It’ll show itself with how we’re defining new jobs going forward. I’m basing a lot on breaking news with a specific level of expertise. You look at the NFL. We’re looking to break news in a (highly) competitive setting. We want people setting the agenda for the sport they’re covering.

How did you base your decisions?

Nobody had to reapply for their job. What we did was create 90 news job titles and classifications. If you look at every one person at the paper, their job didn’t exist anymore. Portions of it, but not the entire job. So if you were based in Seattle and covered the NBA and colleges, that’s not a job I have going forward. You’re either going to be NBA or colleges. As part of redefining our news organization, we’re reducing generalization and increasing specialization. We’re creating centers of expertise.

How do you respond to people who say this is a cost-cutting measure and that you wanted to get rid of higher-priced veteran staffers?

If you look at the make-up of our staff going forward, that’s not true. USA Today long has been a destination job. The people we interviewed all had talent. Otherwise, they wouldn’t have been at the company. We trying to project people who best fit in with the broader terms of what we’re building. We’re going to add positions where we don’t have anyone right now. We’re going to do more with web, mobile, video, tablet, audio. People see this as an either-or thing. It’s all.

How do you respond to Pedulla’s point about not getting a face-to-face interview?

He wasn’t the only one who didn’t get a face-to-face interview. And I want to say there were people who didn’t get face-to-face interviews who did get hired. We did 150 interviews and every candidate got interviews with the same executive team. It was a long and thorough process and we learned from it.