As we are moving into discussing the media and their involvement in sport this week, there are some questions I would like us to start thinking about. What is the role of the sports journalist? Do they play a role in telling us what athletes are good or bad? Should we be more critical of the sports media? More specifically should we hold sport journalist's responsible for being aware of the topics we discuss in class? Does the connection between the media and sport help facilitate the large salaries athletes are paid? Why do you think more journalists don't take the critical approach that Dave Zirin seems to take with sport?
Here is a great article discussing some of the topics we talked about today
http://sportsonmymind.com/2009/09/29/the-daily-skip-bayless-a-t-o-induced-doozy/
One way in which to start thinking about these questions is to take a look at this article. What does it suggest? Does it omit anything? What is the purpose of this?
I do feel like the media has an enormous role in telling us certain things such as who is good, bad, or whatever. Depending on where you are geographically can have a big impact on what you as a view and hear about. For example the Jacksonville Jaguars could have the best team in the NFL, but i would never know because i never see anything about them on ESPN. But the general sense i get is that if they were a good team they would be all over the news. But i also do think that thanks to journalists some of these athletes are getting paid more because of all the attention. With attention comes ticket sales and then the owners of these organizations compensate these athletes, its a big circle.
ReplyDeleteThe role of sports journalists are to bring attention to a certain subject by reporting the most interesting viewpoint of the subject. Whether it is good or bad they will not hesitate to show the information they have in order to spark interest. I don't think we should be more critical of the media in sports but i do not think we should take them as seriously as we do.
ReplyDeleteQuestioning the role that mainstream media has a negative or positive effect on it's viewers i think is a grea question. Because what is always the headline on sportscenter or a show of that nature, it is almsot always negative or some sort of controvery. That is what we as a society has came to love. It is almost always biased, covering the main story over and over again. However, one can not blaim the media for this, because this is their job to inform and to entertain and we as a culture love to hear about the controversial issue. There is minimal coverage of the great story that includes a sport other than football, basketball, or baseball. And that is directly influenced by money and contracts. Nonetheless it all goes back to why sports journalists cover the controversial issues, and that is because thats what consumers want to read or watch.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the above statement of how coverage of sports often include some negative and shock factor. I think that we as a nation have almost expected this for almost all sorts of news. The news often wants to cover a story that involves a criminal instead of doing a story about a dog show. It is exactly the same as when you hear about athletes that make a mistake untill your ears bleed, but you never hear about their good deeds. The reason why journalist do this is because it is more entertaining and they can make more money from stories like these
ReplyDeleteI also think that the role that media in sports plays is the sole reason that athletes are able to be paid as much as they are. Without the national and global attention they receive they wouldn't appeal to as large of a market as they do therefore some brands such as Jordan and Lebron's Nike line would not be as successful as they are now.
ReplyDeleteIn response to the T.O. article I think it is unfortunate that Skip Bayless still has a job. He continually takes shots at athletes that are uncalled for and often times inaccurate. He seems to have it in for Owens and even though Owens did a great job biting his tongue in the press conference, Bayless couldn't waste an opportunity to bash him. I think this form of sports reporting is slanderous and uncalled for.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Anthony as far as Skip Bayless goes. This guy is honestly one of the worst "journalists" I've ever seen. At the same time, I'm sure the main reason ESPN gives him so much air-time is because they know he usually produces so much publicity with the things that he always says.
ReplyDeleteHe always presents his arguments in a sort of "angry" manner, like each and every topic in sports finds a way to offend him in some shape or form. Obviously almost all journalists are trying to generate a reaction with their work, but Bayless goes about it in a way that is not subtle enough and is just obnoxious, sometimes even fake.
In my eyes, Bayless is the equivalent of a tabloid journalist (which isn't really journalism in the first place).
I feel that the media plays a huge role in the amount of money that athletes make. For one, without T.V., radio, newspapers, etc people wouldn't be able to watch/listen/read about the games unless they were able to attend the game. Then people wouldn't know the players as well, wouldn't buy the jerseys, and you can see where I'm going with this. Without T.V., there wouldn't be the massive TV contracts that helps create revenue for the leagues, which also plays a part in the players' salaries.
ReplyDeleteI mostly agree with the article on TO and Bayless. Clearly, when you look at those specific comments made by Bayless, there is an agenda that is against TO. That said, I think it is unfortunate that the writer, in a way, falls to Bayless's level when he calls Harrison a "cheap shot artist." Not quite sure if I would go that far or agree with that comment
ReplyDelete