(05-19-2022 01:59 PM)MattBrownEP Wrote: (05-18-2022 01:15 PM)JRsec Wrote: Here's what I mean Matt, for over 30 years of covering realignment it has been clear that those on the inside only ever release information they want known. Journalists run with what they are told. John Pennington and Clay Travis were convinced in 2010--2 that N.C. State and Virginia Tech were going to be headed to the SEC.
Respectfully, I think this is an incomplete way of describing how working journalists really operate. The catalyst for the Fox/BTN story, after all, wasn't because anybody wanted to brag about the deal (otherwise they just would have done a press release). It came from me reading regulatory filings (which Fox has to put out by law) and from FOIA....which is all about getting documents and info that schools typically don't WANT to release.
THEN you get into information horse trading.
It is unquestionably true that readers should consider the motives of any source that talks, and that sometimes, even in realignment, officials or businesses leak stuff to accomplish certain goals. Like I've said before, which I know makes CUSA partisans angry, but the reason the "UConn and CUSA are talking" news got out, was because CUSA officials leaked it to reporters to try and put pressure on UConn and project stability (the move backfired). That does happen.
But getting business news or realignment news isn't just about being a stenographer. It's also about talking to other people and getting enough info so folks talk to you even when they *don't* want to talk, or getting the information so you don't *need* officials to talk. I can tell y'all that I have broken realignment stories that the institutions involved *did not want out in public*, and I know plenty of other reporters have too.
I say this not to insinuate I'm the best or most connected reported, because lmao I absolutely am not. And hey, it's possible that Gary Barta ends up being right, and this deal ends up being way below what the industry thought it would be. But I do think it's important for folks to understand how this process actually works, so they can be better news consumers.
I'm glad you do your homework. Kudos for your sweat equity! That puts you in the minority of the many print and television reporters I've known or worked with. Journalism credibility is on the endangered trait list. And many of the beat writers, that I've read over the past decade plus, seem to have an appalling lack of inquisitiveness, with due apologies to the Houston Chronicle for serious digging. Most stories fall into pandering to their constituents, flowing with group think on trending issues, and essentially putting their name on AD press releases. I don't call that news, let alone journalism.
I've done organizing and the interviewing, digging, finding documentation, and baiting hostile people to talk is hard work and sometimes dangerous. People who truly dig at anything are the exception. How many articles do you read that actually stimulate your mind? How many instead contain glaring errors in grammar, word usage, or in relating data accurately? (And, while none of us are perfect in all expression, I'm speaking of mistakes which would have flunked you on a paper in English 101.) What boggles my mind is that means not only did the columnist make mistakes, but the editor and Sr. editor whiffed as well, and the publisher turned a blind eye to overall quality.
No doubt, newspapers are suffering. Circulation impacts revenue and voila everything suffers. I'd attribute this laziness to a passing industry going through death throes except that I hear the same mistakes committed nightly on network news, and see even more of it in blogs and online news.
Please don't take personal umbrage because my disdain is not with you, what you've posted, or what little I've looked up and read of your work. My comments are observations made as one who did his masters work in a communication field and knows that even if you dedicatedly dig, diligently question, and competently convey, you are still only as good as your information used to contextualize, and your cited source. And you should be proud of yours. It's logically laid out and competently conveyed. However, after 30 years of following realignment news, while having sources participating in it, and knowing personally some of the original players, much of what I've read about what happened, when it happened, and who was actually involved (meaning prospective movers) actually indicates to me in bold face how much of what passes as news is actually a gloss, outright spin, inaccurate, and simply wrong. And that doesn't even touch what's not even mentioned.
If you pieced together all that is in print about realignment what you would have would not be a history, but could classify as myth. There is something real behind it, but the topic has been eclipsed by the public perception of it, e.g. "the gentlemen's agreement" which was Slive asking that concerned presidents at South Carolina and Florida refrain from nominating their in state rivals (which were their organizing principle for donations for ticket priorities) for membership until after a renegotiation clause was met with ESPN which required 2 additions from new markets (A&M & Mizzou). You can't stop the blackball myth (which is 180 degrees off from the truth) because a blogger related bits of a story, twisted it to sound more sensational, and put it out on the internet only to have a collection of beat writers repeat it, and message board posters cite them as proof of the authenticity of the story.
So, you're damn right I'm cynical, but that cynicism is born out of too many examples of lousy journalism committed by your compatriots across the spectrum of delivery systems. What actually happens behind the scenes in realignments is simply straight forward exploration of business arrangements, which may, or may not, prove to be mutually beneficial. It has only the skullduggery which prevailing contracts require. There is virtually no animus involved and the presidents and commissioners involved go out of their way to avoid ill will. This is why glosses and spin and cover stories are acceptable and mostly go unchallenged. A&M's AD's behavior a year ago was well outside the norms and disturbing.
You have convinced me of your diligence and sincere belief in the truthfulness of your imparted information. But, I wasn't doubting that. I did doubt the motivations of the parties involved. Now you know why I doubted it.
Personally, I hope the Big Ten gets what you expect. The gaps between the SEC/B1G and the rest will serve as a solid catalyst to proceed wherever we are headed with more speed. That in turn will allow the major overhaul to end more quickly and for a few decades to hopefully settle into a period of stasis which experiences only minor tweaks. What is hurting the sport is the constant turmoil which merely mirrors that of the world. Sports are an escape. When they become as stressful as the rest of life you lose your audience. It is thirty plus years after OU/Uga vs the NCAA and enough is enough! Figure it out, get it done, and leave it the hell alone!
/
Sports Business Journal: FOX and B1G have deal in place
