(01-20-2024 04:10 PM)darkdragon99 Wrote:  

(01-20-2024 03:08 PM)eltigre Wrote:  

(01-20-2024 08:19 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(01-20-2024 06:56 AM)darkdragon99 Wrote:  

(01-19-2024 09:19 PM)Sellular1 Wrote:  S.I. became irrelevant years ago when they turned into political hacks. Just like Rolling Stone.

Smell ya later

I mean the thing is these journalists still have a high and mighty opinion of themselves despite people like yourself losing faith in them and their industry collapsing. All you need to do is go on Twitter and read their comments. Its like one big circle jerk with them. They live in their own world it seems where they think they are super important. Twitter being a thing didnt do them any favors. You used to just read their articles and that was it but with Twitter you can read their own personal thoughts and yeah its rough. Same thing happened with Hollywood too btw. I was a huge Star Wars fan growing up and now because of Twitter I know Mark Hamill is a dick in real life so it didnt exactly make me reaffirm my love for Star Wars and it had the opposite effect. I didnt necessarily know the political views of the people who wrote for SI back in the day but thanks to Twitter and them not being able to contain themselves, they got exposed so it turned lots of people off. I knew Stephen King was a liberal and it didnt bother me but he goes wild on Twitter and says lots of dumb stuff so it just turns you off to these people and they lose fans/support.

I get the Mark Hamill stuff, continuing a childhood love for a storied franchise is complicated enough without something turning you off about it, but have you ever read Stephen King novels with a view on his political views? I read Stephen King when I want to be scared out of my mind (I read Pet Sematary when I was 10, big mistake), or perhaps to open up my mind to an amazing saga like the Dark Tower series.

Easily accessible platforms and how often have we heard Hollywood elites, musicians, social influencers, etc... say that they will use their platform to advance whatever causes are important to them. As a consumer of product, I don't give a s#!% about their opionions and it's rather stupid for them to venture into such waters. Read Mr Wonderful's comments about the Bud Light debacle. These elites, entertainers, corporations should learn to stay in their lanes.

At the end of the day Twitter has done lots of damage to people's reputations and how they are perceived by others. I was hoping Musk would buy it just to shut it down but the fact hes so invested in it doesnt really bode well for society in general. I mean some people use it just to troll people they dont like. Not healthy at all and not a proper place for discussion and debate.

100% agree with everything in bold. Twitter's entire function is more or less for people to be awful to others.

Many journalists are incredibly self-righteous and defame whoever they write/tweet about...all while the people they defame are lightyears more successful than they are. While it isn't all journalists, it's gotten beyond ridiculous and it's hard to feel sorry for journalists who act in that manner.

'I Just Don't Know Where We Went Wrong,' Contemplates Sports Illustrated Executive In Front Of Framed Covers Of Obese, Trans Swimsuit Models



NEW YORK, NY — After sending a company-wide email to notify all of its staff that they were being laid off, a top executive at iconic publication Sports Illustrated contemplated how things turned out so wrong as he stood in front of framed covers of obese and trans swimsuit models.

"I just don't know where things went south," said Jack Weber. "Did we not get woke enough? Should we have featured trans models even earlier? Was the heavy woman we put on the cover not heavy enough? What was it? Maybe we should've given more consideration to plastering the Pride flag on our cover back in June. I was certain we signaled the appropriate amount of virtue for every possible cause and movement out there. It just makes no sense."

https://babylonbee.com/news/i-just-dont-...suit-issue

(01-20-2024 04:15 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Fort all the Twitter readers who think SI went off the cliff Friday, it's been falling for almost a decade. Put another way, when was the last time you bought an issue?

It's next to my last Sears Roebuck catalog.

(01-20-2024 04:15 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Fort all the Twitter readers who think SI went off the cliff Friday, it's been falling for almost a decade. Put another way, when was the last time you bought an issue?

The print mag hasn't been the most important revenue source for the company in over a decade.

The more interesting question is...when was the last time any of you read an SI story? I'm guessing most of you have in the last month.

The readership is still there, albeit a little dampened because of earlier rounds of draconian cuts. The problem is the debt load.

(01-22-2024 11:28 AM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  The readership is still there, albeit a little dampened because of earlier rounds of draconian cuts. The problem is the debt load.

So ... Chapter 11 filing likely soon? And dropping printed goods?

Or ... just change SI magazine to swimsuit-mainly issues, for red-blooded hetro male readers.

(01-20-2024 09:52 AM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  Anybody who looks at this development as a political thing, or even a transition from print to digital, really doesn't understand SI or the industry.

SI was actually a *leader* in legacy sports media pivoting to digital. The vast majority of the company's revenue came from sources outside of the print magazine distribution for years...not just website advertising, but from events and licensing.

The biggest problem here is that SI's new ownership was saddled with a crazy amount of debt from an insane financial scheme, run by some of the notoriously dumbest executives in the industry. The company has struggled with terrible corporate leadership, like most newspapers and large digital outlets, who only saw the brand as something to extract value *from*, not build. Also, if this matters, the current owners of SI are bigtime GOP boosters, not Oberlin gender studies graduates.

It's tragic, and it will be fans who suffer. One of the best reporters in college sports (and a guy that breaks a TON of news relevant to this beat), fled the magazine a few months ago (Ross) and now other very good college sports writers are going to be looking for new gigs...and they might not find them, because there simply aren't many places left. Not everybody can start something new like I did.

It sucks. There won't be much to aggregate if all of the people who do the actual writing and make the actual phone calls get laid off.

Nice perspective from somebody who actually knows a bit about the industry.

(01-20-2024 12:32 PM)Garden_KC Wrote:  

(01-20-2024 10:48 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, sports reporting is kind of like streaming and cable sports broadcast. Regardless of how the technologies evolve etc., there will be plenty of sports being broadcast, and plenty of money being made off of it, because we the people want sports broadcasts. Yes, in the creative destruction of that churn, individual companies and individual careers (employees) will suffer, such as is happening at Disney/ESPN and to the sports reporters at SI, but from the fan POV it will all carry on, because we demand them - sports, and reporting of sports.

Just MO.

I think sports are bubble right now. There is a rumor the NBA is going to take a haircut on their next TV contract. The CFP for the 6 year extension is only going to be 1.3 billion (at least from what is reported at this point) as opposed to a rumored 2 billion.

The P2 might still have enough "juice" to land 100 million per school TV deals but the XII/ACC may be at about the top and potentially going down with a raid. Nobody in those conferences sans FSU is really complaining about maknig "less".

They'll be some opportunites to match what the AAC is making. MWC with OSU/WSU can probably do that. Other G5s could inch up but don't expect exponetial cash.

A haircut? Are you nuts? Perhaps they don't get the 3x their current revenues that they're projecting, but I bet they will, or something close to it. The NBA is one of those Prime Properties (not Deion but the actual normal meaning of the word "Prime"), 2nd only to the NFL and far ahead of CFB. EVERYBODY with money wants to be involved with them, and a couple need to be.

(01-20-2024 04:41 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(01-20-2024 04:10 PM)darkdragon99 Wrote:  

(01-20-2024 03:08 PM)eltigre Wrote:  

(01-20-2024 08:19 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(01-20-2024 06:56 AM)darkdragon99 Wrote:  I mean the thing is these journalists still have a high and mighty opinion of themselves despite people like yourself losing faith in them and their industry collapsing. All you need to do is go on Twitter and read their comments. Its like one big circle jerk with them. They live in their own world it seems where they think they are super important. Twitter being a thing didnt do them any favors. You used to just read their articles and that was it but with Twitter you can read their own personal thoughts and yeah its rough. Same thing happened with Hollywood too btw. I was a huge Star Wars fan growing up and now because of Twitter I know Mark Hamill is a dick in real life so it didnt exactly make me reaffirm my love for Star Wars and it had the opposite effect. I didnt necessarily know the political views of the people who wrote for SI back in the day but thanks to Twitter and them not being able to contain themselves, they got exposed so it turned lots of people off. I knew Stephen King was a liberal and it didnt bother me but he goes wild on Twitter and says lots of dumb stuff so it just turns you off to these people and they lose fans/support.

I get the Mark Hamill stuff, continuing a childhood love for a storied franchise is complicated enough without something turning you off about it, but have you ever read Stephen King novels with a view on his political views? I read Stephen King when I want to be scared out of my mind (I read Pet Sematary when I was 10, big mistake), or perhaps to open up my mind to an amazing saga like the Dark Tower series.

Easily accessible platforms and how often have we heard Hollywood elites, musicians, social influencers, etc... say that they will use their platform to advance whatever causes are important to them. As a consumer of product, I don't give a s#!% about their opionions and it's rather stupid for them to venture into such waters. Read Mr Wonderful's comments about the Bud Light debacle. These elites, entertainers, corporations should learn to stay in their lanes.

At the end of the day Twitter has done lots of damage to people's reputations and how they are perceived by others. I was hoping Musk would buy it just to shut it down but the fact hes so invested in it doesnt really bode well for society in general. I mean some people use it just to troll people they dont like. Not healthy at all and not a proper place for discussion and debate.

100% agree with everything in bold. Twitter's entire function is more or less for people to be awful to others.

Many journalists are incredibly self-righteous and defame whoever they write/tweet about...all while the people they defame are lightyears more successful than they are. While it isn't all journalists, it's gotten beyond ridiculous and it's hard to feel sorry for journalists who act in that manner.

Not all journalists are like that, but platforms like Twitter encourage them to stake out aggressive positions in order to appeal strongly to a subset of the overall audience. Ie, 50% engagement from 50% of the CFB-interested twitter users is far better than 5% engagement from 100% of the CFB-interested twitter users. It's the same for politics, leading to polarization and aggressive, often rude takedown style articles that in the past would have been anathema to "real" journalists.

(01-22-2024 01:49 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(01-20-2024 04:41 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Many journalists are incredibly self-righteous and defame whoever they write/tweet about...all while the people they defame are lightyears more successful than they are. While it isn't all journalists, it's gotten beyond ridiculous and it's hard to feel sorry for journalists who act in that manner.

Not all journalists are like that, but platforms like Twitter encourage them to stake out aggressive positions in order to appeal strongly to a subset of the overall audience. Ie, 50% engagement from 50% of the CFB-interested twitter users is far better than 5% engagement from 100% of the CFB-interested twitter users. It's the same for politics, leading to polarization and aggressive, often rude takedown style articles that in the past would have been anathema to "real" journalists.

There are sports journalists and then there are pseudo-sports journalists. A sports journalist covers the sporting event, does the research, does the interviews, writes the stories. They usually work for reputable media outlets. A lot of sports journalists have twitter accounts, and they use them to provide updates on sports stories or provide a comment on an event. The pseudo-sports journalist usually does not work for a reputable media outlet. The pseudo-sports journalist will use speculation, rumors, fabrication for their stories. Some of these guys seem to enjoy getting into spates on twitter and drawing attention to themselves.

(01-22-2024 04:46 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(01-22-2024 01:49 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(01-20-2024 04:41 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Many journalists are incredibly self-righteous and defame whoever they write/tweet about...all while the people they defame are lightyears more successful than they are. While it isn't all journalists, it's gotten beyond ridiculous and it's hard to feel sorry for journalists who act in that manner.

Not all journalists are like that, but platforms like Twitter encourage them to stake out aggressive positions in order to appeal strongly to a subset of the overall audience. Ie, 50% engagement from 50% of the CFB-interested twitter users is far better than 5% engagement from 100% of the CFB-interested twitter users. It's the same for politics, leading to polarization and aggressive, often rude takedown style articles that in the past would have been anathema to "real" journalists.

There are sports journalists and then there are pseudo-sports journalists. A sports journalist covers the sporting event, does the research, does the interviews, writes the stories. They usually work for reputable media outlets. A lot of sports journalists have twitter accounts, and they use them to provide updates on sports stories or provide a comment on an event. The pseudo-sports journalist usually does not work for a reputable media outlet. The pseudo-sports journalist will use speculation, rumors, fabrication for their stories. Some of these guys seem to enjoy getting into spates on twitter and drawing attention to themselves.

Yeah, a significant number of pseudo-sports journalists are extremely nasty to players/coaches/etc on Twitter. I have so much more respect for the actual players/coaches who are doing the incredibly hard work in a public-facing, public-scrutiny position.

(01-22-2024 11:34 AM)PlayBall! Wrote:  

(01-22-2024 11:28 AM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  The readership is still there, albeit a little dampened because of earlier rounds of draconian cuts. The problem is the debt load.

So ... Chapter 11 filing likely soon? And dropping printed goods?

Or ... just change SI magazine to swimsuit-mainly issues, for red-blooded hetro male readers.

That's a possibility, but i think its more likely that Maven just tries to find a new licensee/operator and hopes the SI Union doesn't sue them over hireback provisions in their contract.

As for the magazine, shoot, have ANY of you guys bought a PG-13 skinmag like Maxim or something in the last 15 years? Has anybody? If you want to look at boobs, my friends, let me introduce you to a little something called The Entire Rest Of The Internet

(01-22-2024 11:28 AM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  

(01-20-2024 04:15 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Fort all the Twitter readers who think SI went off the cliff Friday, it's been falling for almost a decade. Put another way, when was the last time you bought an issue?

The print mag hasn't been the most important revenue source for the company in over a decade.

The more interesting question is...when was the last time any of you read an SI story? I'm guessing most of you have in the last month.

The readership is still there, albeit a little dampened because of earlier rounds of draconian cuts. The problem is the debt load.

The debt load precludes paying writers, obviously. 'SI' articles have been shocking lately in their poor quality. Like word mash cooked up by a AI bot in off hours when it's not operating the toaster.