This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/08/public-editor/covering-sports-including-smelt-fishing-and-bighorn-sheep-hunting.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Covering Sports. Including Smelt Fishing. And Bighorn-Sheep Hunting. Covering Sports. Including Smelt Fishing. And Bighorn-Sheep Hunting.
(about 17 hours later)
MARCH Madness is a two-week binge of fast breaks and alley-oops, of brilliant shots and embarrassing bricks, of reigning champions and stunning redemptions. If you are a reader of The New York Times, the NCAA tournament is also a time to learn why rubber shoes squeak on wooden floors, why some coaches prefer an open collar to a necktie, and why Marquette tried — and failed — to push its players to eat veggie wraps rather than hamburgers. MARCH Madness is a three-week binge of fast breaks and alley-oops, of brilliant shots and embarrassing bricks, of reigning champions and stunning redemptions. If you are a reader of The New York Times, the NCAA tournament is also a time to learn why rubber shoes squeak on wooden floors, why some coaches prefer an open collar to a necktie, and why Marquette tried — and failed — to push its players to eat veggie wraps rather than hamburgers.
Times tournament coverage included many of basketball’s basics. All the major tournament sites were staffed, as were the big games and great rivalries. But one of the sports staff’s go-to moves was the well-turned feature that often told readers more about what was happening off the court than on it.Times tournament coverage included many of basketball’s basics. All the major tournament sites were staffed, as were the big games and great rivalries. But one of the sports staff’s go-to moves was the well-turned feature that often told readers more about what was happening off the court than on it.
This approach to sports — in which features and analysis often trump news and routine game stories — is a defining philosophy of the coverage. The aim, says the sports editor, Jason Stallman, is to produce a general-interest sports section for a sophisticated global audience, with a report that includes internationally popular sports like soccer and U.S. favorites like the N.F.L., along with local teams like the Yankees and Knicks. Groundbreaking investigative work is another key anchor.This approach to sports — in which features and analysis often trump news and routine game stories — is a defining philosophy of the coverage. The aim, says the sports editor, Jason Stallman, is to produce a general-interest sports section for a sophisticated global audience, with a report that includes internationally popular sports like soccer and U.S. favorites like the N.F.L., along with local teams like the Yankees and Knicks. Groundbreaking investigative work is another key anchor.
That is a grand ambition for a staff of only 20 reporters, and plenty goes uncovered. Fans who love the theater that surrounds sports fare well. Those who want a reliable venue to follow a favorite player or the arc of a team’s season may need to look elsewhere.That is a grand ambition for a staff of only 20 reporters, and plenty goes uncovered. Fans who love the theater that surrounds sports fare well. Those who want a reliable venue to follow a favorite player or the arc of a team’s season may need to look elsewhere.
It’s the latter group that complains most frequently to my office.It’s the latter group that complains most frequently to my office.
Here’s Charles Paikert of South Orange, N.J.: “Why are there big stories on Nordic surfing, German ice water swimming and Brazilian badminton and hardly any beat coverage of the Knicks, Nets, Rangers, Devils or Islanders?” he asks. “Why does a soccer column from Europe get more play than a column on sports in America?”Here’s Charles Paikert of South Orange, N.J.: “Why are there big stories on Nordic surfing, German ice water swimming and Brazilian badminton and hardly any beat coverage of the Knicks, Nets, Rangers, Devils or Islanders?” he asks. “Why does a soccer column from Europe get more play than a column on sports in America?”
Here’s reader Mark Brzozowski of Yorktown, Va., commenting on a personal feature on Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers: “I’ve notice a trend toward very soft personality pieces on the front page of the section as opposed to game analysis, sports politics, and the business of sports,” he said. “I look to the NYT for adult discussion of sports.” Numerous comments left on the article echoed this sentiment.Here’s reader Mark Brzozowski of Yorktown, Va., commenting on a personal feature on Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers: “I’ve notice a trend toward very soft personality pieces on the front page of the section as opposed to game analysis, sports politics, and the business of sports,” he said. “I look to the NYT for adult discussion of sports.” Numerous comments left on the article echoed this sentiment.
Stallman says the more unusual features constitute a small fraction of his staff’s enterprise efforts. The rest, he says, are about mainstream sports. That said, routine game coverage is not a priority — profiles, trend pieces and deep investigations into subjects like concussions and doping are.Stallman says the more unusual features constitute a small fraction of his staff’s enterprise efforts. The rest, he says, are about mainstream sports. That said, routine game coverage is not a priority — profiles, trend pieces and deep investigations into subjects like concussions and doping are.
“We’re aimed at fans that don’t live in the X’s and O’s of locker rooms,” said Stallman. “We don’t want to turn our backs on those straight-up sports stories, but we’re always looking for what people wouldn’t get elsewhere, for what’s not being done.”“We’re aimed at fans that don’t live in the X’s and O’s of locker rooms,” said Stallman. “We don’t want to turn our backs on those straight-up sports stories, but we’re always looking for what people wouldn’t get elsewhere, for what’s not being done.”
Some readers may say they do not like the shift away from hard-core sports coverage, but plenty of others are clearly reading. Times audience data last year shows that Sports consistently punched above its weight, drawing more traffic than many sections with larger staffs.Some readers may say they do not like the shift away from hard-core sports coverage, but plenty of others are clearly reading. Times audience data last year shows that Sports consistently punched above its weight, drawing more traffic than many sections with larger staffs.
But here’s where the problem comes into focus. The section’s readership sprawls the globe. Roughly 15 percent is outside the United States, a number meant to grow. Of the domestic audience, only 20 percent is in the tristate area. Thus, it’s not surprising that only four reporters are assigned to cover local teams full time, with others dropping in. The remaining writers are a mix of national beat reporters, feature writers, columnists and investigative reporters.But here’s where the problem comes into focus. The section’s readership sprawls the globe. Roughly 15 percent is outside the United States, a number meant to grow. Of the domestic audience, only 20 percent is in the tristate area. Thus, it’s not surprising that only four reporters are assigned to cover local teams full time, with others dropping in. The remaining writers are a mix of national beat reporters, feature writers, columnists and investigative reporters.
With so much ground to cover and so few resources, choosing the right stories is essential. Yet if there is a pattern to what gets selected and what doesn’t, it’s not easy to discern. And when favorite teams and news are covered unevenly, the offbeat, unorthodox or outright bizarre features really stand out.With so much ground to cover and so few resources, choosing the right stories is essential. Yet if there is a pattern to what gets selected and what doesn’t, it’s not easy to discern. And when favorite teams and news are covered unevenly, the offbeat, unorthodox or outright bizarre features really stand out.
There was a recent first-person piece on the art of luring crafty little fish called smelts from the icy waters of Maine. There was a feature on the commotion that ensued when the Pittsburgh Penguins hockey team set free actual penguins on the ice. There were two takes on a much-maligned bronze bust of Portuguese soccer player Cristiano Ronaldo, and two on the controversial red locks of Yankees prospect Clint Frazier. There was a recent first-person piece on the art of luring crafty little fish called smelts from the icy waters of Maine. There was a feature on the commotion that ensued when the Pittsburgh Penguins hockey team set free actual penguins on the ice. There was an article on a much-maligned bronze bust of Portuguese soccer player Cristiano Ronaldo, and there were two on the controversial red locks of Yankees prospect Clint Frazier.
And then there was the 4,000-word story on bighorn-sheep hunting in Montana, where permits go for $100,000 and higher. The piece, beautifully executed by writer John Branch, explores the paradox of using money from hunting fees to revive the dwindling herds. The feature resonated with many readers, and infuriated others who questioned why it was a sports story to begin with.And then there was the 4,000-word story on bighorn-sheep hunting in Montana, where permits go for $100,000 and higher. The piece, beautifully executed by writer John Branch, explores the paradox of using money from hunting fees to revive the dwindling herds. The feature resonated with many readers, and infuriated others who questioned why it was a sports story to begin with.
It’s hard to criticize a piece with the artistry and sophistication of this one, but it’s also hard to imagine how a staff of 20 writers — with a mandate to cover the world — can afford to pick such obscure targets.It’s hard to criticize a piece with the artistry and sophistication of this one, but it’s also hard to imagine how a staff of 20 writers — with a mandate to cover the world — can afford to pick such obscure targets.
I don’t envy the sports editor trying to please clamoring fans. Local readers are easily incited when their teams aren’t covered as thoroughly as by the tabloids. Yet with The Times’s push for global reach, how much Knicks coverage makes sense?I don’t envy the sports editor trying to please clamoring fans. Local readers are easily incited when their teams aren’t covered as thoroughly as by the tabloids. Yet with The Times’s push for global reach, how much Knicks coverage makes sense?
As things are, though, too many readers don’t understand the trade-offs the current strategy entails. Many don’t get what the sports section is trying to do, what’s in its sweet spot and what’s no longer in favor. Many feel that the section produces great feature stories but lacks a focused mission. They may not expect the Mets’ 85th game to get blowout coverage. Then again, if resources are scarce, why the huge spread on sheep hunting?As things are, though, too many readers don’t understand the trade-offs the current strategy entails. Many don’t get what the sports section is trying to do, what’s in its sweet spot and what’s no longer in favor. Many feel that the section produces great feature stories but lacks a focused mission. They may not expect the Mets’ 85th game to get blowout coverage. Then again, if resources are scarce, why the huge spread on sheep hunting?
If you examine The Times’s sports section over a long period, it’s noticeable that two coverage areas aren’t approached with the same affection for the offbeat. One is investigative work, which consistently focuses on competitive targets at the center of professional and organized sports. The other is coverage of the Olympics, the World Cup and grand slam tennis. You would not follow those events without following The Times.If you examine The Times’s sports section over a long period, it’s noticeable that two coverage areas aren’t approached with the same affection for the offbeat. One is investigative work, which consistently focuses on competitive targets at the center of professional and organized sports. The other is coverage of the Olympics, the World Cup and grand slam tennis. You would not follow those events without following The Times.
There’s a lesson in there, a litmus test that might be applied to choosing which story to write and which to discard: How close is it to the biggest dramas of professional sports? Will it help a reader follow the pulsing heart of the N.F.L.? Does it capture a flash point in a team’s season or an athlete’s career? And will it help readers unravel the mystery of what to expect when The Times covers sports?There’s a lesson in there, a litmus test that might be applied to choosing which story to write and which to discard: How close is it to the biggest dramas of professional sports? Will it help a reader follow the pulsing heart of the N.F.L.? Does it capture a flash point in a team’s season or an athlete’s career? And will it help readers unravel the mystery of what to expect when The Times covers sports?
The editors say they’re looking for stories that surprise. Sounds alluring, but it only works if there is also a clear body of work that defines the core. Because when everything is a surprise, pretty soon nothing is.The editors say they’re looking for stories that surprise. Sounds alluring, but it only works if there is also a clear body of work that defines the core. Because when everything is a surprise, pretty soon nothing is.