Meta Musings On The Blogger-Friendly Mets Front Office
The Mets' new blogger-friendly approach has become a discussion topic during the offseason lull. Some have raised questions about the new policy on other blogs and in the Amazin' Avenue comments, most entertainingly summarized by I.M. Forme at his blogspaceplace:
I may now be the only one even mildly concerned with the potential consequences for independently-minded "coverage" of the Mets in light of the Wilpon's wooing.
But gosh it looks like the Alderson regime has oh so cunningly stroked the egos of those that are paying the most attention, that is, the obsessive fans with electronic diaries. With mainstream Met journalism looking increasingly bankrupt (not because they do a bad job necessarily, but the zeitgeist is bending them over and bloggers are happy to take their sloppy seconds without asking to be paid), and with the Mets having all but purchased one of the largest "fan blogs" out there to go along with their purchase of Mr.-First-Question Kevin Burkhardt, it's not too outrageous to posit that the Mets probably won't be coming in for any serious criticism for the foreseeable future.
Quick item of note: the "Boof goes the dynamite" tag on the bottom of the post.
Forme's worry is echoed by Andy Martino of the Daily news, who offers a good natured "You think you know, but you have no idea" type warning:
The conference call with bloggers served a different function; obviously, the Mets did not control the questions, but they offered fan bloggers-whose advantage is their independence-access, the very thing that corrupts many journalists. By dialing into that call, bloggers stepped into the same ethically murky conflict of access vs. the ability to criticize that we MSM types face every minute. Many bloggers will be able to manage this inherent conflict well, as do many journalists-for the Mets, though, it was a smart attempt to corral some of the creators of public opinion. Worth noting, is all.
I like the use of "corral". It evokes an image of Sandy Alderson as Billy Crystal in City Slickers, trying to rope in the rogue cattle/bloggers. The concern is that access will cause bloggers to paint a rosier picture of the Mets than they normally would. It's a fair concern, and one that professional journalist Martino acknowledges is a reality among his MSM brethren. Outsiders were recently able to observe a real-life example of how access may have affected coverage. I hate to reference Jeff Francoeur, as I've had my fill of Frenchy discussion, but his relationship with the media is relevant here.
Many, if not all, of the beat writers liked Frenchy on a personal level. Spring training puff pieces were all the rage. The writers sought out the loquacious outfielder for postgame quotes even when his thoughts weren't really relevant. They were still tweeting about his memorable one-liners months after he left the team. Many of these beat writers seemed hesitant to criticize Francoeur's so obviously poor on-field performance. Connecting the dots, it appeared that a personal connection clouded objective appraisal of a player.
It's understandable why this may have happened. Frenchy made easier the grueling life (no snark) of a beat writer. Filling newspaper or World Wide Web pages with content on a daily basis is a challenge, and pleasantries from a fan favorite can help meet a word quota. Most bloggers don't create original content as often as Adam Rubin and co. do, but the concept is the same -- it's tough to write negative things about a person or organization that treats you so nicely. Martino posits that if bloggers step into those shoes then maybe they wouldn't be so willing to criticize terrible-but-friendly players, coaches and executives. And maybe he's right. I can't say for sure either way.
What I can say is the following: AA has been afforded access on numerous occasions. The conference call, press access at Citi Field for several games and a Mets Holiday Party invitation are a few examples. Despite this, I haven't noticed a dramatic shift in tone at AA, nor have any readers suggested as much. Although self-ombudsmanning, if that's a word, is a tough endeavor. Yes, the style here may have evolved a bit, but that's due more to the expansion of the writing staff rather than anything else. With ten front page writers, and countless other community members who produce front page quality material in the FanPosts and FanShots, there will be differing approaches and idiosyncrasies. However, that doesn't mean any future access wouldn't affect coverage. We encourage readers to point out any instances in which the Mets' blogger outreach may have affected the work here. If you read something indicating that AA has been de-clawed, please share your thoughts.
An aside and self-reminder: The extent to which access can improve a blogger's work is also a consideration. I have no interest in obtaining post-game bromides from the players ("We're taking it one game at a time") and it's likely that AA readers wouldn't care about that either. But a discussion with a player about something the AA community is curious about, such as Patrick Flood's talk with Jose Reyes about his declining walk rate, is an example of a worthwhile exercise that would not be feasible while sitting in mother's basement. Extracting value from access is a meaningful topic, and one that is worthy of its own discussion on another day.
Given the choice between no-disparagement-allowed access and First Amendment blogging, I'll always take the latter. Fortunately, the choices are not mutually exclusive. I can commend the Mets and AA favorite Sandy Alderson for reaching out to the blogosphere, while also criticizing a poor free agent signing. Just like frequent AA whipping boy Omar Minaya was praised when he made smart decisions. There is no personal agenda; there is a goal of intelligent analysis and commentary (and occasional immature MS Paintz).
On a more personal note, corruption via access would defeat the purpose of my foray into Mets blogging. This isn't a full-time job; neither the Mets nor a newspaper signs my paychecks. Mets blogging is a hobby, a hobby I am truly passionate about. Not an hour goes by that I don't think of an idea for a post or some way to improve AA. Pulling punches to suit the blogger-friendly Mets organization would betray that passion.
Now, will someone please write a blog post about this blog post, which was about another blog post about a blogger conference call? Thank you, and God Bless America.
21 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Eh, plenty of radio shows and papers are pretty critical of the team regardless of access.
You’ll have your Metsblog who take them up on the access and lose a lot of their objectivity. And you’ll have your AAs that could care less. The audience knows pretty quickly who is who.
phew i thought i was gonna get
tarred and feathered (“Silva’d” as they say) when i saw the Kannons pointed my way.
I am content to let the discussion play out, and all I’d like to say about the “corraling” at this time: get along, little dogies!!
I.M. Forme
"When you get yourself into trouble is when you feel you have to do something, and then you get yourself in trouble." --Omar Minaya
Are the Muppets a bunch of
John Dillinger sympathizers?
by James Kannengieser on Dec 13, 2010 11:44 PM EST up reply actions
i didn't know what to make of that
so of course i think it says it all.
dillinger loved him some muppets.
I.M. Forme
"When you get yourself into trouble is when you feel you have to do something, and then you get yourself in trouble." --Omar Minaya
by itsmetsforme on Dec 13, 2010 11:48 PM EST up reply actions
The episode of The Simpsons, where Comic Book Guy was critical of the Hollywood producers who made his movie,
thwarting his own chances at getting millions of dollars (by putting in a good word, instead of bashing it) is, I think, indicative of what will happen here. “Internet Comic Book Guys” will always be “Internet Comic Book Guys”.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
AA Gamethread Embiggening Record Holder- 453 posts (10/03/10)
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Dec 14, 2010 12:05 AM EST reply actions
they may buy you off with ego stroking access
but they will never stop our MS Paint.
HELLO HELLO MR WILPON... BUY THAT MANSION. WE DONT NEED A CONDO.
James K = The Meta
Seriously though, great post. In terms of corruption of authenticity, I always tend to view things from an economic standpoint, which is one of the points you’re trying to make here. Getting postgame quips from Jeff Francoeur isn’t putting any blogger’s food on the table. Access was never free, even for MSM, its just apparently now being made cheaper for independent media, which I can’t bring myself to view as anything but a new competitive advantage. Maybe I’m being naive, but as of now, only Metsblog crossed the boundary into being economically restricted by its sources of content, and its hard to imagine many others will follow. There simply isn’t enough room on Cerrone’s side of the fence. And if it turns out this new level of accessibility provided by the organization is a subtle ploy to defer criticism, what happens if it doesn’t work and criticism continues? This is why I don’t buy it. If the ploy fails, and the blogosphere gets re-cut-off, it will only increase the criticism exponentially, leaving the powers that be in a far worse standing with independent media that they was before they made the attempt.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Dec 14, 2010 9:17 AM EST reply actions
Why no criticism?
I fully intend to disparage when and if. There is nothing wrong with a little kindness in return for some transparency.
Bloggers are different
Bloggers are able to blog about the Mets with or without access. Occasional access is a perk, and while it may color some bloggers’ coverage of the team (for fear of losing those occasional perks), I think most bloggers will regard it as more of a fringe benefit of blogging rather than some type of holy grail.
Beat writers are more susceptible to bias by access because they have FULL access, which means spending countless hours in the clubhouse and on the road with players and personnel. Such close access is more likely to bias a beat writer, since a) the beat writers build personal relationships with players and personnel and b) the beat writers have to interact with the people they criticize on a daily basis. I think that most Mets beat writers are fairly objective, but the potential for bias still exists.
I also don’t think the Mets’ main motivation in giving access to bloggers is to lessen these writers’ objectivity. To me, it seems like more of a PR move, an attempt to reach disgruntled fans through a medium that many passionate fans use to vent their frustrations.
It's not just a question of bias via chumminess though
i.e. your Frenchy example. As there is such a multitude of blogs and limited opportunities for access, the Mets could grant the best access to those they prefer, providing a subtle but real pressure on other blogs to emulate the preferred ones. A blogger might clean up his act a little to come in from the cold (and get more hits) or just to join the “professional,” credentialed ranks. Now I don’t think this is anywhere close to being a problem right now, but it is something to be aware of. There’s indeed something liberating about being unconnected and ignored, and a lot of blog bravery and iconoclasm feeds on that. Access naturally breeds professionalism, which has its upside and its downside.
Just as an example of this last sentence
Sam’s Dickey interview was tremendous and this is NOT a knock on it. But in this interview it felt natural that, for the very first time, an AA writer would call a player “Mr. So-and-So” and generally leave out any blog-like framing or commentary. This was probably because of (understandable) gratitude for the access and an (understandable) sense that the interview was kinda important and would benefit from a clean, professional presentation. I would have gone the same route. If AA interviewed Castillo it would be roughly the same, too. “We’d like to thank Mr. Castillo for giving us his time,” etc, and the worry would be that it would be harder to write a “F***ing Castillo, ship him out!!!” article the next day. Suddenly that feels childish, whereas previously that may have been a blog’s standard style.
Just something to think about.
by Pack Bringley on Dec 14, 2010 11:13 PM EST up reply actions
I don't think anyone at AA has written anything remotely comparable to "F***ing Castillo, ship him out!!!"
Yeah, there’s some silliness and lame jokes, but nothing really malicious.
by James Kannengieser on Dec 14, 2010 11:28 PM EST up reply actions
You're definitely right
I was just using an extreme example and not thinking so specifically about AA, though that wasn’t clear. That example aside, my point is access can tug on tone in ways that are at once defensible and transforming. I’m not alarmed about it though, just adding it to the discussion.
by Pack Bringley on Dec 14, 2010 11:35 PM EST up reply actions
I get what you're saying though
And like I said above, if it ever appears that AA is neutered because of a couple nice blogger invites, I want people to point it out.
by James Kannengieser on Dec 14, 2010 11:33 PM EST up reply actions
If AA is neutered
Erica and Janice will have to answer for it.
It's a triumph of number crunching over the human spirit...aaaaaand, it’s about time. -- Play-by-Play Announcer, The Simpsons.
by MookieTheCat on Dec 15, 2010 12:34 AM EST up reply actions
fixed
who watches strokes the watchmen.

I.M. Forme
"When you get yourself into trouble is when you feel you have to do something, and then you get yourself in trouble." --Omar Minaya
by itsmetsforme on Dec 15, 2010 6:49 PM EST up reply actions

by 





























