No respect for a WR


Main message board: for the discussion of topical track & field items only.

No respect for a WR

Postby br » Mon Sep 29, 2003 8:25 am

Once again, track and field gets shunned by the LA Times (and who knows how many other major newspapers). Despite crushing the WR in an event that many non-running fans appreciate, details of Tergat's marathon was treated as an afterthought in a one sentence "recap" back on page 13 in the Newswire section of the LA Sports section, under "Miscellany". The average reader would never know that Tergat was just one second ahead of his pacemeakerker Sammy Korir, and that Andres Espinosa ran 2:08.46 for a master's record.

"Paul Tergat of Kenya set a marathon world recordof 2 hours 4 minutes 55 seconds in winning the Berlin Marathon. Khalid Knannouchi had set the previous mark of 2:05.38 on April 14, 2002."

Way to go LA Times, keeping the public informed !!
br
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: No respect for a WR

Postby dl » Mon Sep 29, 2003 8:36 am

I dunno why, but I made a point of watching the local sporst news just to make myself angry when they failed to mention the record. What should I expect on a football Sunday?

Well, I SHOULD expect more, but I don't. Lame!
dl
 
Posts: 1803
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:30 am

Re: No respect for a WR

Postby Guest » Mon Sep 29, 2003 9:21 am

>details of Tergat's marathon was treated as an >afterthought in a one sentence "recap" back on >page 13 in the Newswire section of the LA Sports >section, under "Miscellany".

"Paul Tergat of Kenya set a marathon world
>recordof 2 hours 4 minutes 55 seconds in winning
>the Berlin Marathon. Khalid Knannouchi had set
>the previous mark of 2:05.38 on April 14,
>2002."

Hey, don't sell the LA Times short. That was 2 sentences!!
Guest
 

Re: No respect for a WR

Postby Guest » Mon Sep 29, 2003 9:28 am

BTW, the LA Daily News out-did the Times with a one sentence synopsis buried in the "Briefly" section on page 29.

"Paul Tergat broke the marathon world record by 43 seconds, winning the Berlin marathon in 2 hours, 4 minutes, 55 seconds to shatter Khalid Khannouchi's record."
Guest
 

Re: No respect for a WR

Postby Guest » Mon Sep 29, 2003 4:13 pm

Nothing changes. Unless it was the NY or Boston Marathon, no one in the newspaper business will ever want to give up their precious type space to cover an event that isn't a big money sport. Swimmers face the same problem.
Guest
 

Re: No respect for a WR

Postby MJD » Mon Sep 29, 2003 4:24 pm

As I pointed out on another thread, the grey lady had 13 paragraphs but the content is getting bashed on that thread. You can't win with this crowd. The first thing that happens when you get some rare TV coverage of track is everybody comes on here and says how incompetent the announcers are.
MJD
 
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: No respect for a WR

Postby Guest » Mon Sep 29, 2003 6:00 pm

The US sport's press is closed minded to sports that are not "American". It is sad this provincial attitude exists within the US sports media.
Contrary to popular belief people in Europe don't care about the Dallas Cowboys.
Guest
 

Re: No respect for a WR

Postby Guest » Mon Sep 29, 2003 8:51 pm

>As I pointed out on another thread, the grey lady
>had 13 paragraphs but the content is getting
>bashed on that thread. You can't win with this
>crowd. The first thing that happens when you get
>some rare TV coverage of track is everybody comes
>on here and says how incompetent the announcers
>are.


Althoough I feel your pain, what does this tirade have to do with newspaper coverage?
Guest
 

Re: No respect for a WR

Postby Guest » Mon Sep 29, 2003 10:19 pm

I can never understand why anyone would ever complain about the coverage that any event ever gets. What are they? Professional spectators! Participate in life - don't watch from the sidelines. I say good on the newspapers and TV stations - cover whatever you want and whatever sells. If it don't sell I wouldn't cover it. If people are really interested in specific news they track it down - there is coverage somewhere.

Stop winging
Guest
 

Re: No respect for a WR

Postby Guest » Tue Sep 30, 2003 1:21 am

>I can never understand why anyone would ever
>complain about the coverage that any event ever
>gets. What are they? Professional spectators!
>Participate in life - don't watch from the
>sidelines. I say good on the newspapers and TV
>stations - cover whatever you want and whatever
>sells. If it don't sell I wouldn't cover it. If
>people are really interested in specific news
>they track it down - there is coverage
>somewhere.

Stop winging


I'll stop "winging" once newspapers give us a fair shake. Sure, they can cover whatever they see fit, but it is not like br was demanding they stop the presses and devote an entire section to the marathon (as they do for soccer). All we want is something a little more explanatory than a one or two line recap, that can tell you somethiing about the race, the conditions, the competitors. Sure, I don't expect every major newspaper to have a reporter on the scene, they just get their results and stories from wire services. So, when you say "If it don't sell I wouldn't cover it. If people are really interested in specific news they track it down - there is coverage somewhere", it is OK for newspapers to report the end result of an event without giving any specifics? In this particular case, it is like reporting that Barry Bonds broke the home run record, and not provide any key elements that led up to the moment. Sure, I can look up on the internet more specific information about the marathon, but what if I had no access to the internet? I am at the mercy of a sports editor, like they have at the LA Times, that won't give T&F a fair shake, simply because they (the editors) don't like track. Now do you seriously think that the 2-line summation of a major world record by the Times was all the public needed to have?
Guest
 

Re: No respect for a WR

Postby MJD » Tue Sep 30, 2003 1:38 am

>Sure, I can look up on the internet more
>specific information about the marathon, but
>what if I had no access to the internet?

Who doesn't have access to the internet that would be real interested in this sort of thing?

>I am
>at the mercy of a sports editor

Cancel your subscription if you really feel that you are a victim.
MJD
 
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: No respect for a WR

Postby MJD » Tue Sep 30, 2003 1:39 am

Althoough
>I feel your pain, what does this tirade have to
>do with newspaper coverage?

No pain and no tirade and if you don't understand my point, I'm not going to explain it to you.
MJD
 
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: No respect for a WR

Postby Guest » Tue Sep 30, 2003 2:38 am

Now do you seriously think that the
>2-line summation of a major world record by the
>Times was all the public needed to have?

The public need to have? What the? Since when does the general public need to know that someone ran very fast over 42.2k?? Holy moly there are much more important things going on in this world that people should be campaigning about getting media attention then athletics.

Why does athletics need more publicity? Where is the link between coverage and participation? There may be a link between coverage and sponsorship - but I don't think there needs to be more money in track for the athletes or anyone else. That is the bueaty of athletics - it is basically free bar purchasing a pair of joggers. It also is not a sport that takes a lot of time in training - so possible to work as well as train.

Once again - quit winging from the sidelines. If you don't like what the editors print - become an editor - see how long you last devoting space to the sports you love instead of the sports that folks want to read about.

Quit talking - start chalkin!
Guest
 

Re: No respect for a WR

Postby Guest » Tue Sep 30, 2003 8:01 am

Who doesn't have access to the
>internet that would be real interested in this
>sort of thing?

My father for one. He may be old fashioned but he relies on the newspaper for his information. He doesn't want to bother with computers, and I am sure there are more people like him who feel the same.
Guest
 

Re: No respect for a WR

Postby Jnathletics » Tue Sep 30, 2003 8:25 am

The public
>need to have? What the? Since when does the
>general public need to know that someone ran
>very fast over 42.2k?? Holy moly there are much
>more important things going on in this world
>that people should be campaigning about getting
>media attention then athletics.

Where are you from? Papers have a specific section called "Sports", that section has a given amount of pages. If we athletic fans complain about an athletic's story not given its proper respect and coverage it takes nothing away from your important media events. We are just say that Targets marathon race should get more "Sports" coverage then Jerry Rice's hangnail.

As for the rest of your tirade. Why are you on this web site? Why aren't you chalkin?
Jnathletics
 
Posts: 2213
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Cross Country Mudville

Re: No respect for a WR

Postby Guest » Tue Sep 30, 2003 8:43 am

The public
>need to have? What the? Since when does the
>general public need to know that someone ran
>very fast over 42.2k?? Holy moly there are much
>more important things going on in this world
>that people should be campaigning about getting
>media attention then athletics.

Do you not agree that the establishment of a world record in the marathon is a major sporting achievement ? Athletics is entertainment, and I am not trying to take space away from the important issues which our newspapers need to follow, but the whole basis of a "newspaper" is to print the news.

Why does
>athletics need more publicity? Where is the link
>between coverage and participation? There may be
>a link between coverage and sponsorship - but I
>don't think there needs to be more money in
>track for the athletes or anyone else. That is
>the bueaty of athletics - it is basically free
>bar purchasing a pair of joggers. It also is not
>a sport that takes a lot of time in training -
>so possible to work as well as train.

Re-read my original response. Where did I ever mention that athletics needed more publicity, and where did I try to link together coverage and sponsership?? I was trying to vent my frustration over the seemingly transparent summation the marathon recieved.

Once
>again - quit winging from the sidelines. If you
>don't like what the editors print - become an
>editor - see how long you last devoting space to
>the sports you love instead of the sports that
>folks want to read about.

Quit talking -
>start chalkin!

Well, I guess you don't get it. If I were a sports editor, I would certainly include more than a 2-sentence summation of a world record for an event that millions of Americans can identify with. Not to put down any particular track or field event, but most Americans associate T&F with the 100m, the mile, and the marathon. While most people may not have ever run a step in their lives, they know that running a marathon is a hallmark of strength and endurance, and one of the greatest achievements an individual can accomplish. The average fan, along with the rabid fan deserve more than a 1 or 2-sentence summation buried on the back pages.
Guest
 

Re: No respect for a WR

Postby Guest » Tue Sep 30, 2003 9:24 am

>>As I pointed out on another thread, the grey
>lady had 13 paragraphs but the content is
>getting bashed on that thread.

Pardon my ignorance, but who is the grey lady?
Guest
 

Re: No respect for a WR

Postby MJD » Tue Sep 30, 2003 9:38 am

>Pardon my
>ignorance, but who is the grey lady?

http://www.nytimes.com/
MJD
 
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: No respect for a WR

Postby Guest » Tue Sep 30, 2003 2:13 pm

So I take it that those complaining about the coverage have all written to the editors to express their frustration. And will continue to write to every editor when they feel that something is not getting the coverage they feel it should.

That is the difference between winging and chalkin'
Guest
 

Re: No respect for a WR

Postby blacklily » Tue Sep 30, 2003 3:27 pm

>Nothing changes. Unless it was the NY or Boston
>Marathon, no one in the newspaper business will
>ever want to give up their precious type space to
>cover an event that isn't a big money sport.
>Swimmers face the same problem.

The Chicago Tribune had an article, as did the New York Times. If people have a problem with their local paper's coverage, people must let their local paper know.

>The US sport's press is closed minded to sports
>that are not "American". It is sad this
>provincial attitude exists within the US sports
>media. Contrary to popular belief people in
>Europe don't care about the Dallas Cowboys.

Your point has some validity, although why wouldn't the U.S. sports press cover the Dallas Cowboys when most of their readers are big football fans? Why would they care one iota what Europeans think, when Europeans aren't a sizeable portion of their readership? Just like Europeans don't care about the Dallas Cowboys, Americans don't care about cricket, rugby, etc. Your point?

Golf & tennis aren't American sports & yet both get a good amount of coverage. Volleyball IS an American sport & Americans do quite well in track & field (well, at least in the sprints & field) & swimming, & yet neither get sufficient coverage. So it's more complicated than that. Why is this the case? It all comes down to fan interest.
blacklily
 
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 11 guests