Veteran
Sports Illustrated pro football
writer Paul Zimmerman, known as Dr. Z, once caused a problem for the Bills’
media relations staff during training camp at St. John Fisher. He ventured from
the media-designated sideline to watch a drill on the opposite sideline, which
was empty enough to have comfortably fit the state of Rhode Island.
           But for whatever reason, media
people weren’t permitted there, so a Bills media assistant told him to move.
           I often attended Buffalo’s
mini-camps, which were closed to the public. Occasionally I’d quote a coach
explaining something to a player because that gave insight into his
development. Unfortunately, a team official told me coaches and players could
only be quoted during the sanctioned media period.
Welcome to
sports media relations, where the objective has evolved from
accommodating media to controlling them. Sports organizations limit access and
pander to TV so well, they practically run sports journalism.
           There’s no greater evidence than the
NCAA men’s basketball tournament. Reporters’ access to players and coaches is
primarily through televised press conferences, where the questions and answers
tend to be weak simply because of the impersonal environment.
           That’s followed by a 30-minute
post-game locker room access period. Unfortunately, with so many cameras and TV
reporters looking for sound bites, there is seldom any meaningful conversation
between the interview subject and the reporter. The interviewee just delivers
the same BS he hears on SportsCenter, thinking that’s how he’s supposed to
talk.
           Yet, press conferences are sports
organizations’ communication tool of choice. Why? First, they really don’t want
you to know the athlete, except for
his statistics and community service.
           Second, the podium is a shield that
suggests civility. It limits potential confrontation because people don’t want
to look stupid on TV… unless it’s reality TV. Thus, no negativity surfaces; and
if it does, the media relations people have already pre-programmed the
interviewee to handle it.
           Overall, the press conference is for
the uncritical eye of television. That’s why sports organizations love them.
The less detail, the less likely trouble will occur.
           It’s just regrettable that TV and
print media get lumped together. Each has different needs. The TV people want
sound bites based on four or five themes easily identifiable in 10 seconds.
Print journalists want specifics, because stories are seldom as simple as TV
implies. But print people are only going to get those specifics by talking to
someone for 20 to 30 minutes, which rarely happens.
           Ultimately, what the fan gets is
garbage, nothing remotely similar to the classic work by renowned sports
writers Jimmy Cannon and Red Smith.
           When 12th-seeded Manhattan upset
fifth-seeded Florida, 75-60, in the NCAA’s first round on March 18, the media’s
questions focused on why Florida lacked competitiveness. What did Manhattan say
about the strategy it employed during the contest’s pivotal points? Who knows?
That question wasn’t asked because it’s apparently not sound-bite friendly.
My favorite
press conference question is: “Talk about [subject].” Properly translated,
this means, “Say anything about [subject] for 20 seconds and I don’t care what
it is.”
           My second favorite question is: “How
important was [something]?” Over the years, among the things that I’ve learned
were important: Adam Vinatieri’s Super Bowl-winning kicks; Josh Beckett’s
five-hit shutout for the Marlins in Game 7 of last year’s World Series; Tampa
Bay’s five interceptions and three defensive touchdowns in Super Bowl XXXVII.
           In the meantime, we haven’t learned
anything.
           Paul Zimmerman tells me he’s still
waiting for someone to explain to him how US hockey upset the Russians in the
1980 Lake Placid Winter Games. He argues that the media captured the drama, but
said little of the strategies that pulled off that shocker.
           I won’t tell him, because I don’t
want to embarrass him. But we all know it was a miracle, a victory of good over
evil and God’s way of punishing the USSR for being communist. I thought that
was obvious.
           What is most obvious is that
television has shaped today’s sports journalism because sports organizations
cater to TV. They know there’s much more money to be made on the tens of
millions who watch TV than on the sliver of people who read. No print publication
ever paid the NFL $17.6 billion to cover its games.
           Consequently, discerning print
journalists and fans suffer through the inanity. Only a few writers contest it,
such as Zimmerman. He’s unwilling to allow, as he says, “the characters with
their mics and mini-cams, searching for the eternal and damnable sound bite,”
ruin sports journalism. He fights for better NFL access, but league officials
don’t seem to pay any attention.
           Legendary New York sports columnist
Dick Young hated TV reporters and camera people with such fervor, he sometimes
fought with and swore at them. In fact, the disgust was so intense, it even
earned mention in his New York Times obituary.
           Obviously, vitriol existed once, but
that’s fading, partly because ESPN has curried favor with today’s print media
by hiring many big-city columnists for shows such as Pardon the Interruption and Around
the Horn. Evidently, ESPN is buying print people off, interested in
control, like the sports leagues.
           Man, they’re just made for each other.
And we all lose in the end.
This article appears in Mar 24-30, 2004.
