Demand Dictates: Supporting Local Media To Increase Coverage Quantity And Quality
by Scott Kessler on Jul 1, 2011 5:13 PM EDT
in Editorials
Email
PrintMarc Narducci's column for the Philadelphia Inquirer and Philly.com has brought outrage and hatred from Philadelphia Union fans, especially the Sons of Ben.
The Union beat reporter wrote a somewhat nonsensical piece for the Inky that criticized the Union fanbase for booing the team and for using organized chants that are laced with profanity. Then fans reacted to the article with understandable anger toward Narducci.
There were no quotes backing up Narducci's point of view, nor were there any facts, figures, links, videos or audio recordings that provided ample support for him. That's where the real problem was with his article on fan behavior.
Complaints are warranted. We here at the Brotherly Game have on multiple occasions defended the fans when the mainstream media have taken potshots at them. That's where this situation has led to, again.
At this point in the Union's life, the media still doesn't need the team - the team needs the media. The Inquirer and Daily News, along with the Delaware County Times and other news outlets have the upper hand in the relationship with the team because the demand just isn't there for them to commit full time to Union coverage.
To improve coverage of the Union, both in quantity and quality, fans need to step up on their own. Supporting local media is how to do just that.
Currently there is not close to enough of a "market" for papers and their online outlets to pursue more coverage of the Union. Facts and figures are what will drive news outlets to not only want to cover the Union, but also to force them to do so.
Talking to people in the industry, the Brotherly Game understands that there just isn't enough demand at the moment. Philly.com has content that is republished from the Inquirer and Daily News, but stories on the site's blog The Goalkeeper have tailed off in frequency due to a lack of people clicking in to read articles.
The Brotherly Game draws an average of 750 people and 1700 page views a day. Transfer that over to a Philly.com, CSNPhilly.com or otherwise and it still doesn't translate into enough of a money "grab" for editors with limited resources to devote more effort to.
Buying papers is the main way to justify coverage in the Inky or Daily News, in addition to filling out surveys that indicate why the purchase was made. With quantifiable sales for articles related to the Union, papers can put more resources into their reporting on the club.
Online news is a whole other situation. In addition to simply clicking on links and visiting sites, the use of social networking is of equal importance. "Likes" on Facebook are now factored into the algorithms, as are tweets and retweets of links on Twitter.
Comments on both, through emails or actual writing on sites, show that there is an active readership that wishes to see reporting continue and grow. There's a lack of that for Union-related sites, be them blogs or mainstream media outlets.
Too often people will read a headline, not click on an article and comment off the site or not email an author or his/her editor. It hurts everyone involved. Ad revenue is what everyone in the equation (sans the readers themselves) is looking for. Companies will throw more money to 'papers and online outlets if there is a sustainable - and large - number of readers or consumers.
The solution to 'fixing' the current state of main stream media coverage of the Union is to read, write and click. It's all in your hands (or mouse).
3 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Let's not let some insecure need for validation of our sport get us all attached to this crappy, dying media format, okay?
Ok, so you want the fan base to support this struggling industry, specifically the local papers that badmouth the fans and the team, b/c you think the industry will somehow, like in a symbiotic relationship, help the team get new fans from increased exposure in the media down the road? Time out.
Problem #1 is that these newspapers are going bankrupt for their own reasons. Since we’re concerned about the future growth of the team here, we should be focusing on the growing media formats and marketing strategies, not the dying ones.
Problem #2 is that Narducci just wrote a sensationalist piece of garbage clearly trying to draw negative attention to the Union and its fans. Who do you really think that piece was written for? Soccer fans? Not quite. It was for the soccer haters to enjoy, and for the soccer fans to get irritated about. Did that double their readership, clicks, etc.? I can’t say for sure, but I am sure that such writing is not the kind of product that’s going to help the team or its image to the casual fan.
Because of those problems, I don’t see the makings of a symbiotic relationship between the team and the antiquated, traditional sports media in Philly.
Frankly, rather than spending our time clicking and reading through the media’s garbage, as you suggest, I think persistent word of mouth marketing by you, me, and all the fans of the team is a much more likely means to facilitate the growth of the fan base and interest in the sport on a professional level.
With all due respect...
It is not the customers job to buy something that does not give them what they want. It is the producer’s job to make the customer want to buy their product.
If MSM refuses to cover a team you want to read about, I would think those people should find sites like this one. I worked in MSM for more than a decade and saw far too much of the attitude you speak of. It is that very thing that has led to newspaper’s downfall.
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter
I don't think there is a satisfactory answer for all
The newspapers often times put such little effort into soccer coverage, which is a huge reason soccer specific magazines/websites get a lot of traffic, that it is hard to read. They make it smaller and it is almost like a game to find the article. Hell last weeks game was on ABC but when I checked the daily sports line up, which lists the games of local/national interest and what time and channel they were on, the Unions game wasn’t even listed. The Gold Cup final wasn’t even listed (although that may have been because it was on such a specific channel with FSC) I mean shit, here I am in Philly fan country and I am looking at the Under 17 world cup as the only listed game. What the hell is that? So yes when the local media’s only interest in our team is the “terrible fans who cuss and blah blah blah”, it doesn’t matter how many site clicks you give them.
The counter to that is we do need the media, their promotion and the advertising dollars. soccer will always be relegated to special channels at awkward times or in rebroadcasts if the advertising dollars aren’t there to support putting them on. Those dollars are given based upon the perception of a company being able to sell to us the soccer fan. So we do need to go out of our way to click on site stories no matter how porrly written they are, we do need to wirte editors, writers, and make ourseleves very publicly known if we wish to see soccer grow. who wouldn’t want to see us have the chance to keep some of our best stars here in the States on a regular basis, or have the same opportunity as a European club to sign the next Messi. As Scott wrote we at this point need the media so that in the future they need us.
"I will never have my best season," Brian Dawkins
Mike Vick is a piece of shit
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
