That's basically true. No offense, Connor, but you have a boss that wants results. 2 years from now, you will regret being this open to Jets fans.
This is what's wrong with journalism these days. Too many people are trying to sell instead of looking for the truth. A lot of times the truth isn't a popular thing but if everybody is looking to sell and nobody is looking for the truth we're completely screwed.
Thank you to all that have replied. I appreciate the encouragement and well wishes and I hope to be one of the sources you go to for Jets information. One issue I do have to address is that have "unnamed sources." Unfortunately, this sometimes does not have to do with a journalist not wanting to name a source for the simple fact he doesn't have one and is making up the news-- which, sadly, I'm sure happens. Part of the reason something is named "via a source" is because that source chose to speak "off the record." When speaking "off the record," the information is allowed to be reported, however, you cannot, by law, name the person that said that information. Unfortunately, some of the best scoops no person will want to put their name to for fear of losing their jobs. Thus, you have unnamed sources. When you poke around the site, which you can find the URL on my twitter page, you'll see many featured articles that may be to what many have suggested they look for in writing. The topics include Demario Davis and his strong faith, Jeff Cumberland helping Jace Amaro make a familiar transition and many others. One of the pieces I truly enjoyed writing was one on Antwan Barnes. After landing on the season-ending injured reserve, Barnes was motivated to return for one reason and one reason alone: his daughter. While she knows nothing about football, Barnes said it gives her the biggest smile seeing him on the television. Just when the nerves of taking the field agains the Patriots were catching up to him, he told me he saw that picture of his daughter and everything got much easier.
You can find the above articles and more by going to my twitter page at Connor_J_hughes-- this is not a self promotion, but I am still not able to post links, just waiting on a 'like'--- and you will see the site's link in the bio. Scroll down slightly and you will see "New York Jets Essentials." There you will see the Harvin, Amaro and Barnes articles among others.
There's nothing wrong with the truth. In fact, that's exactly what every reader is looking for. Well, maybe not every reader. The well disguised truth is what a great writer can convince the reader to believe. Our existing beat corps publishes undiguised misdirection. It's trying to move you toward a destination that has sign posts that mock the reader's intelligence at every turn. Gotta hand it to Cimini, though. He knows how to write a well-researched article when his masters remove that cone from around his neck. Not very often.
Yes, we all know this; we're not stupid. What we're telling you (pretty much unanimously if you look through the thread) is that if you can't get a source to go on-the-record, we'd rather you not report the information at all. There are several reasons for this, but the two big ones are: 1. Frankly, the Jets beat writers (as a whole) have no credibility and we believe they make things up constantly and attribute it to an unnamed source. 2. We further believe you have beat writers who have one or two malcontent Jet-employee sources who they can get to say anything with some prodding ... and the next thing you know Mehta is reporting "A source working in the Jets front office says the whole team thinks they should do X" because Joe, the front office janitor, thinks the "whole team" thinks they should do X. Again, the beat writers have no credibility anymore; when we read "anonymous source" we translate it as "I talked my one guy who works for the Jets who has zero influence or behind-the-scenes knowledge to say what I wanted him to say". If a good source tells you he will only say something off-the-record, tell him thanks ... then don't print it. If he wants it public badly enough, he'll go on the record eventually.
So basically you are asking someone who has a job to do, to not play by the same rules as his colleagues (putting him at an extreme disadvantage). Thats a totally unreasonable request in my opinion. It would be reasonable for you to ask him not to post that to this site, but he would be out of a job quickly if he never cited unnamed sources. While I get your frustration and where you are coming from, I feel that is a pretty unreasonable request.
My best advice in differentiating yourself would be to avoid perpetuating the "circus" motif. During the Tebow fiasco, this was warranted. It was easy pickins for lazy journalists, and they got a year's worth of free stories out of it. Ever since then, they've tried to keep the theme alive in hopes of reliving the glory days of being able to put together a page of clickable copy without a shred of actual reporting, research, or quite frankly...football. Those days are gone. Sure, this team is bad now, but it's just plain old vanilla bad. Not TMZ bad. Don't try and invent off the field drama (like the "Rex told reporters how to beat Vick" filth). Also, besides reaching out to us, try and get on a few of the podcasts. The Jets Blog (SNY Corey Griffith/Bryan Basset) one is very good, and they're always bringing in lesser known beat writers. Good to have a voice to go with the written word nowadays. Last, and I cannot stress this enough...if you're at the press conference after a game, there's always one blatantly obvious question that will be asked by the sheep (bad qb play, that one crucial interception, whatever). If you get your shot to ask, don't be the fifth guy to ask it in a different way. It's a total waste of time. Have a completely different line of questioning ready. You'll get a lot more respect from everyone (including the hacks that are forced to ask the obvious). Best of luck (from a former journalism major).
Ajitator -- Will look into the information you like, you have some very solid ideas that are easily manageable and able to be put together. Via twitter, and tweeting out links again, my articles normally will get tweeted once initially, then once again with an "ICYMI." I do not believe I have ever tweeted out different lines from an article with different information. Normally it is just the title of the article. Have to think when its tweeted out a second time people that did not see it originally may see it and be interested. Usually, from my POV, I will just tweet out again featured articles or articles that have a longer shelf life. You're not going to see me tweet out today an article about the Jets playing in London. Tweeting during press conferences I do do, and most likely will continue to do. A pretty large number have an interest in it and are curious for what some are going to say. The big topics that are stated are then turned into articles, which I think you'd enjoy. Thanks again for the feedback. -Connor
Noted on this front. Can see how it comes off as "snarky" and didn't see that as ruffling some fans' feathers. More approriate title that would come across better will be used for future articles.
Thank you, Milo. Radio is actually something that I have a pretty deep background in and have started up my own podcast that can be found on soundcloud. Myself, along with a colleague, started it roughly three weeks ago when the site launched. It's in that trail-error stage of what is the best way to go about it. You can give a search, it's simply on soundcloud and the username is "New York Jets Podcast." First week's I thought was a little bit happy-go-lucky for the state of the Jets, this week was a little bit negative. Next week's will be much more football centric.
Excellent! I'll check it out! May I post the link? P.S. Just the fact that you are willing to go direct to the community gives you respect in my book. We may be over-emotional at times, but the majority of fans of this team are pretty football-savvy - it's kind of necessary when you are constantly having to do forensic analysis on what went wrong! If you have our respect, you'll never need to write an Enquirer-esque piece to get our attention - that's half the battle won.
