I hope for your sake that the team turns it around fairly soon Conner. It would really help with some fans that you have something good to write instead of the usual tales of woe. The truth isn't always something Jet fans want to read so you might wanna keep a few fluff pieces on standby.That's the best way to avoid being lumped in with the Jet hating media that is the root of all evil in Jetland. Hopefully one day the Jets will give you something good to write about.
The thing about unnamed sources is that they might have an agenda and not be telling the truth. They're trying to put out their spin.
His colleagues are held in near-universal disdain. It's not unreasonable to suggest he not make the same mistakes they did. It's not a handicap, it's good advice - there 99.99% of all Jets fans don't couldn't give a sh-t who the first person to report a particular story is.
That's the point - it's not "how it is". There aren't more Steelers fans in the stadium than Jets fans and it's not even reasonably close or debatable. His snarky "never had any chance of being correct" headline was simply perpetuating a false negative for the sake of mocking the Jets. It's one of the reasons Jets fans hate the Jets media; the media doesn't like the team or the fans and needles them at every opportunity. And even if it were true? The headline serves no purpose other than to annoy the fans; that's not a way to win them over.
You don't have to be first you have to be best. Don't write short gossipy stuff. If an issue is worth writing about it's worth writing about in depth. Fight your editor for the space you need. That's how you'll be best. All the rumors about Santonio Holmes as an un-named source in 2011 should have been followed up by in-depth look at how he was on the Steelers. He wasn't a back-biter there and odds were really good he wasn't going to be a back-biter behind the scenes with the Jets. All his stuff was out in the open. Not good but out in the open.
I'm watching Mike Vick's presser after the game. All these guys are trying to do is get Mike to say something controversial. Trap him to say the team would have won more games with him than with Geno. Just speaking for myself. I don't appreciate it. It means nothing and I don't believe like they do that it sells newspapers.
Awesome, and that's appreciated as I do miss some articles when they're posted on Twitter,. there are a few who like to post an article and then tweet it 3-4 times quoting 3 different sentences <cough>Cimini</cough>. Basically if you don't try to make click bait I would appreciate it. I have a lot of interest in what people related to the team say, probably more then most. But I would/do appreciate the more articulate articles written after the fact rather then just being the first to tweet 140chars. There are live broadcasts and transcripts available if I just wanted to see the content as it was said. Would rather have a well thought out question followup then have the same sentence tweeted 3-4 times by the hoard of "writers". Appreciate that you're reaching out at all and listening to what fans has to say,. That in itself is a different twist. I wish you well in your new endeavor.
Welcome to the beat Connor! I will not offer advice. Half of this board told you how to be a beat writer yet you never told them how to be douches so I do not see the fairness in that...j/k. If you want to be liked by the members of this forum, search for Cimini, Mehta, Francesa, Fatcessa, or Fatcesa. Use those as a guide of what not to do. Cimini thought that Michael Vick going to the bathroom during training camp was newsworthy. But I digress.
Do us a favor...if you see Manish Mehta or Rich Cimini, tell them to find something better to beat off to, like TMZ. Because all they are good at is speculative gossip reporting to drive clicks rather then geniune stories on the Jets
I didn't see the press conference but asking Vick if he thinks the Jets would have been better off using him from the beginning of the season is certainly a legitimate question. Asking the question different ways may invoke a more complete response. What's the problem?
They were badgering him and trying to get him to make a mistake. They kept harping on that instead of talking about the game.
Ding. Ding. Ding. If someone says something controversial, by all means report it. But if you're going to ask someone the same question 15 different ways because he didn't give a controversial answer the first 14 times, that's not journalism, that's actually trying to create a controversial (or newsworthy) story so you have something exciting to report. It's the antithesis of journalism.
Just clear writing keep to the reader no problems. Comprehensible luck! edit: I'm sorry. I can be a real dick when I've had a few beers, I guess, but only in 2014 can someone who writes that sentence get a job in professional journalism. What the fuck is going on?
Sure, Milo. You can post the link. You can post links to any of the site's stuff in here at any point. A new podcast will be up on Tuesday.
Belated welcome from someone who has little love for your colleagues. For me the issue is with the writers that say they represent us as fans. I don't agree. If a story is written with information that is detrimental to the NY Jets' chances of winning their next game I'd rather not have the chance to read it. Jets info is OK, but not at the cost of Jets victories.
