• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

COOKING UP A SPORTS FEATURE STORY: Dissecting the writer-editor decisions and operations that lead to sports features making it to publication by MARK SELIG Jacqui Banaszynski, Committee Chair Living in New York for the bulk of his professional career, Leon Carter used cabs for transportation. He also used them for story ideas. Carter, a former sports editor at The New York Daily News and ESPN New York who now works for ESPN’s black culture site, The Undefeated, usually didn’t share his line of work when he stepped into a taxi, but he did encourage conversations about sports. Cab drivers are often passionate about sports, Carter said, so he wanted to hear their opinions. While his choice of vehicle for discussions might stand out, Carter is much like the other five sport editors I interviewed over the summer. One of the most fertile seeds for story ideas, those editors said, are conversations — from informal ones in Manhattan taxis to planned talks during staff meetings. In addition to six sports editors at six publications, I interviewed six sports reporters who work for those editors. I aimed to examine the factors that lead to writers and editors identifying and selecting topics to cover for in-depth features. Feature stories are, according to the Pulitzer Prize committee, “Stories that are not hard news and are distinguished by the quality of their writing. Stories should be memorable for their reporting, crafting, creativity and economy of expression.” That’s a good start on a definition (though obviously I’m considering more than just Pulitzer- worthy stories). Newspapers and web publications often devote additional resources to these pieces and spotlight them in their overall coverage. In sports, they go beyond game coverage, daily news and reaction, and use deep reporting to better explain a person or topic. Feature stories certainly can be written quickly and on deadline (W.C. Heinz’s Death of a Race Horse is a famous example), but for the purposes of this project, I’m looking at stories that were planned days or even weeks in advance. It’s these stories that an editor will bring to his bosses and ask to carve out space or money to produce. I’m analyzing stories where there’s a decision-making process between writer and editor, rather than a writer independently choosing a direction once he’s in the field. In a typical month I read close to 100 sports feature stories from newspapers, magazines and websites. Being in the industry — and working toward a master’s degree — I digest these stories more critically. I’m constantly thinking “Why?” Why did they choose to cover this person or topic the way they did? Or how? How did they think to attack the story in that manner? By documenting the processes behind these decisions, I hope to provide an inside look that might help others in the industry develop ideas for feature stories that fit their coverage area. There is no blueprint for identifying and selecting topics to write features on. My conversations revealed that. While it was my goal to identify connective tissue binding the techniques that a dozen writers and editors use to develop feature story ideas, each has his or her own nuanced line of thinking. Sure, there are similarities, but there is no definitive system that unites how journalists determine a story is worthy of the space and time commitment of a big feature: Some go by gut, some use analytics. Some mimic other journalists they respect, using peers as inspiration. Writers and editors all said they emphasize the need to create interesting content — but the definition of “interesting” varies a bit, too. Whether stories are pitched from writer to editor or assigned from editor to writer varies drastically among the six publications. And while the six publications I researched use audience analytics in some way, the audience is still, often, a passive participant in this exchange. As Carter’s cab rides suggest, sports fans might be a news organization’s most invested audience. Yet the writers and editors I interviewed seem to be paying more attention to what their peers in the industry are doing, rather than what their audience wants. Each person I interviewed said they read other newspapers, magazines, books or websites as a way to think of potential story ideas for themselves. Many also read the Twitter feeds of their peers. But most said they don’t actively seek out the opinions from those in their audience. Journalism has long been governed by gatekeeping, “the process by which the vast array of potential news messages are winnowed, shaped, and prodded into those few that are actually transmitted by the news media,” according to published research in 2001 by Pamela J. Shoemaker, a gatekeeping theorist and a communications professor at the University of Syracuse. When Carter talked to cab drivers, he was acquiring information that would help him rule his gate to the satisfaction of his audience. He was trying to remove some of the guesswork. While editors still decide what does and doesn’t run in their publication, consumers in the digital age have helped minimize the power. In the digital age, consumers can choose to go elsewhere if a certain publication doesn’t provide what they want. As Shoemaker wrote in 2009, “an entirely new gatekeeping process begins when audience members make their own decisions about which news items, if any, to view, listen to or read.” But it appears some writers and editors are inattentive — if not blind to — this new gatekeeping process when it comes to feature stories. They don’t leverage the ideas of a potential audience that consumes these stories. I conducted interviews with a six sportswriters and their editors. Three of these pairs work at print-and-digital operations; the other three pairs work (or worked) at strictly digital outlets. The panel: • Boston Globe assistant managing editor Joe Sullivan, who has guided the sports department for the past 21 years. • Boston Globe enterprise reporter Shira Springer, whose role is a bit different from the beat writers and columnists that dominate the Globe’s sports section. Springer has a lot of freedom to write about what she wants, and if it doesn’t fit squarely into the sports department’s plans, the news side will often use it. • San Diego Union Tribune sports editor Todd Adams. He took that job in 2012 after working at the Orlando Sentinel the previous two years. • San Diego Union-Tribune Chargers beat writer Michael Gehlkin. This is Gehlkin’s fourth year with the paper. • Knoxville News Sentinel sports editor Phil Kaplan, who has been at the newspaper for 20 years and took over as sports editor in 2010 • Knoxville News Sentinel Tennessee football beat writer Dustin Dopirak, who’s covered collegiate athletics throughout his 12-year career — first in Virginia then in Indiana, before joining Knoxville’s staff in August 2014. • Former ESPN New York editor Leon Carter, who is now heading ESPN’s fledgling black culture site, The Undefeated. Carter worked at the Daily News more than 20 years before joining ESPN in 2010. • ESPN New York reporter Ian O’Connor, who writes a mix of features and columns. He also hosts a radio show in New York. And used to work with Carter at the Daily News. • Former Grantland editor Sean Fennessey, who, in October, left to work at HBO under Grantland founder Bill Simmons. Then, in November, ESPN shut down Grantland, an offshoot that presented lengthy sports and pop culture features. ESPN cited a willingness “to direct our time and energy going forward to projects that we believe will have a broader and more significant impact across our enterprise.” At the time of our interview, Fennessey was still at Grantland. • Former Grantland football reporter Robert Mays, who had been with the website since its launch in 2011. Before moving to Chicago this summer, Mays was one of few Grantland reporters who lived in Los Angeles, where the website was based. That will come up later, when I discuss the challenges of remote working. • Bleacher Report special projects editor Bill Eichenberg, a former Newsday and Wall Street Journal sports editor. Bleacher report is a 2007 fan-focused digital startup that’s received criticism in the industry for publishing low-quality coverage from its unpaid contributors. Eichenberger was brought in to run a more professional “Longform” section that’s added legitimacy to the website. • Bleacher Report feature writer Lars Anderson, a former Sports Illustrated staff writer who is the only full-time writer in Eichenberger’s Longform section. My interviews reveal the thoughts and leanings of several sports journalists as they consider possible in-depth feature stories to pursue. The interviews also show the decision-making processes that lead to what consumers read. Despite the lack of consistency about how writers and editors determine what makes a feature story worthwhile, here are some things I discovered that are worth considering. GENERATING IDEAS Lars Anderson, formerly a staff writer at Sports Illustrated, now writes for Bleacher Report’s Longform section, which was built in part to legitimize a website more known for its quick-hitting fan content. Anderson also teaches a sportswriting course in the journalism department at the University of Alabama, and lectures about the importance of coming up with good story ideas, which he considers the toughest part of writing. "If you're good with ideas, you'll have a job in this business as long as you want,” Anderson said, “because the ideas are what drive everything." In sports journalism, the most outwardly compelling athletes — the ones that are the best or most vocal — receive plenty of coverage.

Load more

  24

Copy Link