The Oregonian editor reponse to lack of FCS coverage

[JALMOND]

In light of Portland State's fairly good showing against Pac-12 Cal, there was a small uprising of Portland State fans who were wondering what we need to do to get noticed by the local Portland media. The main contention was why the Oregonian did not have a local reporter to do the story in Berkeley (they opted for the AP story) yet sent three sports reporters to Charlottesville, VA to cover the Ducks story. The sports editor felt the need to discuss "coverage" in an open forum. Here is the link...

http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/index. ... _yo_2.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Specifically, what he said, "Regarding small colleges: Yeah I hear you on that. I wish we could do more there, but we just can't get to everything. Instead, we are trying to put most of our resources into the subject that the greatest number of readers are interested in. It's hard to muster audience on that topic but it won't go ignored. That paper of record mentality of the past-covering everything in the community just because that's the way it's always been done-is no longer feasible. And while there are some sad losses that come with that, we're a business and have to operate like one. In sports, and in all of journalism today, one of the major changes is we can see exactly what's being read. And while we aren't going to chase that to the ends of the earth, we are going to put our staff and our money in places where we know we-and you as our readers-will get the most for our investment. For us, that's five primary things: Blazers, Ducks, Beavers, Timbers-Thorns, and prep sports."

I myself do not like this. Being in a market that has DI football right on its doorstep, yet chooses not to cover it, is extremely short-sighted. Last I checked, you can't get any bigger in the NCAA that DI.

[SuperHornet]

Amen, JALMOND. We fight this in Sac, and I'm sure just about every FCS area that has other "distractions" fights it. We have a paper that up until this year focused on the Kings, the A's/Giants, the 49ers/Raiders, Cal/Stanford, and UC Davis, only dealing with Sac State if there was a scandal (like "PAMscam"). I'm still not sold that the current is changing, thought they DID have some legit reporting just prior to the season. And local radio? Fuggeddaboutit. The local guy goes out of his way to diss us. He would probably diss us even if we won the title (which I'm about 150% sure won't happen for the next few years).

I'd be interested to hear from other FCS fans about this. Do you feel the same way?

[Grizalltheway]

Covering a women's soccer team over FCS football? Thanks, SH.

[AZGrizFan]

In light of Portland State's fairly good showing against Pac-12 Cal, there was a small uprising of Portland State fans who were wondering what we need to do to get noticed by the local Portland media. The main contention was why the Oregonian did not have a local reporter to do the story in Berkeley (they opted for the AP story) yet sent three sports reporters to Charlottesville, VA to cover the Ducks story. The sports editor felt the need to discuss "coverage" in an open forum. Here is the link...

http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/index. ... _yo_2.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Specifically, what he said, "Regarding small colleges: Yeah I hear you on that. I wish we could do more there, but we just can't get to everything. Instead, we are trying to put most of our resources into the subject that the greatest number of readers are interested in. It's hard to muster audience on that topic but it won't go ignored. That paper of record mentality of the past-covering everything in the community just because that's the way it's always been done-is no longer feasible. And while there are some sad losses that come with that, we're a business and have to operate like one. In sports, and in all of journalism today, one of the major changes is we can see exactly what's being read. And while we aren't going to chase that to the ends of the earth, we are going to put our staff and our money in places where we know we-and you as our readers-will get the most for our investment. For us, that's five primary things: Blazers, Ducks, Beavers, Timbers-Thorns, and prep sports."

I myself do not like this. Being in a market that has DI football right on its doorstep, yet chooses not to cover it, is extremely short-sighted. Last I checked, you can't get any bigger in the NCAA that DI.

The $64,000 question: What comes first, the audience or the coverage?

[kalm]

In light of Portland State's fairly good showing against Pac-12 Cal, there was a small uprising of Portland State fans who were wondering what we need to do to get noticed by the local Portland media. The main contention was why the Oregonian did not have a local reporter to do the story in Berkeley (they opted for the AP story) yet sent three sports reporters to Charlottesville, VA to cover the Ducks story. The sports editor felt the need to discuss "coverage" in an open forum. Here is the link...

http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/index. ... _yo_2.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Specifically, what he said, "Regarding small colleges: Yeah I hear you on that. I wish we could do more there, but we just can't get to everything. Instead, we are trying to put most of our resources into the subject that the greatest number of readers are interested in. It's hard to muster audience on that topic but it won't go ignored. That paper of record mentality of the past-covering everything in the community just because that's the way it's always been done-is no longer feasible. And while there are some sad losses that come with that, we're a business and have to operate like one. In sports, and in all of journalism today, one of the major changes is we can see exactly what's being read. And while we aren't going to chase that to the ends of the earth, we are going to put our staff and our money in places where we know we-and you as our readers-will get the most for our investment. For us, that's five primary things: Blazers, Ducks, Beavers, Timbers-Thorns, and prep sports."

I myself do not like this. Being in a market that has DI football right on its doorstep, yet chooses not to cover it, is extremely short-sighted. Last I checked, you can't get any bigger in the NCAA that DI.

The $64,000 question: What comes first, the audience or the coverage?

Or winning?

EWU has battled this as well. We compete in-season with the Cougs, Vandals, Seahawks, and Huskies. But even out of season you're still battling the Zags, WHL Chiefs, and AFL Shock as many folks pick and chose just one team they'll invest their annual time and $'s in.

The athletic department has done a solid job of capitalizing on the NC, other playoff runs, and the red turf. They signed the local ESPN radio affiliate to broadcast games and host the weekly coaches show. This has led to increased attention from their local sports talk show including "eagle minute" info-ads, interviews, and an hour- long per-game. They've also invested in things like billboard advertising, and are doing a great job of employing electronic assets like goeags.com, Facebook, podcasting, etc to create further demand.

After pulling the EWU beat writer from reporting on fall practices a few years back, The Spokesman Review has had no choice but step it back up and to follow along more closely or fall behind their media counter competitors.

So savvy athletics marketing can increase demand to a certain extent, but, as they say...winning (obviously) cures most ills.

[JALMOND]

Amen, JALMOND. We fight this in Sac, and I'm sure just about every FCS area that has other "distractions" fights it. We have a paper that up until this year focused on the Kings, the A's/Giants, the 49ers/Raiders, Cal/Stanford, and UC Davis, only dealing with Sac State if there was a scandal (like "PAMscam"). I'm still not sold that the current is changing, thought they DID have some legit reporting just prior to the season. And local radio? Fuggeddaboutit. The local guy goes out of his way to diss us. He would probably diss us even if we won the title (which I'm about 150% sure won't happen for the next few years).

I'd be interested to hear from other FCS fans about this. Do you feel the same way?

This year, however, was going to be different. OregonLive set up a PSU fan forum similar to what they have done with the Ducks and Beavers where the Viking fans could have a place to discuss PSU athletics. Back in April, they also vowed to extensively cover Viking football and basketball every week, which we PSU fans assumed meant a similar layout to the Ducks and Beavers. After a good showing at Cal, we were hoping for an extensive story about the game, complete with interviews and pictures. Nothing, just the AP story. After McDonagh was named conference player of the week we looked for the big story in the paper. Nothing, just a blurb under the subheading "Big Sky".

How about the comment about coverage of local sports. If you are a super high school football player, they'll shower you with all kinds of coverage. If you choose to stay local and go to the big local university to continue playing football, they will ignore you, yet if you decide to go 100 miles down the road, they will still shower you with the coverage. Huh?

The Portland market currently has three 24hr sports talk radio stations (not just talk, but sports talk) and we cannot get any attention in the local media. If you make waves and ask why, they want to talk about the years with Pokey Allen when PSU football ruled the town and "someday" we'll get back there. Well back in the days of Pokey Allen, we were the only horse because Duck football was terrible and Beaver football was atrocious. They say, well win and we'll come back. Well the thing is the first week of the playoffs is the same week as the Civil War, and I am to believe that they will all of a sudden do something they have not done all season (cover PSU playoff football) instead of sticking to their status quo of all Civil War coverage all week. I highly doubt it.

I have never relied on the Oregonian or OLive for FCS coverage, but I feel as a PSU fan, that we were sold a false bill of goods back in April.

[MSUDuo]

We're pretty lucky here in Missouri. Yes, we have the Chiefs and Rams plus MLB and NHL but we also only have one BCS team. Our local sports radio guy calls the Bears football and basketball games so there is always talk no matter how bad things are.

[grizzaholic]

Amen, JALMOND. We fight this in Sac, and I'm sure just about every FCS area that has other "distractions" fights it. We have a paper that up until this year focused on the Kings, the A's/Giants, the 49ers/Raiders, Cal/Stanford, and UC Davis, only dealing with Sac State if there was a scandal (like "PAMscam"). I'm still not sold that the current is changing, thought they DID have some legit reporting just prior to the season. And local radio? Fuggeddaboutit. The local guy goes out of his way to diss us. He would probably diss us even if we won the title (which I'm about 150% sure won't happen for the next few years).

I'd be interested to hear from other FCS fans about this. Do you feel the same way?

Having Southern Oregon take you to the wood shed and you getting a squeaker of a win in OT doesn't help your case.

[mtjack]

I feel your pain, JALMOND. I'd say it's a safe bet that this is the case for nearly every FCS school that competes for air time and attention against FBS and pro teams. It's certainly the case for NAU. 8-3 last season with big wins over UNLV and Montana and barely got a sniff from AZ media outlets.

I wonder if the Montanans and North Dakotans (not disrespecting either state or fanbase...I've lived in both places and like em both) on here appreciate the love and coverage given to their schools from their state media outlets? I'm sure having no pro sports or FBS schools to compete with helps.

This leads me to think about which other FCS schools don't have major sports competition in-state .... Maine... Vermont, maybe?

[SuperHornet]

Amen, JALMOND. We fight this in Sac, and I'm sure just about every FCS area that has other "distractions" fights it. We have a paper that up until this year focused on the Kings, the A's/Giants, the 49ers/Raiders, Cal/Stanford, and UC Davis, only dealing with Sac State if there was a scandal (like "PAMscam"). I'm still not sold that the current is changing, thought they DID have some legit reporting just prior to the season. And local radio? Fuggeddaboutit. The local guy goes out of his way to diss us. He would probably diss us even if we won the title (which I'm about 150% sure won't happen for the next few years).

I'd be interested to hear from other FCS fans about this. Do you feel the same way?

Having Southern Oregon take you to the wood shed and you getting a squeaker of a win in OT doesn't help your case.

No duh.

Covering a women's soccer team over FCS football? Thanks, SH.

Say what?

[canyoncat]

I feel your pain, JALMOND. I'd say it's a safe bet that this is the case for nearly every FCS school that competes for air time and attention against FBS and pro teams. It's certainly the case for NAU. 8-3 last season with big wins over UNLV and Montana and barely got a sniff from AZ media outlets.

I wonder if the Montanans and North Dakotans (not disrespecting either state or fanbase...I've lived in both places and like em both) on here appreciate the love and coverage given to their schools from their state media outlets? I'm sure having no pro sports or FBS schools to compete with helps.

This leads me to think about which other FCS schools don't have major sports competition in-state .... Maine... Vermont, maybe?

Here in Montana we are very lucky in that regard where the Cats and Griz do not have to compete with a local FBS or Pro team. Generally the coverage is pretty good through out the state. Some newspapers lean towards one of the schools, but over all the coverage is pretty good. However, my local newspaper (Helena Independent Record) I have noticed a drop in coverage for both Cats and Griz, but the main newspapers in Montana are pretty good.

[Grizalltheway]

Having Southern Oregon take you to the wood shed and you getting a squeaker of a win in OT doesn't help your case.

No duh.

Covering a women's soccer team over FCS football? Thanks, SH.

Say what?

The editor mentioned that the Portland Thorns are above PSU on the coverage pecking order, and I blame you for promoting women's sports other than sammy making.

[Ibanez]

The Post and Courier does a good job of covering the local colleges (Charleston Southern, The Citadel, College of Charleston), South Carolina, Clemson and SC players in the Pros. Coastal has gained some better press in the past year or so but it's still AP or taken from the Sun News in Myrtle Beach. While they don't go to all the games, the P&C does report on many local players in the pros and at other colleges, i.e AJ Green at UGA and now in the NFL.

[HI54UNI]

In light of Portland State's fairly good showing against Pac-12 Cal, there was a small uprising of Portland State fans who were wondering what we need to do to get noticed by the local Portland media. The main contention was why the Oregonian did not have a local reporter to do the story in Berkeley (they opted for the AP story) yet sent three sports reporters to Charlottesville, VA to cover the Ducks story. The sports editor felt the need to discuss "coverage" in an open forum. Here is the link...

http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/index. ... _yo_2.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Specifically, what he said, "Regarding small colleges: Yeah I hear you on that. I wish we could do more there, but we just can't get to everything. Instead, we are trying to put most of our resources into the subject that the greatest number of readers are interested in. It's hard to muster audience on that topic but it won't go ignored. That paper of record mentality of the past-covering everything in the community just because that's the way it's always been done-is no longer feasible. And while there are some sad losses that come with that, we're a business and have to operate like one. In sports, and in all of journalism today, one of the major changes is we can see exactly what's being read. And while we aren't going to chase that to the ends of the earth, we are going to put our staff and our money in places where we know we-and you as our readers-will get the most for our investment. For us, that's five primary things: Blazers, Ducks, Beavers, Timbers-Thorns, and prep sports."

I myself do not like this. Being in a market that has DI football right on its doorstep, yet chooses not to cover it, is extremely short-sighted. Last I checked, you can't get any bigger in the NCAA that DI.

UNI fans feel your pain.

A few years ago UNI denied one of the "big" sports reporters from a Des Moines TV station press credentials for the NCAA BB tourney because they hadn't covered UNI all year. The reporter is still a big cry baby about it.

[ASUG8]

Here we're inundated with either South Carolina, Georgia, or Clemson with very little mention of Furman or Wofford. Panthers and Falcons are also pretty heavily covered, and high school football here is a pretty big deal - much more so than when we lived in NC.

[clenz]

In light of Portland State's fairly good showing against Pac-12 Cal, there was a small uprising of Portland State fans who were wondering what we need to do to get noticed by the local Portland media. The main contention was why the Oregonian did not have a local reporter to do the story in Berkeley (they opted for the AP story) yet sent three sports reporters to Charlottesville, VA to cover the Ducks story. The sports editor felt the need to discuss "coverage" in an open forum. Here is the link...

http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/index. ... _yo_2.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Specifically, what he said, "Regarding small colleges: Yeah I hear you on that. I wish we could do more there, but we just can't get to everything. Instead, we are trying to put most of our resources into the subject that the greatest number of readers are interested in. It's hard to muster audience on that topic but it won't go ignored. That paper of record mentality of the past-covering everything in the community just because that's the way it's always been done-is no longer feasible. And while there are some sad losses that come with that, we're a business and have to operate like one. In sports, and in all of journalism today, one of the major changes is we can see exactly what's being read. And while we aren't going to chase that to the ends of the earth, we are going to put our staff and our money in places where we know we-and you as our readers-will get the most for our investment. For us, that's five primary things: Blazers, Ducks, Beavers, Timbers-Thorns, and prep sports."

I myself do not like this. Being in a market that has DI football right on its doorstep, yet chooses not to cover it, is extremely short-sighted. Last I checked, you can't get any bigger in the NCAA that DI.

UNI fans feel your pain.

A few years ago UNI denied one of the "big" sports reporters from a Des Moines TV station press credentials for the NCAA BB tourney because they hadn't covered UNI all year. The reporter is still a big cry baby about it.

refresh my memory on that one

quando omni flunkus moritati

[Ivytalk]

Well, JALMOND, at least PSU gets more coverage than Reed College. Right?

[Sundown]

I
http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/index. ... _yo_2.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Specifically, what he said, "Regarding small colleges: Yeah I hear you on that. I wish we could do more there, but we just can't get to everything. Instead, we are trying to put most of our resources into the subject that the greatest number of readers are interested in. It's hard to muster audience on that topic but it won't go ignored. That paper of record mentality of the past-covering everything in the community just because that's the way it's always been done-is no longer feasible. And while there are some sad losses that come with that, we're a business and have to operate like one. In sports, and in all of journalism today, one of the major changes is we can see exactly what's being read. And while we aren't going to chase that to the ends of the earth, we are going to put our staff and our money in places where we know we-and you as our readers-will get the most for our investment. For us, that's five primary things: Blazers, Ducks, Beavers, Timbers-Thorns, and prep sports."

As a person who worked in news-print media for 7 years, I can attest that this is indeed the attitude that legacy media has taken, and it is exactly the reason that media continues it's precipitous decline into obscurity. So much so, that the only papers that continue to survive (ie. do more than break even) are only in major-metro markets. It's that same lazy, privileged mentality that continues to drive younger demographics online for their information simply because they can only learn so much from the mainstream. Yes, it's a business, and the "major interest" only coverage is one of the factors that has sent newspapers into a death spiral from which there will be no escape.

[Sundown]

I feel your pain, JALMOND. I'd say it's a safe bet that this is the case for nearly every FCS school that competes for air time and attention against FBS and pro teams. It's certainly the case for NAU. 8-3 last season with big wins over UNLV and Montana and barely got a sniff from AZ media outlets.

I wonder if the Montanans and North Dakotans (not disrespecting either state or fanbase...I've lived in both places and like em both) on here appreciate the love and coverage given to their schools from their state media outlets? I'm sure having no pro sports or FBS schools to compete with helps.

This leads me to think about which other FCS schools don't have major sports competition in-state .... Maine... Vermont, maybe?

Here in Montana we are very lucky in that regard where the Cats and Griz do not have to compete with a local FBS or Pro team. Generally the coverage is pretty good through out the state. Some newspapers lean towards one of the schools, but over all the coverage is pretty good. However, my local newspaper (Helena Independent Record) I have noticed a drop in coverage for both Cats and Griz, but the main newspapers in Montana are pretty good.

I would suppose the IR spends a lot of time covering the Saints?

[HI54UNI]

UNI fans feel your pain.

A few years ago UNI denied one of the "big" sports reporters from a Des Moines TV station press credentials for the NCAA BB tourney because they hadn't covered UNI all year. The reporter is still a big cry baby about it.

refresh my memory on that one

quando omni flunkus moritati

In 2004 UNI was the only Division 1 program in the state to make the NCAA BB tourney. WHO and Keith Murphy never covered the Panthers all year and suddenly wanted press credentials for the tourney. Rick Hartzell strictly followed the NCAA rule about giving press credentials only to press that regularly covered your team. WHO hadn't so Hartzell told them no credentials. Murphy whined about it saying that UNI denied him credentials without telling the entire story.

[SDHornet]

Amen, JALMOND. We fight this in Sac, and I'm sure just about every FCS area that has other "distractions" fights it. We have a paper that up until this year focused on the Kings, the A's/Giants, the 49ers/Raiders, Cal/Stanford, and UC Davis, only dealing with Sac State if there was a scandal (like "PAMscam"). I'm still not sold that the current is changing, thought they DID have some legit reporting just prior to the season. And local radio? Fuggeddaboutit. The local guy goes out of his way to diss us. He would probably diss us even if we won the title (which I'm about 150% sure won't happen for the next few years).

I'd be interested to hear from other FCS fans about this. Do you feel the same way?

Having Southern Oregon take you to the wood shed and you getting a squeaker of a win in OT doesn't help your case.

A win is a win …and SH is wrong as usual. The Bee doesn’t cover anything local outside of Bay Area NFL, MLB, Pac 12 unless it’s the Kings. However the Bee has surprisingly been giving us some press this season. Usually a recap article and preview article per week and they did some articles leading up to the season.

The Hornet admin has also stepped up its marketing campaign this season. 15+ billboards posted around Sac, some air time on the local morning shows in fall camp and srimmages, revamped website and social media campaigns/outreach.

Hasn’t anyone ever learned to not take anything SH says as truth? Sheesh. Just go jump in a lake Grizza.

[JALMOND]

I
http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/index. ... _yo_2.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Specifically, what he said, "Regarding small colleges: Yeah I hear you on that. I wish we could do more there, but we just can't get to everything. Instead, we are trying to put most of our resources into the subject that the greatest number of readers are interested in. It's hard to muster audience on that topic but it won't go ignored. That paper of record mentality of the past-covering everything in the community just because that's the way it's always been done-is no longer feasible. And while there are some sad losses that come with that, we're a business and have to operate like one. In sports, and in all of journalism today, one of the major changes is we can see exactly what's being read. And while we aren't going to chase that to the ends of the earth, we are going to put our staff and our money in places where we know we-and you as our readers-will get the most for our investment. For us, that's five primary things: Blazers, Ducks, Beavers, Timbers-Thorns, and prep sports."

As a person who worked in news-print media for 7 years, I can attest that this is indeed the attitude that legacy media has taken, and it is exactly the reason that media continues it's precipitous decline into obscurity. So much so, that the only papers that continue to survive (ie. do more than break even) are only in major-metro markets. It's that same lazy, privileged mentality that continues to drive younger demographics online for their information simply because they can only learn so much from the mainstream. Yes, it's a business, and the "major interest" only coverage is one of the factors that has sent newspapers into a death spiral from which there will be no escape.

A side note, one that I failed to mention because I didn't think it was relevant, is that the Oregonian itself is going to only have delivery service on Wednesdays, Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays starting October 1. I think, based on your points, that this part is relevant to my earlier post. OregonLive will still maintain articles during the week online and the Oregonian will have printed news on the other days available at newspaper distributors. The Oregonian editor has said that many papers have started to transition over to an all-online format.

[Cap'n Cat]

Some of you whiners gotta just adopt an FBS team and move on. I have. I'm a Gophers and Badgers and Big Ten fan now and it's much easier for me.

[BlackFalkin]

I have my own theory on this topic and it has nothing to do with winning. People are followers and even though EWU has played Washington and Washington State down to the wire, and BEAT a ranked Oregon State, the fact of the matter is Eastern Washington and Portland State don't regularly compete against the best. They also don't have beautiful 35-70k seat stadiums. Which means a BIG WIN against a FCS power house ends up being not so big. Matter of fact its like it never even happen bc most people in Spokane and Portland haven't heard of Sam Houston State or the University of Delaware. Had Eastern played an entire schedule of Pac 12 opponents in a 50,000 seat stadium and went 5-7, EWU would have more fans, more students, AND MORE COVERAGE.

[Grizalltheway]

Some of you whiners gotta just adopt an FBS team and move on. I have. I'm a Gophers and Badgers and Big Ten fan now and it's much easier for me.

Being a Gophers fan isn't easy for anyone.