From Mike Reiss' most recent chat at ESPNBoston:
Second, he raises a very interesting philosophical debate - what is his primary job function? Is it to report the news or is it to generate "clicks" through spin, "hot sports takes" or the generation of (Tanguay voice) "controversy"? A quick review of Reiss' twitter feed shows football - lots and lots of links to stories, answers to questions and little attempt to sell himself or his latest effort. If you want to know what happened, check with Reiss. If you want to know WHY something happened (and what it means!) then go to Curran or Borges or Bedard - guys with an opinion/agenda and a vested interest in "getting clicks".
What's your reaction to Reiss' lament?
First, IMO, Mike Reiss is the best sports reporter working in the Boston market and it isn't even close. He works his ass off, rarely presents a personal opinion as "news" and never misses a story. He isn't sensational or controversial and he doesn't do anything to "get clicks" - he just does his job, reporting the daily news from the Patriots/Foxboro in detail and without spin.I have been having some internal philosophical debates in my head about what media is these days. What are we trying to accomplish? When I got into this business, I thought we were supposed to tell people what they needed to know. Now I think we're trending in a dangerous area where we report based on what will get clicks. It bothers me...... I'm not perfect, but when I see a company soliciting publicity for dropping a boatload of Butterfingers in Boston and thanking Wes Welker for his drop -- and then some report on it to give that company exactly what they want (publicity) -- it makes me shake my head. What are we doing here?
Second, he raises a very interesting philosophical debate - what is his primary job function? Is it to report the news or is it to generate "clicks" through spin, "hot sports takes" or the generation of (Tanguay voice) "controversy"? A quick review of Reiss' twitter feed shows football - lots and lots of links to stories, answers to questions and little attempt to sell himself or his latest effort. If you want to know what happened, check with Reiss. If you want to know WHY something happened (and what it means!) then go to Curran or Borges or Bedard - guys with an opinion/agenda and a vested interest in "getting clicks".
What's your reaction to Reiss' lament?