Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Deadspin Staffers Are Quitting

thebiglead.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 83 posts

Re: Deadspin Staffers Are Quitting

#61

Post by [deleted] »

manicdee wrote: post #59
mc32 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I looks like the new bosses were pushing sports on the journalists. I don’t see how that implies losing integrity. Not caring about integrity would be things like fabrication, omission, taking one side of the issue, etc. Focusing on one section of news doesn’t compromise integrity.

You’ve missed the subtext. “Stick to sports” doesn’t mean “report only about sports.” It means, “do not follow that story any further because it makes me uncomfortable.” This could be for various reasons but ultimately means sticking to one side of an issue, omitting details that would anger the Powers That Be, or even fabricating details to put a positive spin on an otherwise damning report. “Stick to sports” means,…

[deleted]

Re: Deadspin Staffers Are Quitting

#62

Post by manigandham »

chrisseaton wrote: post #58
manigandham wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does that have to do with anything? There are millions of people raising families and working with a lower cost of living to do so.

What it has to do with the topic is that you need money to support a family. Moving to a lower cost of living area does not mean you can support them on nothing, so does not solve the problem we were talking about.

The topic was whether journalists know how to run their business given all their critique.

Seems like it’s either easy and so they should get on with it (and it’s undeniably cheap to get started) or it’s much harder than it looks and they don’t really know what they’re talking about.

Re: Deadspin Staffers Are Quitting

#63

Post by manigandham »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #48
manigandham wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe the claim is exaggerated but having money doesn’t make you invincible, especially to larger organizations. Regardless nobody should have such personal details revealed as news without their own doing, no matter how rich or famous they are.

Money doesn't make you invincible to everything. But when it comes to "I need to visit this country for business", money easily solves that. > Regardless nobody should have such personal details revealed as news without their own doing, no matter how rich or famous they are. Yeah, sure. Though I'd say that the existence of billionaires is a significantly larger problem...

No, money doesn’t easily solve anything, and it can actually bring attention (like tabloids that want to expose your sex life). And existence of billionaires? Envy of other people’s wealth and taking it away by force is at the forefront of every catastrophic economic outcome.

Re: Deadspin Staffers Are Quitting

#64

Post by mcphage »

shaki-dora wrote: post #54
vuln wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> like most journalists I know, are eager to do work that makes money; we are even willing to compromise for it. Is this journalism in 2019? Pump out content to make a buck and fuck journalistic integrity because they have kids to feed? Real journalism takes too long and doesn't generate enough revenue? One could say the same about Russian troll farms, they too have kids at home to feed. What a sad world we live in.

Is this reading comprehension in 2019? The clear intent of the sentence is to state that journalists do understand the need for their publisher to function as a business, i. e. to rebut the other stereotype of journalists that they often get to hear, namely that they are unrealistic idealists. Sad world, indeed.

The quality of reading comprehension on this site is depressingly low.

Re: Deadspin Staffers Are Quitting

#65

Post by chrisseaton »

manigandham wrote: post #62
chrisseaton wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What it has to do with the topic is that you need money to support a family. Moving to a lower cost of living area does not mean you can support them on nothing, so does not solve the problem we were talking about.

The topic was whether journalists know how to run their business given all their critique. Seems like it’s either easy and so they should get on with it (and it’s undeniably cheap to get started) or it’s much harder than it looks and they don’t really know what they’re talking about.

The original question was this

> Why don't the journalists who know how to run the business pool their resources up and start a business then? What's stopping them? What do they need those venture capital vultures for?

The answer is super simple - because they would starve to death before they managed to start making a profit. Most people don’t have that much savings for a runway.

Someone said ‘move to a lower cost of living area’ but there is no zero cost of living area to move to until you become profitable.

That’s why they need VC.

Re: Deadspin Staffers Are Quitting

#66

Post by mcphage »

Khaine wrote: post #57
xyzzyz wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real and less romantic story is this: The journalists at Deadspin and its sister sites, like most journalists I know, are eager to do work that makes money; we are even willing to compromise for it, knowing that our jobs and futures rest on it. An ever-growing number of media owners, meanwhile, are so exceedingly unwilling to reckon with the particulars of their own business that they refuse to accept our eagerne…

As I understand it the owners told them to focus on sports not politics, and these "journalists" refused. It sounds to me that a site dedicated to sports, should focus on sports.

> It sounds to me that a site dedicated to sports, should focus on sports.

What does it sound to you that a site not purely dedicated to sports—like say, I dunno, Deadspin—should do?

Re: Deadspin Staffers Are Quitting

#67

Post by manigandham »

chrisseaton wrote: post #65
manigandham wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The topic was whether journalists know how to run their business given all their critique. Seems like it’s either easy and so they should get on with it (and it’s undeniably cheap to get started) or it’s much harder than it looks and they don’t really know what they’re talking about.

The original question was this > Why don't the journalists who know how to run the business pool their resources up and start a business then? What's stopping them? What do they need those venture capital vultures for? The answer is super simple - because they would starve to death before they managed to start making a profit. Most people don’t have that much savings for a runway. Someone said ‘move to a lower cost o…

This is the same situation that the vast majority of entrepreneurs are in and they make it work. What is so special about journalists that they always need special rules or consideration?

Re: Deadspin Staffers Are Quitting

#68

Post by slg »

thrower123 wrote: post #60
manicdee wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’ve missed the subtext. “Stick to sports” doesn’t mean “report only about sports.” It means, “do not follow that story any further because it makes me uncomfortable.” This could be for various reasons but ultimately means sticking to one side of an issue, omitting details that would anger the Powers That Be, or even fabricating details to put a positive spin on an otherwise damning report. “Stick to sports” means,…

That's emphatically not what "stick to sports" means. For a lot of people, sports are an oasis of tranquility carved out of the incessant rage and cultural bickering that blares 24/7 everywhere else. There's a lot of old duffers that would rather hear about David Price's fastball rather than his political positions, or Kyrie Irving's crossover dribble rather than his speculations on the geometry of the Earth. It's st…

>It's still a weird pivot for Deadspin to take, because that was never what they were about or where their audience was.

I have been a Deadspin reader since at least 2006. It might have gotten more political over recent years (hasn't everything?), but I think you fundamentally didn't understand Deadspin's purpose if you think it was the place to go to read about David Price's fastball. There are countless places on the internet that cover stories like that better. The thing the separated Deadspin from the crowd was that they didn't stick to what happened on the field in sports and that was a key factor in them building their audience.

Re: Deadspin Staffers Are Quitting

#69

Post by Dylan16807 »

manigandham wrote: post #63
Dylan16807 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money doesn't make you invincible to everything. But when it comes to "I need to visit this country for business", money easily solves that. > Regardless nobody should have such personal details revealed as news without their own doing, no matter how rich or famous they are. Yeah, sure. Though I'd say that the existence of billionaires is a significantly larger problem...

No, money doesn’t easily solve anything, and it can actually bring attention (like tabloids that want to expose your sex life). And existence of billionaires? Envy of other people’s wealth and taking it away by force is at the forefront of every catastrophic economic outcome.

> No, money doesn’t easily solve anything

Anyone who has ever had an unreliable car begs to differ. Among a million other examples. Not being able to just solve unexpected problems is the worst part of being poor.

> Envy of other people’s wealth and taking it away by force is at the forefront of every catastrophic economic outcome.

I didn't say 'taking it away', it's more a comment on how taxes should be more progressive.

But if you did knock every billionaire down to 100M... nothing bad would happen. It's less than one percent of one percent of people going from "filthy rich" down to "still filthy rich".

Re: Deadspin Staffers Are Quitting

#70

Post by dang »

sylens wrote: post #22
manigandham wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m in adtech and know enough publishers. I can’t share exact numbers but readership is way down. Constant political stories and culture outrage doesn’t make good sports reading. Contrast this with barstool sports which is doing well.

found the stoolie

Personal attacks will get you banned here. Please follow the rules: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Post reply on HN