PDA

View Full Version : Interview w/ White Sox, Cubs Beat Writers Scot Gregor, Paul Sullivan


DrCrawdad
03-02-2005, 01:04 AM
Brief interview with Sully and Scot Gregor, here. (http://www.chicagosportsreview.com/chicago/chicagoview.asp?c=146710)

How much attention do you pay to baseball bloggers and fan message boards?

SG: More and more. Some of the bloggers and fans on message boards know more about baseball and/or their respective team than some of the writers I've run across.

PS: None. I never read them. I know some of the other beat writers that read them, but I don't have the time or the desire. Sometimes people will email me a link to a fan site where someone is drilling me for something I wrote. I've learned never to respond. Some of these people are downright nuts. No offense to you, but everyone with a PC and a printer believes they're a writer. That's the worst aspect of the Internet Age -- everyone has something to say and a blog to say it in.

MUsoxfan
03-02-2005, 01:09 AM
Paul Sullivan is an ass. Forgive us fans Paul for having our opinions and thoughts on the game of baseball. What qualifies as being a writer? More of us do than he does anyway.

voodoochile
03-02-2005, 06:53 AM
Isn't that the cool thing about the Internet?

It brings people together and lets all of us connect? In ways it's the diary of the human species.

So sorry you're not thought of as a star anymore, Paul. Maybe if you were a better writer, it wouldn't bother you so much.

At least he and I have something in common. He doesn't read message boards and I don't read him.:cool:

samram
03-02-2005, 07:48 AM
Isn't that the cool thing about the Internet?

It brings people together and lets all of us connect? In ways it's the diary of the human species.

So sorry you're not thought of as a star anymore, Paul. Maybe if you were a better writer, it wouldn't bother you so much.

At least he and I have something in common. He doesn't read message boards and I don't read him.:cool:

Right on all counts, voodoo. There seems to be a lot of consternation among those working in the "traditional" media outlets about the potential of the internet. Furthermore, I believe that they really don't like the fact that the internet serves as a watchdog on the media, whether it's sports, politics, etc.

voodoochile
03-02-2005, 09:39 AM
Right on all counts, voodoo. There seems to be a lot of consternation among those working in the "traditional" media outlets about the potential of the internet. Furthermore, I believe that they really don't like the fact that the internet serves as a watchdog on the media, whether it's sports, politics, etc.

Sure and now anyone who watches a game can put together a recap. Read enough articles and you can start to paint a picture about players and expectations and write even more summary related articles.

Unless you have great connections in the sporting world, being a sports writer isn't all that special anymore. Guys like Rogers, Holtzman, Smith actually can add something to the diaglogue, but most of the rest of them aren't doing anything that a serious fan can't do and it ticks them off that they no longer are the be all and end all of public perception.