There wouldn't be bloggers if the gatekeepers wouldn't be doing a horrible job of getting news out there.

As posted elsewhere, I'd like to ask ESPN why their "trained professional journalists" are meeting this new Reggie Bush book with a deafening silence that is frightening, but they don't seem to want to answer that question. So I have to address it myself. There is precedent. When Barry Bonds allegations were printed in a book, it was news for years. I think it's a good thing that we're out there.

"how many bloggers actually report news themselves?"

"Do they throw rumors at the cyberwall and hope one or two stick?"

"Do they simply repeat other people’s gossip?"

"Do they know how to conduct interviews?"

"where would they be without the mainstream journalists who do?"

Wait, I thought InsideTheHall was conducting the Q&A. I hate when people speak like that. Just say what you mean, Forde. Don't prance around the issue with silly rhetorical questions.

Pick him!!! He's Forde!!!! Has that joke been used yet? Yes? Damn.

does Pat realize that the only product of his anyone reads, the "Forde Yard Dash" (cute pun, Pat) is total rambling and doesn't "actually report news"? Where would his bit be without the "mainstream media that does all the heavy lifting"?

It seems like every week there is a new 'mainstream' guy, who always happens to work for espn, talking about 'real' journalism. ESPN is a self promoting PR machine, the vast majority of their "news" comes from local sources who do the "heavy lifting". They are there to make sure everyone continues to believe that the OSU-Michigan game is important, not report actual news.

I'm not as pissed off as I sound, and as a blogger I don't really give a shit about this stuff, but I just can't get over the irony of the whole thing.

Steven A is still my favorite espn jokster. Favorite in a bad way, of course.

and sports radio callers live in their mom's basement.

it gets old.

Very weak on Forde's part. Very weak.

Maybe he wasn't joking. It seems a little true to me.

Eh, screw him. I'm so fucking sick of the sanctimony spewed by most of these MSM schmucks. Methinks they doth protest too much.

You left off the first paragraph of his answer, which provides additional context (and balance):

"Blogs are definitely having an effect. I welcome all attempts to modernize our industry; the good innovations will stay and the bad ones will eventually disappear. Blogs are here to stay and definitely have some positive aspects, in terms of giving people more information, more points of view, and more access to topics of interest."

I have had first-hand experience at getting beat up by Forbes Magazine in their article "Attack of the Blogs" and you can read about it here.

Most bloggers, I think yourself included, say that you blog because you enjoy it. Which is fine but what is your long-term plan for the site? You have said before in “interviews” by other sites that you did not/do not have a goal for the site, I think not having goals is somewhat troubling and unproductive. Eventually you have to want something bigger (at least one would hope you would)?

He is right saying most of what bloggers post is coming from mainstream media outlets, there is no creatively in taking what someone else wrote/say and poking at it, re-writing it and or bashing it.

AA you are sometimes too critical of announcers and what they say…yes it’s funny sometimes and unbelievable, but will you ever tire of it and want to do something bigger or more productive.

Criticism of others is fine, but do you actually having anything significant/earth-shattering to give to the sports world?

i actually enjoy working in my boxers. beats wearing a suit.

blogs do the same thing bruce. forde is wrong, i love aa. but all blogs can talk shit about everyone else. where is all the morals blogs claim they have when deadshit fucked up the comments twice for bill simmons?

don't say bs deserved it, that gets old. but outrage over tbl.

all blogs turn to pussies when it comes to deadshit. look what he did to cstb, he gets wet if you mention them. they show that is a hypocrite.

I wish I could make millions writing a column wondering where Eric Bienemy (or whomever) is, and then have my readers do my work for me!

yes i am pissed deadshit won't give me an account

Hi Kyle,

Here's what blows my mind about people with your point of view. You find it completely unbelievable that someone could make a living doing this and that people are actually entertained by a site like this. Like I've said before, if I told you I did this full-time and made more than most of my friends in the "corporate world"....you wouldn't believe me anyway.

Also, what would be "contributing more" by your definition? Reporting the same news that everyone has already seen???

I think doing something different and creative speaks for itself.

Bloggers like football players like to slap each others asses after good post/play. Most of the time bloggers are writing for each other, a lot of people don’t even know you all are out here. I check out sites because a few of friends blog, just my opinion.

I, for one, stay away from most bloggers' asses.

thanks for the link, awful announcing people.

AA: There are times I read your posts and find them pee in my pants funny. Other times, I cringe, For example, you love to bash on Pam Ward, but have you ever met her or talked to her? Have you ever tried to do the job she does?

The big problem MSM has with bloggers is the anonymity some people live behind, and the lack of accountability that goes along with that. If people are not willing to put their names on the line and on their blogs, why should anybody take them seriously?

Of course, all it takes is one visit to sportsjournalists.com to see what a bunch of hypocrites the sports writers are when it comes to bashing bloggers.

The underwear joke has been around alot longer than two years.

Bruce is right -- if you guys are going to criticize Forde here (which is justified, IMO, and my site is the one that interviewed him), you'd do well to include his entire quote. Don't just tear a snippet off and fire away. Or at least convey the context of what he prefaced his criticism with.

I think he makes good points about a lot of things, and I don't think a "smug dick" would agree to do a friendly interview on a fan blog. Do I agree with his assessment? Not at all. Do I disagree with his characterizations? Yes. Do I think name-calling or overall dismissal is warranted anytime someone dares speak of ill of the blogosphere? No. We'd all do well to be more balanced and reasonable, building on the criticism and, yes, defying it, rather than just angrily firing back. That's called playing into stereotypes, and it ought to be beneath the intelligent ones among us.

Everyone should stop discussing and take a stand already -- Are blogs credible sources of news?

http://whereistand.com/Opinions/25684

Forde, Wilbon and frank Deford all say no.

I say yes. I'd imagine AA would say yes, too.

gethro - some are, some aren't. that site that blew up nifong and the duke rape case, abosolutely. mine? absolutely not. we're idiots.

@PostmanE: No that would be me, not Bruce...the layout of the comments is weird...and confusing.

In many cases, the people who write to blogs are often as qualified (and in some cases, more) than the people who report in the media. Anyone can be a journalist, degree or not. You don't go through certification or accreditation.

I see the purpose of blogs to be the "watchdogs of the watchdogs." The media needs to be called out when they are full of shit, or when synergy or audience considerations trump the public's "need to know." I think blogs do a great job of that.

@GethrO: There is no absolute yes or no on this question. It all depends on the content being published. If all a blog does is republish content with out any commentary or other added value, the answer is absolutely no. If the blog does original news content, it depends on who you ask.

I think the underlying issue with most in the MSM is content...Original content. Forde is right... Many (most? all? none?) bloggers simply produce zero original content. Where is the value? Stealing someone else's original thought and making a sarcastic comment? Gets old. Fast. Blogs like AA have original thought and content on occasion, and that brings value to the reader. Now, 'value' can be determined as one wishes, however, I believe those in the MSM (maybe I am one....???) are really criticizing the value of certain blogs. That’s all. I’m out…… Pam Ward rules! PEACE!

CB and Wrigleyville:

Then your stand would be 'yes'. There are those out there who unequivocally say that blogs are not and should not be considered credible...regardless if they're breaking news like ProFootballTalk and some of the other well-connected blogs.

Seriously, if you go to that link it shows Wilbon saying outright that blogs are unedited, unaccountable and too much rumor-oriented.

that's goofy. there are lawyers who blog on legal issues, history professors who blog on history, pitchers who blog on pitching (Schilling), owners who blog on owning (Cuban). I would venture to say all of these people know more about what they write on than, say, Pat Forde. journalism is one of the few professions where it requires absolutely no expertise in a given field to get the job - and to progress.

look at phil rogers. the man can put together a sentence well enough (though it is nothing special), but he is rarely insightful or informative. yet he has a perch at the trib and the worldwide leader.

and yes, a vast majority of blogs come from people staring at their hand and musing about life. but a vast majority of newspapers are like the kokomo tribune or beloit daily news - not the washington post, which of course had its own janet cooke scandal, with its multiple layers of editors. not to mention 5-12 corrections daily. not to mention the fact they can't get the newspaper from their printing press to my kitchen table without it getting very wet.

But are those lawyers blogging on legals issues, professors blogging on history issues, or MLB'ers blogging on baseball actually breaking news? When Schilling writes a 5,000 word reaction to the Mitchell Report, he's not offering any new facts. What he's offering is a new perspective on an old story.

I'd argue that they're providing analysis, but not breaking any stories. Is there a distinction? I think so. Associated Press rarely provides any kind of analysis on any issues, but its bread and butter is in news.

Hi AA,

Here’s what blows my mind about people like you. You find it completely satisfying to sit and blog almost 24-7. I suppose you can call it “making a living” but are you really living if you are tied to your computer and the television all the time. Yes, I agree your site is entertaining.

I just assumed that you do this site full-time because how could one adequately do another “corporate world” job.

Contributing more would be making the sports area more positive or contributing something more then just being cynical or negative.

You are doing something different, but I wouldn’t necessarily call it great or profound.

i would say that is the point i made on my site, though somewhat dismissively: Some blogs do do news. Some talk to sources, some convey new information.

By and large, they're not a "news" source, in the traditional sense.

But ...

If Schilling were to talk about Johnny Podres to a reporter, a reporter would report his comments as news. If Schilling instead blogs about his memories of Johnny Podres, as he did, is that any less news?

No sense in getting caught up definitionally in "news." They are two different animals, one growing, the other not.

kyle - as opposed to what pat forde does? he watches baskeball for a living and writes 40 sentences about it.

are you looking for a blog to cure cancer?

//not to mention the fact they can't get the newspaper from their printing press to my kitchen table without it getting very wet.//

This is very funny. Its funny because its true, like the comentary on most blogs.

PostmanE- I really didn't think the first part of the paragraph was important if he was just going to contradict his sentiment in the next. I also didn't add it in so people would go to the sites (namely yours) since I'm not trying to pass the "news off as my own."

You may not think he's a smug dick as I put it because he was gracious enough to do an interview with you, but I promise you there are many of his co-workers that feel the same way I do.

Everyone- I never claimed to being a breaking news site even though I've broken a ton of stories on the site. There are thousands of places for that. Tell me how many stories Pat Forde has broken in the past year and I'm sure I can come close to matching it. There are only a few places that people go for the good and the bad of the media....I'm happy to be one of them.

Kyle- You can stop reading and change the dial whenever you want, but I think you know the merits of the site or else you wouldn't be here.

this could turn into a shitstorm fast so i'm putting in my two bits and then getting out.

Any blog that has ever been read had value. Someone was looking for information, or entertainment, did a search and decided that particular blog most matched what the person was looking for. It doesn't have to have what MSM calls 'journalistic integrity' to have value. Blogs exist because the MSM has, for too long, done a very poor job of reporting the news. There are too few companies that own way too many newspapers and networks for there to be the vast number of sources from many point of views that a democracy requires.

Say a MSM source gets real information, does the 'heavy lifting' on their own (as Pat would say), but then reports it in a totally bias way. If a bloger simply quotes that story, but then also quotes from another story which speaks from a different POV, well that leading to the citizens being better informed, giving them raw information to form their own opinions, that is what 'journalistic integrity' is all about. No, the bloger didn't interview anyone close to the story or do blood tests to validate claims, but saying the aren't contributing is blind as fuck.

Now onto sports, sports is not news, sorry. I love sport, I have a sport blog, but sport in entertainment. Therefore, 'sports news' is really 'entertainment news' which isn't really news at all. So if a blog takes this 'news', given reactions, sarcastic comments or whatever else they do, they is adding entertainment TO entertainment…there is no separation as far as I'm concerned. To draw a line in the sand like Forde is doing is stupid, and his journalism degree doesn't help him better interpret the way games turn our or the value of our team's most recent trade.

What led to all of this is that the WWL decided they would no longer be objective. All of their biggest stars are opinion guys, not facts and figures guys. They blurred the line dramatically. It means, as far as I'm concerned, that because Steven A Smith or Pat Forde or whoever decides that their opinion is fact don't make them less of an idiot than me and my totally different opinion. Take your degree and wipe my ass with it if you are going to try and use it to declare your opinion more important than mine.

AA I totally agree with you and the fact that there are like 30 comments on the story speaks for itself about the 'value' of blogs.

I really didn't think the first part of the paragraph was important if he was just going to contradict his sentiment in the next. I also didn't add it in so people would go to the sites (namely yours) since I'm not trying to pass the "news off as my own."

AA, I love ya, but I really don't know what you mean by this. So long as the link is there, I'm not really sure how that passes the news off as your own. That just doesn't make any sense to me.

You may not think he's a smug dick as I put it because he was gracious enough to do an interview with you, but I promise you there are many of his co-workers that feel the same way I do.

Well, there are differing opinions, I'm sure. (Just like I'm sure there are former co-workers of mine that think I'm a smug dick, too.) That's what this whole landscape is all about; differences of opinion, alternative viewpoints. I just get a little testy when, because someone uses an (admittedly silly and easy) stereotype of bloggers, all of a sudden it's UNLEASH HELL without actually considering what that person said.

Everyone else: The anti-blog or anti-AA arguments here are inherently hypocritical; if you're at this site, then clearly, AA is providing something you're interested in. To then denounce it as "just a blog" -- well, if that's how you feel, spend your time in whatever other ways you can concoct for yourself. Just don't bite the hand that feeds you Pam Ward Youtubes.

i get all my news from erin andrews.

I never said that your blog was not entertaining, it is. But I agree with p-lives, its entertainment that you are giving people not news. I question how many stories you have really “broken.” Also have you really “broken” them or just found them somewhere else before they were on a bigger site? I’ll give you “is she wear panties or not” song girl story.

Another thing AA, I like your site, its fun and enjoyable to read, but please don’t tell me to “change the dial” if I happen to have a few ideas/opinions that you do not particularly like. I thought you were open to discussions.

Constructive criticism is always welcome from everyone. I wasn't telling you to leave the site Kyle, I was just making a point that people are here for a reason That reason is OBVIOUSLY not for breaking news.. There was no underlying tone towards you or anyone in that comment.

E- I was just trying to say that I didn't think the first part was relevant because he completely contradicted himself in the next two. The paragraphs I added were the ones I thought were his true feelings about blogs and the like.

Just as every post....it's just one man's take/opinion.

Kyle - I think AA is doing a great service. What's wrong with holding announcers accountable and asking them to make their broadcasts sharper and coherent? I think we would all benefit from that.

As far as the topic in general, I like Pat Forde. But if he isn't the aforementioned "smug dick", would he have written a long-winded diatribe about how, no matter what, Ohio State should not even sniff a national championship game next year??? That's about as smug as it gets. He's writing off a top 5 team before the season starts even if they were to somehow earn their way back.

I guess that this topic should remind us all not to take ourselves too seriously.

Just for the record, the Kyle above wasn't me. Perhaps I should find a less ambiguous username.

Anyway, I enjoy Forde's writing and this isn't going to make me stop reading him. However, I take umbrage with this stance. Just like there are bad reporters, there are bad blogs. Sadly, a lot of folks in the media seem to lump the blogosphere into one pot regardless of content.

A few blogs that I won't cite specifically have defamed athletes on occasion. Of course, working as a journalist Jason Blair plagiarized a story. Doesn't mean all, or even most, journalists do the same thing.

Ask Mortensen, Herbstreit et al.
ESPN doesn't report the news, they try to make the news.

Is Pat Forde's ass being tweaked in that picture?

I try to refrain from personally attacking most people, but Forde is about as smug as they come. He's really bad.

Look, blogs aren't necessarily even supposed to have "journalistic credibility." Who gives a shit about that? It's called entertainment. It's the voice of The Fans who care enough about a sport to sit down at a computer and write about it. That's what blogs are.

I'm sure Forde's comment is partly toeing the company line, but partly reflective of a concern among some in the media that blogging is going to somehow replace traditional news. The latter line of thinking is akin to the Red Hot Chilli Peppers trashing some cover band that plays small taverns because they somehow feel threatened.

Good Job! :)

First off I want to say that Im really upset that this blog was posted on my birthday and I didnt get to see it on my birthday! :)
I most definitely agree with a lot of people in here, throwing differnet views, different discussions. THIS IS WHAT I LIVE FOR!
:o)