Wednesday, May 07, 2008

Late-Night Final Scores No Excuse for Lame Stories Online

New York Times Content to Not Update Its Mets Game Article -- Whatever Happened To The Continuous Newsroom?

For those of us -- and I'm not among them -- who stayed up to watch the New York Mets engage in yet another game where futility reigned supreme, losing to the Los Angeles Dodgers, 5-4, you likely wouldn't have seen the game story in most editions of the morning papers.
That's understandable, given deadlines, especially for papers delivered in the 'burbs. But that's the beauty of the Internet, right? The story that's not in print is there for you to read online, where pages can be effortlessly updated, right? Not quite.
The New York Times whiffed with its game story by freelancer Billy Witz, which made it into the city final editions, but went untouched online. That meant no quotes, which could have been easily obtained after the story was filed.
The article was all right for what it was, but it's a no-brainer to update it on the web, so we could read manager Willie Randolph's latest mealy-mouthed assessments and a quote from the Goat of the Day, although there were a few candidates last night.
But no such story exists at However, the online versions from The Daily News, The New York Post and Newsday , not to mention The Journal-News, all have quotes.
Again, deadlines are irrelevant online. So, why not update the story? Just one of many questions the Times sports section comes up short answering, though its coverage of the Kentucky Derby and Eight Belles tragedy has been exemplary.
But Tom Jolly & Co. should no better. Baseball is king in these parts, not so much the Sport of Kings.

1 comment:

Tom Jolly said...

I agree. We goofed. But despite that lapse, I'll still argue that overall you're getting the best value for smart sports coverage with the Times.