Cuban v Trolling

Mark Cuban started a small uproar amongst media-types with his post on the role of media for sports teams.

I’m going to make this short and sweet. In the year 2011, I’m not sure I have a need for beat writers from ESPN.com, Yahoo,  or any website for that matter to ever be in our locker room before or after a game.  I think we have finally reached a point where not only can we communicate any and all factual information from our players and team directly to our fans and customers as effectively as any big sports website, but I think we have also reached a point where our interests are no longer aligned. I think those websites have become the equivalent of paparazzi rather than reporters.

There is the crux of his argument. He goes on to weigh the relative (to his business success) importance of each medium of information. His points about TV and physical newspapers remind me of the David Norris’ (Matt Damon) speech about the right amount of scuffing on the politician’s shoe. You don’t want to alienate the working man but you also need the big wig dollar. So it is with print vs online. Balance, baby.

The most controversial point -- in that it is the one being discussed most -- is the one about internet reporters.

Here is the meat of the argument:

If you can back up what you say with well thought out and in depth analysis, you know the things that some people used to call journalism, you are welcome in the locker room.

The internet reporters who get paid , IMHO , are to the Mavs and any sports team, the least valuable of all media . I’m a firm believer that their interests are not only not aligned with sports teams like the Mavs, but in fact are diametrically opposed.  They tend to look at the number of page views they get for any article as ‘their ratings”. More is better. Which in turn leads them to gear their work towards generating more pageviews.

I totally agree with the guy. Totes. Cuban has guys trolling for divisive quotes in is locker room that eff up his business.* Is it really so hard to understand why he is questioning why he enables this?

What about the public’s right to know? That is the tricky part. How much does the public have a right to? Locker room conversations? Private lives of players? Sexual liaisons?

Part of being a fan is wanting to know more. There is a near-insatiable desire for more information about these sports and games and teams and players. Witness the growth of ESPN and the non-stop stream of stuff from insiders that when looked at is really just stuff and nothing of any real usefulness.

You hear reports of the practice statistics at workouts. “QB hit only 3 out of 11 slants today in the 7-on-7.” We read it because we want it and pretend we know what to do with it.** They report it because we want it and pretend we know what to do with it. It is part of the fantasy of being a fan. Unfortunately there is no safe word and we are still trying to find out if we are all cool with what is going on. It is tough in the age of The Internet Never Forgets and Everyone Can Tweet A Pic of Your Anus.

We’ve explored the depths of the internet’s ability to investigate (all the way to nekkid dong pics) and now it’s time to decide if we want to see that (not me).

I commend those who fight for freedom of information and the retention of these new investigative powers. This is not the frontline of that battle, however. Asking “How much does this loss hurt?” and “Do you want to play in New York?” isn’t asking the tough question anymore when you ask it the millionth time in the case of the former and thousandth time in the case of the latter.

This isn’t Lybia, nor Afghanistan, where in-depth reporting brings vital information that could potentially save some lives. It’s a fuggin game, yo.*** And asking those types of questions is akin to asking rebels, “So how did you fell about that last bombing?”

It is a good moment to question if what we are doing here is good and if everyone is cool with it. Cuban is doing just that. It is smart. It’d be smart of the rest of the internetters to take stock of themselves and do a little philosophic self-examination. Short-form filler and puff pieces? Totally the realm of the internet, now and increasingly the realm of the Organization. “Teams don’t need a third party to tell the good anymore.” Aptly put by internet-friend Brian.

Long-form stuff is still up-for-grabs. Although Kindle and the iPad are trying to muscle in, there are still strong arguments for long-form stuff remaining primarily physical in nature. It would be wise for those with access to make good use of it and not fugg it up for everyone.

Another cool thing about Cuban talking about this: that we, the Internet, can make use of it. I’m totally on board with people directly communicating concerns instead of taking action. Makes me respect the dude more (begrudgingly).

Go Spurs.

*This is another branching off point for another set of criticisms of the Maverick mental toughness. These have some weight but not employing mental midgets is but one way to alleviate the problem. Removing instigators is another.

**There are probably ancillary benefits to a greater knowledge of the game. I read somewhere that incoming college frosh are more mentally ready for the strategy part of football largely because of being exposed to it via Madden and its obsessive attention-to-detail.

***I know that line is tired and cliche as the questions I just called tired and cliche. It is no less true.