Sportsfrog.com

First, my apologies for this post not being a timely rebuttal to the post concerning the other side of this issue. I digress…

Sportsfrog.com used to have the tagline, “dissecting sports and media while battling a dirty gambling habit.” Trust me, I have the t-shirt. I guess it is now my turn to jump into the media dissection pool.

Not only has TMZ not made inroads into “sports coverage,” they are not “covering sports” at all. They are taking the elements of what makes gossip appealing to their audience and widening the net of people who fall into that arena.

The two stories Brontoburglar cited that TMZ reported ahead of the mainstream media were the death of Angels’ pitcher Nick Adenhart and the Tiger Woods car accident. However, both stories involve the “sin” aspects that make news or gossip, respectively. In Adenhart’s case, it is his death, as evidenced particularly well by the newsroom cliché “if it bleeds, it leads,” and in Woods’ case, sex (just like how Alex Rodriguez previously made gossip sheets for being spotted with a woman who was not his wife). If Woods had been in the exact same car accident without the prior reports of his infidelity, would TMZ have been beating down doors to get information? I think not.

Saying TMZ is showing “legitimate newsgathering chops” loses all credibility when, in the next paragraph, it is cited that TMZ pays for scoops. People who know they will not be named as sources have no reason to be honest. Think about this for a second. If some gossip outlet came to you, asked if you had any information about a person you did not actually know (or maybe even knew, but did not like) and offered a substantial amount of money for that information plus a guarantee of anonymity, what reason would you have to not make something up? Before you say, “well, I wouldn’t do that, I have no reason to lie,” you should probably consider if that is true when there is a check made out to you valued at $10,000 ready to be put in your hand. How about $25,000? $50,000? Really? No one knows you’re the person making these statements. You have nothing to lose and a lot to gain. Think about the current state of the human race for a little while if you still think honesty matters in the face of money.

I also have a different answer to this question and answer posed in the other post:

“Was the reluctance to use TMZ information in newspaper stories more related to fears that it wasn’t factually correct, or the fact that it came from TMZ? I lean strongly towards the latter.”

Reluctance to use TMZ information in a newspaper story is due to fears that it is factually incorrect because it came from TMZ. TMZ is a source for gossip, not news. A newspaper that reports false information risks losing the trust of its readership, not to mention the threat of lawsuit. The reporting of “facts” without confirmation is a huge sin in the world of news reporting. It is called independent confirmation.

I doubt readers care about how the information is gathered or who reports it as long as the outlet reporting the news is trustworthy. Then again, looking at the political climate in our country, maybe this is not the case.

The Tiger Woods Thing marks the second time that TMZ has absolutely destroyed mainstream media outlets when it comes to a major off the field incident (car crash) with an athlete.

Think that the MSM is happy about that?

While TMZ isn’t infallible, they’ve got a pretty impressive string of exclusives before other gossip magazines/sites/mainstream outlets have gotten them, (Rihanna immediately comes to mind) and has definitely become more influential than Deadspin when it comes to actual news that includes athletes off of the field.

While Deadspin specializes in who’s doing and drinking with whom, something that TMZ is very good at as well when it comes to the Hollywood set, TMZ has shown legitimate newsgathering chops when it comes to both Nick Adenhart and Tiger Woods. (Was the reluctance to use TMZ information in newspaper stories more related to fears that it wasn’t factually correct, or the fact that it came from TMZ? I lean strongly towards the latter)

Of course, that has everything to do with how TMZ gets its information. It’s a well known secret that TMZ pays for scoops, and that’s a definite no-no in the mainstream media world. The money puts TMZ at an obvious advantage, because why tell your information for free when you can tell your information for pay?

And do readers actually care about how their news outlets receive their information, as long as the information is getting out as soon as possible, and to a lesser extent, factually correct?

I’m not suggesting that mainstream media outlets need to start paying sources for information, because I think that opens a giant can of worms, and at the very least, would decrease the number of free information sources available to the general public. However, given the way that TMZ has beaten down the MSM with their scoops in regards to these two stories, the celebrity gossip site has definitely asserted itself as a force to be reckoned with when athletes make news off of the playing field.

Is TMZ really changing sports coverage? Let us know in the Swamp.

(This post assumes that TMZ’s coverage of the Tiger Woods situation has been accurate. If it isn’t, I reserve every right to retract my post.)