Barstool sports (YouTube print outs) vs. Journalists (degrees)

[tacklingdummy]

Surprised that golfwrx was headlining that article. Not any breaking news. More along the lines of knitting club gossip at the senior center.

[RichieHunt]

I think both sides have their points. I do believe that if you're a member of the sports media, you need to check your fanboy ways at the door and show professionalism. I also do feel that too many sports reporters (announcers) make it about themselves, their 'brand' and their personality instead of making it about the athletes and the sport.

 

OTOH, I don't think the behavior of Barstool Sports was unprofessional or being fanboys to where it disrupts the event. At all. In any way, shape or form. If they want to write fanboy type things that should not exclude them from getting a media pass. If that's what their readers like, so be it. Where I would have a problem is what I see out of football reporters all of the time...letting their bias get in the way of factual reporting.

 

I think Harig is wrong here, but I can see in the future where this stuff could get out of hand.

 

 

 

RH

[tkwilliamson22]

This is the worst argument ever. Stop passing the blame to millennial for everything and remember that we are the ones adapting to the errors of the prior generations. The Barstool guys are on a wild ride and are enjoying every minute of it. Imagine being some of the vocal few about Tiger's return to winning form and now living out that dream and being able to actually interact with one of the greatest sportsman of all time. They are guys who figured out how to merge their passion with their work and have pissed off the old guard who think that they were just given their position in golf media when in reality they grind just like everyone else to be successful.

Get off your high horse and be a part of the solution to grow the game instead of the problem and why people think golf is an elitist sport.

[RichieHunt]

It really had to do more with the access that people had to journalism. Over time, more people had access to journalism and free journalism or cheaper priced journalism and thus the main outlet of journalism, the written word, fell.

 

My dad's best friend in high school was the son of the Editor-in-Chief of our local newspaper of a metropolitan population of roughly 40,000 people. But at that time he made a lot of money and wielded a lot of power and influence because of the lack of access to journalism that we have today. Back then, he was basically the man that controlled the information that came into town. Imagine if in your town if one or two companies had all of the control of information on your TV, newspaper and internet. They would be incredibly powerful.

 

But with more TV, more access to different television news (I can go on my SmartTV and get TV news from Seattle) along with 24-hour TV news networks and then the internet...journalism thru the written word becomes less important.

 

It also didn't help that newspaper and magazines handled the change about as bad as one could handle it. To top things off they lost their credibility which was the exact thing they couldn't afford to do. I would still be willing to pay for excellent and compelling journalism by talented and honest journalists. But come to find out that those are very few and far between. Most of them are lazy, not all that talented and have some sort of agenda.

 

At least with something like Barstool they have younger reporters that are excited about what they are covering and they can be humorous at times. It's not exactly 'quality' journalism, but it's better than a lot of stuff out there.

 

 

 

RH

[tkwilliamson22]

 

Seems like they fit the "media" definition to a tee

[bking556]

Barstool = Happy Gilmore

Old Media = Shooter McGavin

That said, Frankie "Butter knives" definitely does not want Ancer to literally quit golf. Nobody does. He is a young Mexican-American who is playing fantastic golf. He is someone who can only help grow the game, which will lead to more potential listeners for the podcast Frankie is featured on. I want to say Frankie should have used better judgement on his comments, however look at the attention and chaos it garnered.

[bscinstnct]

Is this journalism?

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/tiger-woods-is-totally-complet

 

Tiger Woods is totally, completely, unequivocally, and utterly done

By Shane Ryan

""Is Tiger Woods done?"

This is a question I have heard several thousand times over the past year and half, from well-meaning and tiresome people alike. Today I am pleased to report that I have a definitive answer:

Yes.

Tiger Woods is done. Tiger Woods is finished. The version of Tiger Woods that is a once-in-a-generation golf talent now belongs entirely to the realm of memory.

Tiger Woods as a mediocre-to-bad professional golfer is the reality of the present, and, most importantly, the future."

 

------------------------

"Lastly, if Tiger Woods or anyone else says something different on the topic of him being done, you should understand that they are lying or misinformed. Into perpetuity, forever and ever, Tiger Woods is done.

Tiger Woods.

Is Done.

Done."

 

[QuigleyDU]

I guess your right based on the book definition. No argument from me there.

[bladehunter]

i don’t disagree. It’s become a form of social media. But I still say wed be smarter if it wasn’t here. I’d miss several folks but it would be for the greater good.

[thechief16]

I think a lot of the antagonism here lies in the (improper IMHO) conflating of the terms "journalist" and "media". The Barstool guys are media, but not journalists. The journalists (Harig etc) seem to be unhappy that credentials are being extended to media outlets that aren't necessarily journalists. That's fine. Journalists see their role being diminished by media outlets like Barstool, NLU, The Ringer, etc that play by a different set of rules and don't endeavor to be journalists in the classic sense of the word. That's not wholly unexpected. Nobody likes competition, especially when the new competition plays by a different set of rules.

From the PGA's (or PGA Tour, or USGA, etc) perspective, their objective in this is to get attention/exposure to their events and their players. In an effort to do that, they recognize that there is a large segment of the population that doesn't follow golf via their local newspaper, Golf/GolfDigest or even ESPN/SI.com. They follow golf via podcasts like NLU, Foreplay, Fairway Rollin', etc. So its only logical the PGA would extend credentials to high profile media outlets, even of they aren't classic journalists.

[Vindog]

Oh yes.

 

Stuck firmly in the middle of “Okay Boomer” and “millennials ruin everything”

[bladehunter]

It’s a precarious place. Full of confusion and head scratching no matter which was we look. Lol.

[Mitchell]

Both groups diminish their credibility, in my opinion, by their childish, antagonistic reactions towards one another. The game has enough room for differing approaches and viewpoints if providing information in a way that doesn't diminish relevance and shows necessary respect of differing opinions.

[Vindog]

Don’t take his stuff personally. He’s an instigatroll most of the time.

[duffer987]

Yes.

An excellent example of hack journalism, from a complete hack of a writer. There may be good golf journalists currently working out there - IDK TBH as I'd rather read/listen to pieces on other subjects - but this guy is a perfect example of the toilet bowl side of journalism.

[olyo16]

I'm 32. I read/sub to Golf Digest and Golf.com. To me it's traditional sports/ informative writing with everything from drills, swing analysis, equipment reviews, to talking golf with golf professionals of all kinds and I love it all. But I also love listening to Fore Play podcast. Its locker room talk/comedy. Their interviews with the PGA Pros are awesome. They have made friends with guys like Kevin Kisner and you can tell during those interviews the players let down their guards down and just chat based on their relationship and comfort level with the Fore Play crew and those interviews are a great listen.

It comes down to what type of information/entertainment you are seeking like at time. They both can only grow interest. Some people are whiskey drinkers and some are beer drinkers, i like both.

Both sides are taking pot shots at each other and its childish, but it has us all talking and reading about it.

[bscinstnct]

 

 

Graduated from Duke!

 

 

 

 

 

 

[dubbelbogey]

Just another opinion, FWIW.

I have very little problem, in principle, with what NLU, Fore Play, et al are doing. It's another form of the entertainment side of the golf game. It's not "traditional sports news", and was never meant to be. Sure, some (many?) episodes are either borderline ridiculous or well-beyond borderline ridiculous. I think that is the whole point. But to be honest, a lot of it is just lazy and poorly done. Frankly, I think the quality of what they're doing is at about a 3 out of a 10 point scale. It could be light years better, and still retain the irreverent and entertainment focus. But, hey, they're relatively new. We'll see where it goes.

You know what I really can't stand? Those golf podcasts that attempt to be serious and professional, and fail miserably. In particular, I'm thinking about a couple of gear-oriented podcasts that are nearly impossible to listen to. Poor analytical thinking, poor interviewing skills, excessive focus on what the interviewer/host has done, and too little focus what the guest is actually thinking.

In contrast, for all of Club Pro Guy's schtick (which I also really enjoy), when you listen to his podcasts, he's actually quite good at interviewing his guests.

 

[Sean2]

I see the "old media" as giving its audience the facts of a story and allowing the reader to make his own conclusions. I see the "new media" as telling the reader what to think, all the while pushing a narrative. Facts are irrelevant.

[Krt22]

Both seem like perfectly valid points these days lol.

[duffer987]

What does that boilerplate reply even mean?

If you mean 'old' delivery channels vs 'new', everyone cross-platforms these days. Know your sources - regardless of when they were founded and by whom - and engage with the content accordingly. There's fantastic, relatively new (say last 15ys or less) sources out there doing good work and yes of course the exact opposite but hopefully not too many of my neighbours engage with them.

This barstool stuff isn't my cup of tea, but they are easily avoided (before this thread I never knew this current thing was a thing - a highly contrived thing for clicks obviously)

[Hawkeye77]

And wrote about Patrick Reed - some think he got that right, lol, when it helps an argument against Reed (that is not directed at you, just some irony). I give the guy no credibility on either.

[Sean2]

No, I don't mean delivery channels. And, I agree: "Know your sources - regardless of when they were founded and by whom - and engage with the content accordingly."

[pilot25]

Fascinating topic which would never have started if the "old" media didn't come after the Barstool guys. There is room for both media types but it appears the media who was there first feel threatened because their way of life is changing faster than they can accept it. I guess if I saw the future of my career coming to an end I'd be defensive too.

I love playing golf but its pretty freaking boring to watch. I'm a Gen-Xer, hate social media and all the destruction its done to society but love the ForePlay podcast. I used to watch and cheer for Tiger just as much as these guys do back when Tiger was killing it in 2000. The Barstools kids were in diapers and don't remember any of it but they are having a blast cheering for their hero and we get to follow along cheering too. What exactly is wrong with that? If the old school media wants to write their 9000th article on "How to not come over the top" then have at it. I'm sure there are consumers of that and there is no reason to attack the younger generation who are enjoying the sport too.

Someone stated above, "They can guarantee not one person turned to golf because of them." This is completely wrong and I'm an example of it. I completely quit watching golf for the better part of 10 years. Then I found Barstool and foreplay. These guys make watching and consuming golf fun and are turning heads because they look at the sport in team like manner. No different than cheering for your favorite football team or the like. So what they are media? Who says they have to be unbiased. The news media clearly is biased and people still tune into that. This is no different.

There is room at the table for everyone.

[J13]

I agree with the quality of reporting but keep in mind Bartstool guys do not claim to be journalists that want the scoop. They literally said that in the podcast discussing this incident. They want to provide a fresh take on the game as fans of the game not journalist. Some stuff they do I enjoy, other things not so much. Same goes for the old guard journalists. I'm just really shocked at the immature reaction by Huggand. To attack other media because they got a breaking story is both childish and petty. It's also not very smart to piss off of a group that has 100x's the followers you do.

 

So i agree with some of the comments above about there being space for both kind of reporting. I enjoy a few of the journalists covering golf but most I find insufferable. Same with Barstool, some stuff i like and some I can't listen to.

[pilot25]

Why did the "old" guy have to attack the Barstool boys? There is room in the space for both styles of reporting. I think big time jealousy is at play with the old guard. The younger guys are getting more attention in one podcast than the grumpies have gotten their entire career and they can't stand it. Sad way to live life.

I play a lot of golf but watching it is about as much fun as watching grass grow or soccer. I used to watch Tiger in his heyday but lost interest when he got hit with the 9 iron. The Barstool boys are such a refreshing take on golf I started following again. For the poster above to state, "I can personally guarantee not one person got turned on to golf because of them" is very wrong. I got back into the game because of the Stoolies and their love of Tiger Woods. Tiger is the game and everyone else are playing bit parts in his story. He is directly responsible for the growth of the game and its decline after his scandal. He's back in a big way and injected interested in the youth of today. Barstool has tapped into a different way of consuming golf and its great. I'm a GenX who hates social media and the way its destroyed society. However, this new way of watching and following golf has reintroduced me to the game and I know I'm not the only one. There have been decades of reporting on golf the exact same way and the game is losing the younger generation just like baseball is. I mean how many thousands of articles on "How to not come over the top" do we need? If you like golfweek, golf magazine, golfdigest. Good on you. We are all seeking enjoyment from a game. Let us do it in the manner we choose.

Either welcome the younger generation into the fold or get out of the way. Not all millennials are lazy slobs who were poorly raised by their parents. Just most of them. The Barstool boys are go-getters doing what they love and bringing enjoyment to, quite literally, millions of people who consume their content. God bless them for it. We should all be so lucky.

[Hawkeye77]

Didn't Huggan just take after the Barstool guy with the credential that was actively rooting for Tiger and for Ancer to quit golf? That's all I saw in the article.

I can't even think of a context that I know anything about him (I'm sure if I go look him up I will find out different), but I don't see anything wrong with him justifiably calling out a blowhard with a media pass trying to get some social media buzz going in that fashion. IMO, really inappropriate.

The wrx headline overhypes the story for the sake of attention, honestly to me no better or worse than the ESPN guys vs. Riggs - it's all for the views and the clicks.

 

 

[enfuego]

Like it or not the barstool audience and potential is bigger than the "old golf media" audience. They can both exist but in the end old golf media will continue with their declining audience of maybe a couple hundred thousand and barstool will grow and be in the millions. I don't like everything barstool does but you can't ignore them. It has happened in other sports and its happening in golf. They will continue to get more views, more ad money and more access.

[stingerfade]

Barstool - think yelling mashed potatoes is ok and cool

old media NO FING WAY

 

[Holy Moses]

This entire thing kerfuffle started when Barstool thought Bob Harig stole the statement that Reed's caddie gave and published it without giving proper credit. Barstool immediately Tweeted Karain's statement, but it took Bob Harig longer to actually write a story and I'm sure have the editors at ESPN look at it. A perfect example of old vs new media. Shipnuck’s recent column on Barstool/Foreplay (the article was far more focused on No Laying Up though) had the perfect line: “It’s not about what happened at the Presidents Cup, it’s about what happened to their personalities at the Presidents Cup.” Apart from their coverage being too focused on themselves instead of the event they are covering, I do believe Barstool has a place in golf media. They do need to be a little more impartial while covering events. High-fiving Tiger in the middle of an event crossed a line. I enjoy some of Foreplay’s podcasts (the caddie podcasts were neat), but their knowledge of how the Tour works, how golf rules work, and the intricacies of the game are lacking. But I guess that’s not their forte.