US Open - Coverage in media

[Hankshank]

I remember the Masters home page back 2000-2005. Very primitive compared to the web sites of today. Ugly, most millenilals would probably say confronted with it. But I liked it. The front page had only one big banner "Masters Today", where a reporter might go through the play the day before, but just as much focus on the condition of the course, the weather, experiences from patrons and generally the atmosphere around the tournament. 

Generally, the focus was on the tournament. Not any longer so. The focus is on the celeb players.

 

This has been kind of a gradual move, together with web desingers adhering to the possibility to proudce fancy blobs of info instead of the menu system that was the name of the game those days. And the general media strategy of producing a "flow" rather than a prioritized old time newspaper ordering of info.

I read the usopen.com page and, after the undeniably interesting fact that Henley leads, what is supposed to be interesting is amateur players experiences and quirky rounds by celebs. No way I would click that. What I am interested in is stuff like, obviously experiences from the top of the leaderboard players regarding their rounds thursday but even more, how did the course hold up, patrons, how was that handled covid wise, maybe comments from the officials running the tournament, Probability of fog, will the greens be concrete hard during the weekend...

 

I like golf even more than I like separate golf players. I don't turn on the TV to see Rory, Bryson och Brooks.
 

How do you feel about it? Do you find the info you want on some good places?

 

 

Edited June 18, 2021 by Hankshank

[MattyO1984]

Difficult one - websites are useful and it is of course expected that you have one but it doesn’t seem that they are places that people spend too much time on anymore. Attention spans are seemingly so short now that editors would likely think that my response is verging into being too long. With that being the case, the information is kept relatively sparse and what is there is so bland so as not offend anyone. 

[Ferguson]

There are incentives out there for social effectiveness. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 18, 2021 by Ferguson

[JohnnyCashForever]

2 hours ago, MattyO1984 said:

Difficult one - websites are useful and it is of course expected that you have one but it doesn’t seem that they are places that people spend too much time on anymore. Attention spans are seemingly so short now that editors would likely think that my response is verging into being too long. With that being the case, the information is kept relatively sparse and what is there is so bland so as not offend anyone. 

Thank goodness that'll never happen at WRX forums! <ahem>

[MattyO1984]

1 minute ago, JohnnyCashForever said:

Thank goodness that'll never happen at WRX forums! <ahem>

 

If you use one word instead of ten, you are just not trying hard enough 😂

[Hankshank]

Right now, for example. 2005, info on if there is fog or not would be readily available and commented by on-site reporters.

[jonsnow]

I think news in general is presented differently today than as recently as 10-15 years ago. Little long form writing, more video clips with a couple of paragraphs. That seems to be what the consumer wants. I'm old fashioned in that I like the written word; I like to dig into a story I find interesting. I've still got the SI from 1999 with the long profile of David Duval by Gary Smith (my favorite golfer & one of my favorite writers) & read it many, many times in the years since it came out. 
 

[L29]

Flash over substance.  What’s crazy to us old get off our lawn types is that so many people seem to be ok with that now.

[Frankensteins Monster]

2 hours ago, Hankshank said:

Right now, for example. 2005, info on if there is fog or not would be readily available and commented by on-site reporters.

2005 isn't the stone age. Of course conditions would be readily available. There were blogs everywhere. The first iPhone came out in 2007. 2005 was already well deep in the information age.

[smashdn]

9 hours ago, Hankshank said:

I remember the Masters home page back 2000-2005. Very primitive compared to the web sites of today. Ugly, most millenilals would probably say confronted with it. But I liked it. The front page had only one big banner "Masters Today", where a reporter might go through the play the day before, but just as much focus on the condition of the course, the weather, experiences from patrons and generally the atmosphere around the tournament. 

Generally, the focus was on the tournament. Not any longer so. The focus is on the celeb players.

 

This has been kind of a gradual move, together with web desingers adhering to the possibility to proudce fancy blobs of info instead of the menu system that was the name of the game those days. And the general media strategy of producing a "flow" rather than a prioritized old time newspaper ordering of info.

I read the usopen.com page and, after the undeniably interesting fact that Henley leads, what is supposed to be interesting is amateur players experiences and quirky rounds by celebs. No way I would click that. What I am interested in is stuff like, obviously experiences from the top of the leaderboard players regarding their rounds thursday but even more, how did the course hold up, patrons, how was that handled covid wise, maybe comments from the officials running the tournament, Probability of fog, will the greens be concrete hard during the weekend...

 

I like golf even more than I like separate golf players. I don't turn on the TV to see Rory, Bryson och Brooks.
 

How do you feel about it? Do you find the info you want on some good places?

 

 

 

Clicks man.  They want you to flounder around looking for the info you desire.  You stay on the website longer and are exposed to more ads along the way.

 

It is not profitable to make it efficient.

[golfortennis]

8 hours ago, MattyO1984 said:

Difficult one - websites are useful and it is of course expected that you have one but it doesn’t seem that they are places that people spend too much time on anymore. Attention spans are seemingly so short now that editors would likely think that my response is verging into being too long. With that being the case, the information is kept relatively sparse and what is there is so bland so as not offend anyone. 

tl;dr.

[smashdn]

26 minutes ago, Frankensteins Monster said:

2005 isn't the stone age. Of course conditions would be readily available. There were blogs everywhere. The first iPhone came out in 2007. 2005 was already well deep in the information age.

 

That's nto what he is saying.

 

He is saying why in 2021 can I not find information about the course and conditions easily as I could in 2005. 

 

Why do I need to weed through stories about Phil playing golf with Tom Brady a few years ago when it is not really germane to the US Open?  A reporter had to stretch to link those two things together.  I read that story this am.  Basically, blah blah blah, I learned about lifting weights from time and mindset and then the reporter/writer says and Phil is now in the US Open, the end.

 

I think they are trying to inject NBA-esque reporting into golf.  The NBA has transformed into a league where players are followed and not teams more often than not.  MLB is becoming that somewhat as well as NFL for the biggest stars.  Golf is one of the most natural sports to make that way because there aren't teams to begin with.

 

If you are a "golf fan" you might get left out in the cold for want of a good golf article.  If you want a BDC or Brooks article I bet they are easy to find.

[Frankensteins Monster]

12 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

That's nto what he is saying.

 

He is saying why in 2021 can I not find information about the course and conditions easily as I could in 2005. 

 

Why do I need to weed through stories about Phil playing golf with Tom Brady a few years ago when it is not really germane to the US Open?  A reporter had to stretch to link those two things together.  I read that story this am.  Basically, blah blah blah, I learned about lifting weights from time and mindset and then the reporter/writer says and Phil is now in the US Open, the end.

 

I think they are trying to inject NBA-esque reporting into golf.  The NBA has transformed into a league where players are followed and not teams more often than not.  MLB is becoming that somewhat as well as NFL for the biggest stars.  Golf is one of the most natural sports to make that way because there aren't teams to begin with.

 

If you are a "golf fan" you might get left out in the cold for want of a good golf article.  If you want a BDC or Brooks article I bet they are easy to find.

 

Front page of PGATour.com 🤷‍♂️

 

[NoodleSalad]

The Masters has set the gold standard for major presentation, right down to giving you every shot from every player. The other majors hate you. That's all you need to know.