St. Louis Blues media - NHL softest?

[jbron]

Unfortunately most reports fall into two categories passive (afraid to
ask the tough questions) and aggressive (stretching what they heard
at a press conference to create a story).

Reporting is a tough business and there seems to be very little accountability or ethics with today's media regardless of subject.

Real good reporters are like gold. JR at least doesn't create.

 

[SteenMachine]

I think with JR he's got the kind of integrity where he wouldn't start a debate he couldn't finish. He's not going to ask questions he thinks he can't get answered, he's not going to insinuate anything to try and trap someone into admitting things. He knows who he's dealing with, he also has to get a lot of work done in a short amount of time, and things like investigative reporting stay pretty shallow for him.

I'm fine with having someone who appears complicit with the team if it means they can avoid wasting people's time with speculative crap. How may journalists out there do exactly what people want to see and end up getting dragged through the mud as BS artists and phonies?

 

[Sniper]

It's a delicate line that the St. Louis media has to walk. Being a small to mid market team, a lot of people get their Blues information from the media. If the media start asking "tougher" questions, it could give the impression to the casual fan that the media feels this team will fail. That impression could affect ticket sales on a team that is already fighting for profitability.

Toronto can afford a media that is more harsh because they know people will go to Leaf games no matter what. St. Louis doesn't have that luxury. This team depends on the "casual" fan. If that means over-selling a dumb trade by Armstrong or soft-balling questions to the Hitch after a loss, then that's just something we may have to accept based on the fragile financial nature of the Blues.

 

[SirPaste]

I don't think it's too much to ask to have JR simply ask Army why he changed his vision of what the team needed in a three week period

 

[InjuredChoker]

Maybe the small market teams but you go to Chicago, Detroit, NY, LA, Dallas..those people aren't trying to be best friends with the coach and players.

That's the big issue here. JR and Lou want to be buddies with these guys instead of asking questions and keeping them true.

red wings actually have very soft media. same complaints as here, never ask the hard questions, though it's not like they would be answered either. holland is master at speaking 20 minutes and saying nothing.. or even less. it's like red wings have media outlets in their total control. only players who've left or are leaving are criticized.

you should add philly to that list (and maybe remove LA). philly sports media is rough.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

I think Bernie M. is the hardest hitter in St. Louis sports journalism.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I don't think it's too much to ask to have JR simply ask Army why he changed his vision of what the team needed in a three week period

We need SPEED!!!...uh I actually meant size, we need more SIZE...actually, it's goaltending, that's what we need, so lets start with the same goaltending.

2016 summer press conference: Wait, so that didn't work?

 

[Vladys Gumption]

I think Bernie M. is the hardest hitter in St. Louis sports journalism.

I'd agree. Unfortunately he knows jack squat about hockey.

 

[2 Minute Minor]

I think Bernie M. is the hardest hitter in St. Louis sports journalism.

While this is true, he's also irritatingly ignorant of hockey. He's the main one that has mentioned a 'sense of entitlement' in the lockerroom. I really am not sure if this is based on ANYTHING, or if its just a meme he keeps pounding.

Perron gets traded, and now the story is that he was a locker room problem. Oshie gets traded and now I read about him as a "locker room cancer". But what is any of that based on? I'm skeptical.

Bernie posts just enough vague comments that no one can really call him to task, since he doesn't name names or give examples. Eh, I find it to be poor work.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

I mean his article on Oshie was nothing more than him just endlessly bashing the guy. You can say you think it was time to move on. You can argue that Brouwer is a better fit (although I'd disagree). Hell he could have simply said this is a shakeup. Instead he basically ripped Oshie a new one and threw a bunch of crap at the wall that nobody else can confirm. It's like Oshie kicked his puppy or something. That and his absolute, often incredible willingness to act like Armstrong can do no wrong.

 

[TheOrganist]

It's a delicate line that the St. Louis media has to walk. Being a small to mid market team, a lot of people get their Blues information from the media. If the media start asking "tougher" questions, it could give the impression to the casual fan that the media feels this team will fail. That impression could affect ticket sales on a team that is already fighting for profitability.

Toronto can afford a media that is more harsh because they know people will go to Leaf games no matter what. St. Louis doesn't have that luxury. This team depends on the "casual" fan. If that means over-selling a dumb trade by Armstrong or soft-balling questions to the Hitch after a loss, then that's just something we may have to accept based on the fragile financial nature of the Blues.

It doesn't really have much to do with this. As someone who has communications experience in sports, the main reason a reporter/journalist/broadcaster in a smaller market walks a delicate line is because the personal relationships with the subjects are much more intimate. JR is one of a handful of media members covering the Blues on a daily basis and electing to be confrontational with Hitch or Army doesn't really serve him or the readers much of a purpose. Access would be limited and information would be withheld. That doesn't mean hard questions aren't asked but the dynamic of reporting in Toronto and St. Louis aren't remotely comparable.

I also think, on average, reporters covering hockey in the States are relatively uneducated about the game, much less the nuances of the game and strategy. JR's knowledge about the team and league has grown tenfold since he first started covering the team but I still don't particularly respect his personal opinions about the Blues when he's speaking more freely (on his radio show, for example). I think this manifests in tough questions not being asked for the simple reason that reporters don't even know what to ask whereas knowledgeable fans would.

 

[Borderbluesfan]

I mean his article on Oshie was nothing more than him just endlessly bashing the guy. You can say you think it was time to move on. You can argue that Brouwer is a better fit (although I'd disagree). Hell he could have simply said this is a shakeup. Instead he basically ripped Oshie a new one and threw a bunch of crap at the wall that nobody else can confirm. It's like Oshie kicked his puppy or something. That and his absolute, often incredible willingness to act like Armstrong can do no wrong.

The question should be after all the years that Oshie played with little, to no success for the Blues in the playoffs, why wasn't St. Louis media asking him harder questions as one of the acknowledged fan favorites/team leaders????

 

[Vladys Gumption]

The question should be after all the years that Oshie played with little, to no success for the Blues in the playoffs, why wasn't St. Louis media asking him harder questions as one of the acknowledged fan favorites/team leaders????

Oshie has been unfairly scapegoated by some of the media and fans alike. Yes he deserves his fair share of blame, but it's pretty unfair to suggest he was the only one. He was far from the only problem in my mind. Any questions asked of him should have also been asked to Backes, Steen and Sastny among others.

 

[Jeffro]

I'm pretty sure that the two primary voices (and part of the problem is that there's only two) who cover the Blues are terrified of losing their access if they ask "inconvenient" questions. Take the postseason injuries, for example. Obviously, things happen that aren't reported. But rather than ask the question and report that the team refused comment, they don't even ask. Then they go to Twitter and say, "well, nobody says anything this time of year anyway."

That's **** reporting and irresponsible journalism. Of course they won't tell you. You ask so you can report that they're withholding. You don't shy away from asking so you can stay in the cool kids club.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

I'm not sure what incentive there is for the team to release that info even if the reporters do ask. That's his putting an extra target on an already injured player. I know people want information but you don't want to give another team an extra advantage of you don't have to.

Some injuries are so obvious that you don't need the reporters to tell you what is injured anyway. If the reporters already know the team is going to refuse to comment, is it really worth wasting the time to bother with it?

 

[Ranksu]

If the reporters already know the team is going to refuse to comment, is it really worth wasting the time to bother with it?

I have blame couple years injurlyslump destroying our changes in post-season. Now I'm quite sure there wasn't any specific injury (Lehterä was clear and noted) what I'm not aware of, but ignorance leaves that if aspect around and IMHO that is annoying when you adding reasons why team fail again.

I'm pretty sure that the two primary voices (and part of the problem is that there's only two) who cover the Blues are terrified of losing their access if they ask "inconvenient" questions.

I totally agree. You cannot say it better. My inner voice in english.

 

[SteenMachine]

What would even happen if they did ask "tough questions?" They're just some journalists who are doing their job... they can't re-shape the team in any way.

They can't start a petition to trade players.

They can try to influence the team's revenue stream but it doesn't take much before they get blacklisted as unprofessional and ignored by both the team and their audience.

They can't debate with a GM or coach and suddenly raise a player's stock to get him a better trade return or more ice time.

You act like Hitchcock and Armstrong don't hear these kinds of questions constantly and we're just not privy to their mundane and predictable answers as they're not the masters of their own destiny either. They work with what's given to them, they can probably utilize some of it 5-10% better but then we just bash them for the opportunity cost on focusing on that aspect of the organisation while another imperfection remains a blight on their career.

 

[Ranksu]

Sports columnist Bernie Miklasz is leaving the Post-Dispatch

Good or Bad?

 

[Vladys Gumption]

It doesn't bother me as far as hockey knowledge goes. Bernie doesn't know squat about this sport.

 

[2 Minute Minor]

Sports columnist Bernie Miklasz is leaving the Post-Dispatch

Good or Bad?

If they replace him with a sports journalist, probably good. He wasn't afraid to voice negative opinions, but he also tended to develop contrary opinions as a shtick rather than based on facts.

 

[jbron]

Bernie worked at the Post for over 25 years. It's not the easiest thing to do writing a sports column everyday. You can't always be right nor please every reader. He has a passion for football and baseball. In the last decade it seems that the majority of his work at the Post was geared more to selling papers, creating controversy columns.

It was time for Bernie to go and lets hope the Post hires a replacement with a greater love for hockey.

 

[DeuceNine]

Criticizing the team is not even remotely the same as reporting.
People need to learn the difference between the two.
Reporting is supposed to be unbiased and IMO JR does a fair job of that in his articles and interviews.


"Asking the tough questions" isn't reporting, it's directing opinion. That's the kind of garbage you get from "News" groups that push political agenda's(Fox, CNN, MSNBC, Huffington Post, etc). I don't want those types of "reports" in regards to the Blues. Report the actual facts and let people make up their own minds.

The "problem with the St Louis media" is that fans decide for themselves what is going on and then want the reporters to write something that supports their opinion to give them some kind of justification for their opinions. When they don't get the quotes they want or hear things that directly contradict their opinions, they blame the media for it instead of adjusting their opinion.

I would have no issue adding some opinion columnists to the media mix, but for actual reporting JR and Korac do a good enough job.

Whole post QFT.

Blues and hockey blog consumers all think themselves far more knowledgable about the sport (especially internal team affairs) than any of the actual reporters or guys that have legit contacts.

I think this all stems from the self-publishing era we live in: surely if I can kick out something on a site and it contradicts someone else, my version has equal or greater weight, right?

No.

 

[Ranksu]

When Blues (or global) media start to write about is Hitch + Army time to move on? When Stillman is going to pull the trigger, enough is enough. And I mean when that do we need to be under .5 club and clearly down by playoff spot until press/media start to question should Blues need a change GM + coaching staf.

 

[PeterAngelo]

When Blues (or global) media start to write about is Hitch + Army time to move on? When Stillman is going to pull the trigger, enough is enough. And I mean when that do we need to be under .5 club and clearly down by playoff spot until press/media start to question should Blues need a change GM + coaching staf.

As an outsider, I am curious about this as well. For those in St.Louis how are the media currently reacting, is there a harder edge to questioning? Or is the narrative still the same? It intrigues me this. In my home town if any of the footy teams are playing in a lacklustre manner the club cops harsh criticism from certain media personnel (even where unwarranted). From a gazillion miles away it seems like this is not how things play out in St.Louis. There never seems to be a "Brooksy" in the media scrum ballsy enough to have a crack.

 

[Captain Creampuff]

It's because majority of the people in St. Louis aren't really big fans of the sports teams here. Sure they Cardinals may look like a hot team with a ton of fans but it's all just band-wagoners. The whole city is filled with them so the sports journalism likes to cater to that large casual group of "fans" and spit out the mumbo jumbo you hear all the time while the real fans are bored to death and getting shafted from hearing some real answers.