One of the weekend’s most important football stories was written not by a dedicated football journalist, but by a long-serving reporter and editor at online Fairfax website Brisbane Times.
Cameron Atfield is a veteran journalist and knowledgeable football fan, and his piece entitled “Match-fixing fears as Malaysian team joins Queensland football league” highlighted the potential for corruption when the Malaysian under-22 national team joins the new National Premier Leagues Queensland competition.
It was an important story, but one unlikely to have attracted the sort of attention it deserves.
Anyone who has spent time around Asian football knows full well the influence of Asian-based betting syndicates.
Over the years I’ve been asked by more than one outlet to use my extensive knowledge of Japanese football to write publicly-available match previews for the Asian betting market.
I’m far from the only journo to have been asked – even the great Jonathan Wilson writes regular blogs for betting agencies.
So why would a professionally trained journalist spend their time writing for betting agencies?
Because there is no longer enough paid work in print journalism to make a living.
It’s not the first time I’ve suggested as much, but I felt it timely to reiterate the point given the rumours that Mike Cockerill has reputedly left his position as Associate Editor of Football Federation Australia’s website.
Cockerill is, in my opinion, the best print football journalist in Australia.
He joined footballaustralia.com.au at a time when I was writing a freelance column for the site focused predominantly on Brisbane Roar, with the occasional foray into how Australia was faring in Asian football.
But when the website’s digital contract with Optus expired, myself and a few other contractors were told our services were no longer required.
There were no hard feelings from my end – columns come and columns go – but I raised an eyebrow at some of the names who replaced us.
The new columnists were, almost exclusively, former players.
That should come as no real surprise in a country where sports stars hold huge sway and a ‘jobs for the boys’ mentality has long reigned, but what does it say for the future of Australian journalists?
If they’re anything like me they’ve got a $40,000 HECS debt and a mortgage to pay, while plenty of ex-pros have no such journalism training but plenty of cash.
And the problem with relying on a network of ex-players to comment on the game is one of neutrality.
Indeed, when footballaustralia.com.au started running editorial content, critics complained that the game’s governing body couldn’t be trusted to run unbiased reports.
But how many of those critics were willing to put hands into their pockets and actually pay for quality journalism?
Everybody wants New York Times-quality investigative reports, but nobody is willing to pay for it.
In the past few years magazines like Australian Football Weekly, Soccer International and Football+ have all gone to the wall.
They’ve largely been replaced by online blogs and websites, many of which do an outstanding job of plugging the gaps left by the mainstream football media.
But how many of those who spend hours writing for these sites are actually getting paid?
Meanwhile, print media is in its death throes.
That’s probably why newspaper journalists, whose work is now read almost exclusively on the internet, spend much of their time pejoratively calling anyone writing online “new media” as some kind of attempted put-down.
The irony is that this humble little column on an independent website has now registered more than a million article reads.
Trying to transpose old-world, long-form journalism onto websites simply doesn’t work.
And where once we might have asked where the next Hall of Fame journalist like Cockerill would come from, now we might reasonably ponder whether any such journalist can exist at all.
You get the journalism you’re willing to pay for, and right now, no one is willing to pay.
J.T.Delacroix
Guest
Let's not forget that sports reporters (journalists if you like), are reporting on a form of entertainment first and foremost. To distinguish themselves from the pure analysts (preview & review with stats), we have a host of 'columnists' who add their personality and opinions to the mix. Entertainment adding to the entertainment I suppose. Nothing inherently wrong with that at all. It's often informative, even witty at times. Just so long as it at least, appears to be impartial.
Hamish Alcorn
Guest
Good discussion Mike. In particular, whether it is in journalism and coaching, 'jobs for the boys' *will* compromise quality. What do I want as a football media consumer? More like Football by Numbers or Pass and Move thanks. I knew when the latter site started that the amazing work the blogger was doing could not last. It's not just the money (none, no doubt for the blogger) but the interest was not even there for this sort of game analysis. I'm just making the point that if fans don't *want* high quality analysis, no business model will provide it, *not even an amateur one*. Good journalism is hard work.
Mike Tuckerman
Expert
"I highly doubt that a Puliter-prize winner would be making contributions to sites such as The Roar for any other reason than philanthropic." And yet readers like you persistently criticise the quality of writing freely available on The Roar. If you can't see why professionals not getting paid for their expertise is a problem, then there is simply no getting through to you.
Franko
Guest
With respect Mike, I think it could well be you that is not getting it. I highly doubt that a Puliter-prize winner would be making contributions to sites such as The Roar for any other reason than philanthropic. No doubt it they had won a Pulitzer, they could command larger sums for their work in more financially well off and more respected publications. You're sort of like the Blacksmith complaining that nobody is willing to pay for quality horseshoes anymore. Curiously, where would you like the money to come from? How can you expect the website to pay more than the writers contribution generates?
Mike Tuckerman
Expert
I would encourage anyone genuinely interested in where their news comes from to read this piece is in the Columbia Journalism Review about the current media landscape. http://www.cjr.org/feature/womans_work.php?page=all
Ian
Guest
Lockyer is decent at commentating, still a big fan of his, i agree with his gravel voice wasn't suitable but he had an operation to fix it. at least though he has the brains and guts to say he's not going into high level coaching. just because he was one of the best ever doesn't make you a good coach either (as well as not being a good commentator).
Franko
Guest
Seems like you want online contributors to be paid more than they actually generate. Strange indeed.
Fussball ist unser leben
Roar Guru
"why hasn’t Farina bypassed legacy media and used the plethora of channels available to him on social media to articulate his coaching strategy?" He does. He has his own blog where he speaks openly: http://www.frankfarina.net/ But, the question should be: why didn't the mainstream journalists interview Frank Farina, ask relevant questions & publish Farina's responses? Instead, every week (sometimes every day) we got the same rubbish, where journalists simply published their own version of what they thought was happening. That's not professional journalism. That's just being too lazy to pick up the phone, or arrange an interview & and an article that has the same importance as a fan blogging his football opinions from his bedroom. When I read the news, I want to be informed about what happened. I certainly do not want to read someone's opinion about what they think has happened, or might happen, or should happen.
Mike Tuckerman
Expert
I've written more than 300,000 words for The Roar alone. I'd venture to say I've written plenty of ACL previews during that time. Not my problem if you weren't paying attention.
Redb
Roar Guru
A massive reduction in barriers to entry via the internet has meant there is a vast source of information available which is mostly free to access. Many sites dont even payt for content but compete against those that do. Very few sites can actually pay their contributors anything meangingful.
JonJax
Guest
"why couldn’t we have had a 1-on-1 interview with Farina to extract information about his coaching strategies?" I'm not buying -the flip side is why hasn't Farina bypassed legacy media and used the plethora of channels available to him on social media to articulate his coaching strategy? IMO coaches in our fledgling A-League have also to be evangelists and communicate their coaching philosophies to the clubs followers , i.e. Señor Gombau. seems to be achieving this. All good leaders communicate the journey, unfortunately by not engaging the base, Farina comes across as being disdainful of the clubs followers..
nordster
Guest
Its a good article but will only ever be a small percentage of the coverage. Based on demand as much as anything i agree with Mike. Even in more sophisticated football countries, coverage will always get caught up in the veneer issues. I doubt Franky has the patience to do all that many 1 on 1s...but it would be great to see more of them. Assuming they can speak freely in depth without worry about breaching any clauses in his groupthink agreement ;) ...especially when straying a little from tactical graphs and such!
Fussball ist unser leben
Roar Guru
I agree the lengthy articles on tactical analysis of a game would lack broader interest in mainstream media. But, the Farina story has been a hot topic all season. Instead of mind-numbing weekly articles that rehash the same stuff about Farina - without any writer ever speaking to the man - why couldn't we have had a 1-on-1 interview with Farina to extract information about his coaching strategies? Surely one of the Sydney-based FFA-accredited football journalists, who works for the mainstream media (Hassett, Gatt, Smithies, etc.), could have had a sit down with Farina? Farina actually made direct reference to the fact people in the media were criticising various aspects of his coaching, but no had bothered to ask him any questions directly.
Mike Tuckerman
Expert
The fact that kind of article is not commissioned by mainstream media is more reflective of a lack of broader public interest in those kinds of articles. For every one reader eager to understand the minutiae of A-League affairs, there are dozens more who are far more likely to read much more general overviews. That's a commercial reality. That said, I believe Kate Cohen is now writing some tactical analyses for The Guardian, so perhaps the interest in such in-depth reporting is slowly increasing - particularly because it's possible to write lengthier pieces online than in print.
Fussball ist unser leben
Roar Guru
Ok, for me, this article is football journalism at its best. "Inside the mind of a coach: Frank Farina" by Kate Cohen http://leopoldmethod.com.au/frank-farina/ Why? 1. The journalist has gone to the primary source to get information. She's not assuming, or presuming. 2. The journalist has asked insightful questions. She's obviously done sound preparation, has an intimate knowledge of the subject matter & knows exactly the areas she wants to lead the interview 3. The journalist has reported what the primary source said. Finally (and very important, since the message is in written form) 4. The journalist has presented the information in a thoroughly enjoyable & easy-to-read style. As a result, I've finished reading that article & I am so much better informed than I was before reading. I don't know if Kate Cohen has any formal journalism qualifications, but she's done a fantastic job to extract & present all the information that I wanted to hear. To me, that's the skill of journalism. The fact that such an article was NOT commissioned by mainstream media, reflects how poorly mainstream media understand & covers issues that have real meaning.
nordster
Guest
Never :) People are so quick to assume others can never think differently to how they do. Wait till u have a large shift in your own views one day, then u will learn....people can watch Fox and News corp outlets and not have two heads lol....Fox news does empower its viewers in comparison to other US mainstream media...
nordster
Guest
But Franko online ad revenues are still playing catch up with the old print revenues. You're misunderstanding how the ad pie breaks down. The classies are gone and the online ads now are the equivalent of display ads in print. Which were only ever a segment of old print revenues. Mike's point is valid as the shift from print to online has lead to a big gap ...editorial budgets are down and the existence of new outlets is not enough to make up the difference. The pie is smaller overall..
Franko
Guest
"So your statement about journalists being “paid accordingly” couldn’t be more wrong" With respect Mike, I differ with you here. The website will pay the journalist the % they believe they are worth. If advertising money is low, that % may well be low. Paid accordingly may not be enough to live off, but it may be all the website generates. Perhaps your gripe is with the sales department?
Norfolk
Roar Rookie
FoxSports is incredibly bias to Sydney/WSW and so are SBS. The Guardian's Joe Gorman is the best football reporter in the countryIMHO, and Mike your point that good journalism needs to be paid for... it is. Sounds like a hissy fit at missing out on a job, but your work isn't that great anyway. It does neither provide further insight in to the game or is funny. However you bang on about being worldly, Russian History, German and Japanese football. Want to write a preview of the ACL games so we can have better look at your speciality?
Midfielder
Guest
onside Same observations ... even facebook is becoming dated for the under 20