Thrashers

By Jamie Fehr

January 24, 2007 04:22 PM | Link to this

umm. no

By Nicholas Irwin

January 24, 2007 04:37 PM | Link to this

I don’t see why not. I mean, there are obviously varying levels here. If somebody’s blog consists entirely of posts about wanting to father Ilya Kovalchuk’s children, I’m thinking probably not. However, if it’s a serious blog that seeks to provide serious news and insights about the Thrashers or the NHL in general, I think it would benefit the Thrashers and the NHL to let them in.

By AtlantaGatorLee

January 24, 2007 04:40 PM | Link to this

I think blogers should be able to apply for access and let the NHL decide on a case by case basis. Hockeybuzz seem legit. You don’t want every moron with a weak site getting in.

By Dave

January 24, 2007 04:46 PM | Link to this

Here’s another loud NO.

By Hip Czech

January 24, 2007 04:59 PM | Link to this

Up until now that is the only way we get Thrashers or hockey news. Craig seems to be a real beat writer, but before this it stunk.

In a real hockey town, there would be no need for bloggers. Hopefully we get to the point where we actually get some real media coverage here.

Nice article on Nathan Oystrick

The article mentions all the firepower in Chicago, when are we going to start seeing some of it?

By Craig Custance

January 24, 2007 05:11 PM | Link to this

Nicholas: I tend to agree with your opinion, however, determining which blogs are real and which aren’t can be pretty subjective. They talked about limiting access to blogs based on a minimum amount of page views, but we all know there are certain ways to drive page views that may not lend itself to legitimate hockey coverage. Some bloggers are strictly fan sites, so they might not even want access. Other bloggers are anonymous, so they can rip the team, or spread false rumors, and show up in the lockerroom and the players/coaches have no idea who to confront. I guess you come up with a set of guidelines, but I’m not sure what those guidelines would be.

By Michael

January 24, 2007 05:28 PM | Link to this

Eklunds hockey buzz is filled with false rumors. He is just trying to make money. Press only!

By Fred B.

January 24, 2007 05:50 PM | Link to this

Good point Hip Czech-unfortunately we don’t live in a hockey dominated city so we as Thrashers followers tend to get information about our team any way we can given the well documented complaints regarding the lack of hockey coverage by the ajc. I’m not so sure though that giving media credentials to non-media affiliations is the way to go.

By David

January 24, 2007 06:17 PM | Link to this

No.

By Brendan

January 24, 2007 06:32 PM | Link to this

My feeling is that bloggers should not be given “NHL credentials.” Who really knows who they are, anyway? Who checks them out? At least a radio station, TV station or newspaper can be held accountable for what their employees do and how they conduct themselves. I kinda feel it’s a slap in the face to a “real” sports journalist, who has legitimately earned his/her way into that lockerroom. What does it take to be a blogger? A computer? Maybe a credit card?

Now, to be sure, “real” sports journalists misbehave and ask inappropriate questions at press conferences, too. It’s not as if they don’t slant sports news or have an agenda to foster. People accuse Jeff Schultz and Terrence Moore of these very things, all the time!

I think Blogs are great. And if the blog is run by an infatuated teenaged girl, who hopes to marry Sidney Crosby one day and breed with him, that’s her business. If she got in there with her “media credentials” and asked him what his favorite color was, or who he thinks is cute. Well, it’d probably be a little embarrassing. But it couldn’t be any stupider than the media boozehound who asked one of the coaches, before a BOWL GAME, if he thought his team would need to outscore their opponent to win the game. I kid you not.

By Mike Chen

January 24, 2007 06:57 PM | Link to this

I think Blogs are great. And if the blog is run by an infatuated teenaged girl, who hopes to marry Sidney Crosby one day and breed with him, that’s her business.

That’s a very narrow view of bloggers. A number of bloggers have been picked up by mainstream media sources. Paul Kukla of the excellent Kukla’s Korner now writes for NHL.com. Eric from OffWing Opinion now writes for NBCSports.com and has been allowed into the Caps’ press room before. Myself and a few other bloggers now contribute to FoxSports.com’s hockey section.

Blogs aren’t just about gushing fandom or false rumors. Like any other topic, you will always your range of quality. Most of us hockey bloggers have found that if you 1) write well 2) offer consistent updates and 3) have something interesting to say, whether it’s analysis or team-based or humorous rants, it will find an audience.

I fully believe that there should be guidelines in getting bloggers credentials — traffic, quality, etc. But there has to be a way to recognize their overall contribution to the mainstream media without diluting the overall quality of what’s being presented or written.

By TheHockeyChick

January 24, 2007 07:16 PM | Link to this

I agree with AtlantaGatorLee and the submitting a request and letting the NHL decide on a case by case basis idea. I’m a serious hockey blogger who has a journalism degree and worked with a professional team. So I’m not going to try and get a press pass to get autographs from the players. But the experience of actually being at a game in a press box is certainly going to make my entries much more interesting.

By E

January 24, 2007 07:31 PM | Link to this

it depends what the nhl wants. limiting the much-coveted ‘access’ (well, maybe not in atlanta) to ‘real’ journalists can be quite restricting- sports journalists often ask the same questions and write the same sort of stories year in and year out, which is part of what drives many people to blogging in the first place. i can think of a lot of bloggers who might to more exciting things with a press pass (and the privilages it grants) than your average reporter, and the nhl could use all the creative publicity it can get. it’s interesting that the argument i don’t see being made here is that the MSM journalist’s training or qualifications are necessary to the ability to cover sports well, which is really the only reason for giving them access over those of us in less conventional media.

that said, of course this should always be judged on a case-by-case basis. one of the upsides and downsides of bloggers is that there’s a huge range out there- from the incredibly insightful to the incredibly insipid. giving access to some doesn’t mean opening the doors to all.

By Tom

January 24, 2007 08:33 PM | Link to this

Craig

As a blogger, I know that the political parties have granted access to bloggers at their conventions. Tech companies regularly give press passes to bloggers.

It really depends on how fearful the present media is to having a new source of information and competition to their near monopoly on access.

I think it would be a great thing if the Thrashers gave full media access to a couple of bloggers. It may raise the level of coverage by all parties.

You know, the competition thing… And it would give you someone to have a cup of coffee with at practices. :)

By ranallo10

January 24, 2007 08:43 PM | Link to this

Utter shame…

I am the most embarassed Atlanta Thrashers fan in the history of the franchise after hearing The Star Spangled Banner sung in Dallas. The idiocracy of yelling “Knights” was spread to Dallas, thus proving that the most “faithful” Thrashers fans happen to be the most idiotic as well.

Is this off topic? Probably. But, if I were to put it into the same context as one who yells “Knights” at a Thrashers game by grasping for legitimacy, I’ll stick with this one: This is a HOCKEY blog, so anything that has to do with hockey can be posted in this blog. It doesn’t matter that the topic I’m posting on is not relevant to the topic, the simple fact that my post is ABOUT HOCKEY makes it legitimate for this specific blog.

Frickin idiots…I would bet my Thrashers tickets that nobody beyond Atlanta fans understood why in the world a person would yell in unison to “Nights” during The Banner, however everybody watching the game understood why fans would yell “Stars”.

Maybe next time you should yell along with “Brave”…yelling along with an Atlanta team that plays a different sport would make just as much sense as yelling for a FORMER Atlanta MINOR LEAGUE team, that has since moved cities.

Idiots, I just don’t understand you all.

By ranallo10

January 24, 2007 08:49 PM | Link to this

P.S. - Vigier sucks

By Craig Custance

January 24, 2007 09:22 PM | Link to this

Tom — I’m certainly not against it, I’m just in favor of a pretty thorough screening process. I’d welcome the competition and someone to drink coffee with.

By Jennifer

January 24, 2007 11:05 PM | Link to this

Well as a blogger who has had media access I don’t think any harm comes from it as long as you are careful about screening the people you crednetial. I think the Capitals have taken the right approach on this. They have some clear guidelines bloggers have to meat to get credentials including showing a track record of legitimate blogging, sound writing and recurring readership. Eric McErlain of Off Wing Opinion helped author the guidelines with some help from the guys over at SportsJournalist.com. (You can see the guidelines here.

I think the idea has to be that credentialed bloggers behave. Ask your questions rather than loiter at the locker room or the press conference. Produce something and don’t just use it as an excuse for a free ticket. Only issue single game credentials until a blogger has proven themselves worthy.

All that said its not easy to just show up and blend in. There was plenty that I didn’t expect my first time there, especially that “my dog got run over” vibe down in locker room after a loss.

By Eric McErlain

January 25, 2007 12:35 AM | Link to this

Hey Craig, congrats on getting the Thrashers beat. I’m sorry I didn’t have a chance to introduce myself when the Thrashers were last in D.C.

I have a question for you: Since when does a newspaper like the AJC refer to a person by their pseudonym and not their real name like you just did with Eklund? For some reason that I can’t understand, folks in the MSM have been giving him and his methods a free ride ever since he surfaced during the lockout and I just don’t understand why.

I only point that out because it’s folks like him who make it tougher for bloggers like me to be taken seriously. That the NHL and the PHWA treat him the way that they do is inexplicable.

By JAE

January 25, 2007 08:05 AM | Link to this

How could you not allow access to a blogger like this: jksockey.blogspot.com

By Craig Custance

January 25, 2007 08:07 AM | Link to this

Eric — Thanks for joining in the debate. If I was writing a story for the newspaper on blogging, and wanted to include Eklund, I’d have to use his real name. On a forum like this, which is a little more casual, and we’re debating the issue, I’m respecting his requests to privacy. He gave his name at the meeting, but it was off the record.

By Bob

January 25, 2007 08:42 AM | Link to this

Yes, with limitations. If the blogger is anonymous, then no press credentials. If they give their real name, address, etc., then each team should be able to grant credentials, on a case by case basis.

They have to block the nitwits that use the blogs simply to showcase their juvenile behavior, but the serious bloggers should be given access.

Times are changing, and to stay current, changes must be adapted to, it’s the only way to survive for any company or organization.

By Moberg

January 25, 2007 08:54 AM | Link to this

First off:

Ranallo, I totally agree with you! No more “KNIGHTS!!!” Not only is it an antiquated notion, but in reality it’s actually quite disrespectful to the national anthem. I was in New York for the game last Saturday and those people really appreciate and respect the beauty of and pride associated with “The Star Spangled Banner”.

Secondly:

As a journalist, I don’t think bloggers should be treated as equal members of the press. Craig, you can probably relate with me that pressers and other events can be quite chaotic as it is. Throw in a bunch of inexperienced folks with no media savvy and it only provides for delays, stupid questions and people who don’t know when to get their fat heads out of your shot.

Bloggers are better when they’re not held to journalistic standards and it’s understood that they’re merely stating an opinion or speaking out of passion for whatever it is they blog about. The minute they’re given equal consideration is the minute they need to be held to the same professional standards you and I are.

Keep your stick on the ice!

By Al Gore

January 25, 2007 09:08 AM | Link to this

Would “Eklund” be Richard Freedman of Cherry Hill, NJ? That’s who registered hockeybuzz.com…

By Chris

January 25, 2007 09:31 AM | Link to this

Interesting topic. I like the idea of a limited number of blog credentials per team. Two or three perhaps? This would give the serious bloggers incentive to continue to improve their sites, and reward the best with expanded access.

By Shannon

January 25, 2007 10:25 AM | Link to this

I would love to see a few hand selected bloggers have media access. I understand the comments made above about the lack of experience a blogger would have versus a reporter. But at one point, even a reporter is new to a press event and has to learn to sink or swim.

As a fan of hockey, I love reading a bloggers point of view. Most bloggers have sites to express their pure love of the game and to build excitement about their team. I really can’t say I feel that when I read an article written by a reporter. Bloggers give their site a personality with their writing and passion. By giving them access we may even see a stronger writing style with more in depth coverage versus the rumors and hearsay noted in many blogs.

I think we could debate this until the cows come home, as my grandmother would say, but I would love to see a select few bloggers have access. Lord knows the NHL could use a little free advertising and promotion.

By Wayne

January 25, 2007 10:47 AM | Link to this

NHL bloggers should get credentialed, mostly because major newspapers have cut back on covering the NHL; not only that, there’s more passion on the blogs than in a regular newspaper…

By Matt H

January 25, 2007 11:09 AM | Link to this

Wow, it’s nice to know there are so many other journalists/journalism degrees on this blog!

I agree with Bob’s point. There’s a hockey podcast I listen to that sort of debated this issue just last week.

Hiding behind a pseudonym erodes credibility as well as accountability, responsibility, and a few other “ity’s” I can’t think of this early in the morning.

“The Bellowing Moose” and “Eklund” should take a hike until they can accept the responsibility of a real byline.

Responsible bloggers should of course be cred’ed, and every organization with a press or pr dept. should be aware of the power and legitimacy the blogosphere can hold these days (when done well).

By Jennifer

January 25, 2007 11:50 AM | Link to this

Wayne, I suspect there are so many people with some kind of journalism experience lurking because so many of use found more lucrative and life-friendly professions. Craig gets to be an interloper in some interesting situations, but I certainly don’t envy the travel schedule.

I think transparency should be part of the process. It certainly lends to credibility, but it doesn’t guarantee it. Just look at Deadspin. Everyone knows exactly who the editors are, but it doesn’t make their reports more believable. Credibility is more about the accuracy of your information over time and your establishing a professional decorum.

By Eric McErlain

January 25, 2007 12:13 PM | Link to this

I think credentials should be handed out on a case by case basis by the teams and the leagues. The Caps are very progressive in this area, and one of the reasons why is that there is room in the box to accomdate folks. There’s no reason this shouldn’t be replicated elsewhere.

As for determining who should be credentialed, take a look at the guidelines I developed for the Caps and also provided to NHL HQ in New York.

By Fuskie

January 25, 2007 04:08 PM | Link to this

I would imagine that traditional media would be against credentialling new media because it further legitimizes the erotion of the role of traditional media. I have heard the argument that bloggers just sit around their bedrooms and never go out to get what they report. It seems to me that back in the day of radio and train travel, sports reporters did the same thing, using AP and wire services as their source of information. Were they legitimate media? They certainly thought so.

Fuskie - Who believes that a set of industry-accepted standards should be established to certify bloggers to become elligible for media credentials…

By B***

January 25, 2007 05:55 PM | Link to this

Take one look at the Thrashers blogger on Eklund’s site and you will get your answer. Minor league puck bunny at best. I think that you should have to be a blogger on a major, recognized sports site to be eligible.

By Jas

January 25, 2007 08:08 PM | Link to this

This question is so DUMB I can’t believe it was even asked. If people with NHL blogs get credentials… what’s next? Every blogger on the face of the earth is then going to want, and expect, a credential to everything. Blogs, unless they are run by a company, are all amaetur, no matter HOW accurate the information or how popular it may be. Blogs are done for fun, not to make a profit… unless it is a blog used or run by a business. There are WAY too many bloggers out there to start dishing out credentials. What are you people thinking?!?

By Jaclyn

January 25, 2007 11:27 PM | Link to this

As a female hockey fan who owns and maintains a website/blog (I won’t link it here), I’m torn about the NHL giving credentials to bloggers. Some might simply see it as a free ticket. I’m a fan first and sometimes do a lot of my own legwork to get material (i.e. going to practices when I can), but that’s mostly to give a fan’s view of a practice.

Sometimes I wish I could have an interview with a player or somebody within the organization to ask the questions that fans want to hear answers to. And I think that should be one of the top reasons for a media credential. Teams should be a little open to that idea of getting more exposure, and of course, carefully screen the blog and the material to make sure it’s semi-professional.

By Tom

January 26, 2007 07:54 AM | Link to this

Hey Jas,

I would disagree with your assessment of bloggers. I make a nice living writing for my assorted blogs. Much more than a cub reporter or even I dare say a fairly experienced one.

But I also have to deal with all IT concerns and advertising. I do run my blogs to make a profit, not just for fun. And there are many like me.

Blogging is just a new medium that is gaining acceptance. Advertisers are recognizing the fact and are advertising on blogs more and more. Google BlogAds for more on this.

Your characterization of blogs is not atypical, many are of the cat blogging type, but there are many of us who are on the cutting edge of reporting and covering topics that can exceed what resources a newspaper can throw on a topic.

Craig: Kudo’s on bringing up the topic and thanks for providing a soap box for this discussion. You are doing a great job bridging the online and traditional media worlds with your use of this site.

By James Mirtle

January 26, 2007 01:02 PM | Link to this

It’s unfortunate Eklund’s the one the PHWA looks to as a blogger representative, given his penchant for misrepresenting himself (especially in the early days).

There are a ton of quality blogs being produced by far more credible sources — including many who have already been credentialed by NHL teams. Why not approach them for input?

By Craig Custance

January 26, 2007 04:38 PM | Link to this

James — I think Eklund approached the PHWA, not the other way around.

By Eklund

January 26, 2007 06:41 PM | Link to this

Thanks Craig for giving time to this topic. It is also great to see some of hockey’s most respected bloggers like Eric and James weighing in.

Me speaking in front of the PHWA came about through discussions that Kevin Allen (USA Today, and Prez of the PHWA) were having last year during the finals. Kevin asked me to sit in on the meetiong in Carolina, and listen. Afterwards I gave him my two cents to the topic and said that I would be happy to present at the ASG the following year.

During that year I ran into some interesting Media Relations people around the league and there were several varying opinions on bloggers ranging from we never cred them, to we cred one a game, to we will cred almost anyone who is willing to write about us.

So I started taking notes and taking them to dinner and I learned their fears and trepidations.

Basically thiongs like, “Where do we draw the line?” or “Bloggers can write anything without accountability.” or “Will they ask for autographs ion the dressing room, or get in the way of the other writers on deadline?”

Then last year when Eric and Leonsis came up with some really solid and interesting guidelines I tried to use them a few times with some of the teams to no avail. The guidelines weren’t acceptable to team people or certain writers that would rather the internet go away. As Eric correctly stated, there aren’t many teams as progressive as the Caps and Leonsis.

So I continually refined my ideas and went to Kevin Allen with my rough thoughts and he told me to email him what he had and he would make time for me at the meeting.

I brought my ideas to the PHWA m,eeting with the intention of refining them in hopes that perhaps the PHWA could set their own guidelines that teams would all be more likely to acknowledge.

I spoke about the guidelines at the meeting with Caps writer Tarik El-Bashir, and he talked about how he didn’t have any issues with bloggers if they would be as respectful as Eric is. Tarik is one of the more progressive writers, and we spoke again today regarding some ideas.

My concepts, based on my experience and discussions were as follows.

My concept was a blogger who met the following five criteria would HAVE to be given equal access to that of a writer. However, I also said that teams could admit any blogger they wanted to if they were comfortable with he/she. Remember, my concern isn’t for those of us who are already “in” it is more about the bloggers who can’t get access currently despite their solid work and numbers.

1. The site must need to be in existence for over a year. (this shows someone is serious)

2. The site must be able to prove a minimum of 500,000 pageviews per month over at least 4 months, with the blogger getting at least 100-200,000 views per month. (this proves popularity and as I have said to team media people, “do you really want someone that popular p** off?”

3. The site must sell advertising through a recognized Ad Agency, like an advertising.com (this is the accountability issue. when you sign contracts with ad agencies you are accountable that your site won’t slander or liable.)

OR

1. The site must have obtained “Media Liability Insurance.” (this is the same result as #4. Accountability. It also shows a seriousness, because this process is very on depth.)

2. The individuals given credentials must sign a “Contract of Conduct” that will insure each reporter understands and will adhere to some basic rules of the press box, press conferences, practices, and locker rooms. This contract will consist of terms collected from NHL Teams and current Media. If any of these terms are not adhered to the Media Coordinator can write to the Internet Division of the PHWA and that member could be either warned, temporarily or permanently suspended from credentials.

So that was what I talked about with the PHWA. I was also prepared to talk about other issues involving online hockey stuff, but following the discussions we ran out of time and Bill Daly showed up and he trumps me…:)

Anyway, I would be interested in any of your thoughts regarding this, as I have been told that this issue will continue to be looked at moving forward. In fact there were some writers at the bar that night that felt a meeting to discuss this at length should be held in its own.

Thanks again Craig for starting this discussion.

By Paul

January 26, 2007 08:10 PM | Link to this

You forgot the most important thing… HONESTY!

By Eklund

January 26, 2007 08:41 PM | Link to this

indeed. and protecting of sources of course.

By Brittany

January 26, 2007 08:51 PM | Link to this

I think Bloggers should get credentials but I’m with most of the others who agree. You cant just let anyone in. I am a very serious blogger who blogs for Eklund and none of my blogs consist of any trade rumors etc. I would never use a media credential as a way to get autographs.. I would personally just like to be able to blog from the press box every night. I think I would use that more than access to players although an interview every once and awhile might boost reading. I dont think it’s fair to assume just because some of us are bloggers and internet based that we are not reporters like anyone else.

By Jennifer

January 26, 2007 09:04 PM | Link to this

I can’t say that I agree with Eklund’s proposed set of standards. It confuses the income or expenditure of money with integrity and accountability. I don’t need to spend money on liability insurance or pander to advertisers to be a blogger of high integrity. The threat of having access revoked should be a sufficient deterrent. I’m sure the largest blogs with dozens of writers would be the only beneficiaries of these standards. As for 500,000 page views per month…well I’d like to know if the Thrashers’ website gets that much traffic.

By Eklund

January 26, 2007 09:47 PM | Link to this

I agree Jennifer, but the team media people ask for those, as a checks and balamnces. one requires you to make it a business and make money…the other rquires you to put money into it, but both either satisfies the teams needs….which althought I don’t agree with them, they holfd the cards and control the access…but as I said they also can justy give credentials to any bloggr they are ok with…this is just a way to take a little of the power back by saying, “if we do this, we are entitled.”

Again, I reall appreciate any ideas you all have.

By Eklund

January 27, 2007 08:32 AM | Link to this

sorry that last response was written while I was carrying my son and trying to get him to sleep so the wife and I could watch a movie..contrary to how it sounds I was NOT drunk and I can type!

By Tom

January 27, 2007 03:42 PM | Link to this

Eklund,

Thanks for joining the conversation. I do not blog sports, yet, but your ideas are solid. If I had the cash, I could start a local paper that was off the wall. I would get my press pass, write something off the wall, and get it yanked.

It all really comes down to respect. If a blogger is serious, he or she will be respectful, tough, and diligent.

If I was to enter this arena, I would not necessarily want all access, but to be in the press box for the game and be able to live blog the game to a blog of forum, post actively and then get the occasional access to the players for profiles through the team would make a site much more enjoyable.

And it would hold the local media to a higher standard. I grew up in New York and 3 teams were covered in great detail daily. Now in the ATL we have one paper that is improving but still will put the Thrashers on the back page if Georgia or the Falcons do anything noteworthy.

So the die hards are left wanting, those that are on the fence are not being enticed, and the naysayers are given ammunition that hockey is not an important sport in town.

The blogging community may be one of the best things for a sport, and especially the NHL as they are struggling to be media savvy. A groundswell through the blogosphere may be a huge bonus for the league as a whole and a great reason to embrace the bloggers.

By LBrooks

January 27, 2007 05:10 PM | Link to this

DKK (Eklund), you should really stop the BS. Many of the folks in the PHWA know your scam and to be very frank, it is sickening that you are making a mockery of the readers.

By LBrooks

January 27, 2007 05:11 PM | Link to this

DKK (Eklund), you should really stop the BS. Many of the folks in the PHWA know your scam and to be very frank, it is sickening that you are making a mockery of the readers.

By The Falconer

January 27, 2007 08:30 PM | Link to this

I’ve been writing a blog (http://thrasherstalons.blogspot.com/) for quite a while now.

My motives are not financial (I like my day job and I have no advertising on my blog) but to fill the void of Thrasher related content that exists in Atlanta. Other than the AJC, very little is written about the Thrashers outside of rare articles appearing in national outlets such as The Hockey News, USA Today, ESPN.com, etc.

I feel that my Thrasher blogging would be improved were I allowed greater access to the team. I would welcome the opportunity to do interviews with players and coaches from time to time.

From my perspective I think th\at beat reporters like Craig and bloggers like myself have somewhat different tasks. The AJC is the paper of record and they are expected to provide summaries of each game, provide updates on roster changes and injuries along with feature stories on players or events. All of these things are important and useful for fans of the team.

On the other hand, a beat reporter only has so much time and has a limit on the amount of column space in the print edition.

I see bloggers like myself filling a different need. On my blog I prefer to use statistics to break down what is happening with the team. I also track which Thrasher draw penalties because the NHL does not keep publish this information. This sort of stuff will only interest certain fans and might very well never be accepted by a print publication because of its limited appeal. But I do think I offer something original for Thrasher fans to read.

I also review game recording in slow motion and discuss what exactly went lead to a goal against the team. I will name which players made which mistakes. This might be more difficult to do were I beat reporter who needs to remain on speaking terms with the players. (note: I don’t rail against any players, but I will say who make the error in my opinion.)

Were the Thrashers to grant press access I would have no problem if they adopted a two tier system. For example, I might like to ask Hartley a question after a game, but I have no problem waiting until after the tv, print and radio folks go first because they have deadlines to work around.

I do thing that transparency is important. I post under a screen name because some of my employers might not approve of my blogging. However, I am perfectly willing to provide my real name to the team, I just don’t my boss to google my name and find my blog at this point in my career.

I completely reject Eklund’s comment about needing to sell something in order to be credentialed. It takes a lot nerve to ask someone to pay you for insider hockey rumors. I’m not into blogging to make a buck off of my readers.

By The Acid Queen

January 28, 2007 02:12 AM | Link to this

I completely reject Eklund’s comment about needing to sell something in order to be credentialed. It takes a lot nerve to ask someone to pay you for insider hockey rumors. I’m not into blogging to make a buck off of my readers.

Quoted for truth. I blog about hockey because I enjoy it. I love the sport and I love the Hurricanes, so I blog about them. If I can get access to the pressbox so I can post something more than random thoughts from watching a game or reading an interview in the paper, so much the better—but I don’t feel that I should have to be “marketing myself” just to get that access.

I’m a blogger, not a paid w*******.

By gary

January 28, 2007 02:06 PM | Link to this

Eklund, since you have refused to answer my emails to you, maybe you can see it here and respond. Why have you not lived up to the prize you promised my son.
It is my understanding you have to by law, list all of the prize winners by real name and you haven’t even done that. Your lies are beginning to catch up with you, why do you not answer all of the questions that surround you?

By Stormbringer

January 28, 2007 02:34 PM | Link to this

Quoted for truth. I blog about hockey because I enjoy it. I love the sport and I love the Hurricanes, so I blog about them. If I can get access to the pressbox so I can post something more than random thoughts from watching a game or reading an interview in the paper, so much the better—but I don’t feel that I should have to be “marketing myself” just to get that access.

And I quote that for truth. :D

Seriously, as much as I sometimes dream about making money from my scribings, but those are just dreams. I am in the blogging game for three things: Love of hockey, love of the Carolina Hurricanes and Pittsburgh Penguins (and to a lesser extent, the Toronto Maple Leafs), and most important of all, love of writing about anything that comes to my mind, be it hockey or something completely different.

As Acid Queen said, if I got access to a pressbox, bully for me. But overall, I am just as content to watch the tele, listen to the radio, or pay for my tickets for a game or two or three whenever I get the opportunity to visit Raleigh or another NHL city.

Stormbringer (http://stormbringer10.blogspot.com/)

By Eric McErlain

January 28, 2007 09:11 PM | Link to this

This is comical. If you take a look at Eklund’s guidelines, the only bloggers who would qualify are the ones who work for him at Hockey Buzz.

By Eklund

January 28, 2007 10:53 PM | Link to this

First off, I have no idea what this guy is saying that I don’t answer his emails and haven’t sent a prize to his son. I have never gotten an email from anyone claiming this. I will make sure that no one else at hockeybuzz has either… I used to get anonymous emails claiming this kind of stuff from a remailer service that hides the senders identity and does not allow emails to be sent back to them. I long ago since blocked those emails,

As for L Brooks, since I now have a relationship with Larry Brooks, I don’t know who you are.

Eric, I understand your point, but actually only three of my bloggers besides myself would have the page views over 100,000, and we are already credentialed, but as I said, make the number what ever we all think is fair. I am open to whatever number bothjt the teams and the bloggers agree to. I think we can all agree that there needs ot be a number just for space issues in the box

As for trying to force sites to be businesses to get credentialed, that was not my requirement, but it is what the teams want, and not just from the internet media. They are protecting their players and want accountability that comes with a media outlet being a business with advertisers and /or contracts,

I didn’t say I agreed with it, but this process is a give and take as you know Eric, from your great work with Ted.

I am simply trying to help get more bloggers more access. And I want to do it in a way where people get the respect they deserve.

I you don’t want press box access, that is cool. I fully respect anyone who blogs for the love of the game. Contrary to popular beliefs I have spent way more money on hosting and other expenses than I have brought in.

Anyone writing in hockey doesn’t do it to get rich.

again, I appreciate the dialogue

By fuzzed

January 29, 2007 09:33 AM | Link to this

Jeez Eric, you sound a little whiney today. Sounds of jeasouly perhaps? You should join us a hockeybuzz and participate in the chats. Ek has told us numerous times how hockey bloggers are very jealous of him, I guess you proved it.

By Eklund

January 29, 2007 10:29 AM | Link to this

for the record, I have never said that bloggers are jealous of me in any chat. I am extremely happy for guys like Eric and Kukkla who have moved on further than I have to take jobs with NBC and NHL.com. I sent them each congratulatory emails at the times. The was I see it, when one hockey blogger gets ahead like they have EVERYONE wins.

Hockey Blogging getting recognition is not a sprint, and paul, eric, tom benjamin, james mirtle,mike chen, etc. have all done wonders for the idea of hockey bloggers.

By Paul Kukla

January 29, 2007 11:09 AM | Link to this

First off, lose the name… people know who you are! Secondly, you paint such a rosey picture here, exactly what I expected, the deception continues. Why don’t you tell the whole story, instead of just making yourself look like you have done no wrong?

By Bill Houlihan

January 29, 2007 12:22 PM | Link to this

I am hockey fan who blogs because I enjoy expressing my opinion, and I hope any readers I have enjoy reading it. Blogging gives me the freedom to express those opinions without being beholden to an organization reliant upon the teams’ whims to allow them the access they need to do their jobs.

Having said that, I also blog because the beat writers in Detroit are pathetic in their lack of aggression when it comes to following stories other than the obvious. They stepped aside during the lockout, during Yzerman’s decision-making process, and during countless other time periods where stories were staring them in the face. It is through apathy like this that bloggers have emerged and flourished.

But do I ask for access? Not necessarily. I would enjoy it and I think my product would benefit from it, but I don’t require it to continue to write the way I do…for the audience I’ve forged a relationship with. Personally, I relish the opportunity to speak my mind without concerning myself if I’ll get another quote from a player or team I’ve criticized.

As for Eklunk, or Dwayne Klessel, the very idea that he is given any credibility by the league, the NHLPA, XM or Sportsnet (where he was temporarily employed before leaving without explanation…thankfully) is a slap in the face to those of us who share a common theme of honest opinion rather than outright lies.

When I say lies, I don’t mean the rumors. That’s his schtick and more power to him. What I refer to are his claims of differing backgrounds and affiliations with teams, the league and others.

He will soft-pedal you here, and avoid the hard questions as usual. But the fact remains that he is a fraud and, as a poster above pointed out, a fraud who is making on the gullible.

Hockey bloggers are a good bunch. They’re funny, smart and, above all, love their sport. As a whole I can say that we do what we do because we enjoy our audience and our teams.

“Eklund” fits no where in that description.

By Eklund

January 29, 2007 12:45 PM | Link to this

I choose to remain anonymous because it is “fun” and this is a “sport” that we are talking about. this is not kids going off to war. I have NEVER disparaged a single blogger, because varying opinions are what makes sites like kuklaskorner and offwingopinion so great.

I am also not running from the law here. I spoke in front of every writer at the all-star game and I wasn’t wearing a mask. The media who have asked me and those I trust know the “whole story” and obviously don’t have a problem with me.

I still point to Eric’s site and yours all the time anyway, not because you like me, but because they are great hockey sites…and that is what I love…hockey.

Lighten up Paul. You have THE best site out there for what you do. I can tell you I see your site on people’s laptops in press boxes far more often than mine. You deserve all the praise for what you have done.

The anonymous thing is harmless and fun. It is my “choice” and if it hurts anyone’s career, it is mine. I have to work harder to build up trust, and I have to turn down interviews with CBC and Vs. because of my wish for anonymity.

The MSM, like Chris in this thread, have been completely professional, supportive and respectful of my wishes. (they seam to think I am fairly harmless)…..

anyway, I feel as though hockey blogging is making huge strides and I am happy to have as many great bloggers as I do getting the exposure they do on my site. And there are many who I have asked but have declined as well. It is all good, it is all entertaining.

By Paul Kukla

January 29, 2007 01:05 PM | Link to this

You should really address the issues that some bloggers have.
What NHL team did you work for, when did you work for the NHL, and when did you write for the Hockey News. All of the above items were on your previous blogs and need to be answered.

By Eklund

January 29, 2007 01:26 PM | Link to this

Paul, it is a legitimate question and extremely valid concern. I can tell you that I have obviously addressed your questions with many people to this point, but as long as I want to stay anonymous, and not sell some of my sources down the river, I can’t give you those answers. I understand people feeling that those questions somehow discredit me. I completely understand, however I have to be true to my sources, many of whom during the lockout especially, put their neck on the line for me.

That is about the most I can say in a public forum as this one. As I have emailed you prior if you want to meet, and discuss this “off the record” I would consider it. You have never responded to that.

I have put that out to several people, and a few have taken me up on it. great relationships have been forged, and it is always fun to meet good hockey people.

By Paul Kukla

January 29, 2007 01:38 PM | Link to this

Your emails to me contained more lies. I will deal with this in my own way, in my time frame.

By Eklund

January 29, 2007 03:24 PM | Link to this

fair enough.

By The Acid Queen

January 29, 2007 09:33 PM | Link to this

I have NEVER disparaged a single blogger, because varying opinions are what makes sites like kuklaskorner and offwingopinion so great.

Lie much, Dwayne?

http://hfboards.com/printthread.php?t=222531

I quote from your own post in that thread:

one written by a guy who I granted an interview to and then he posted a story that twisted every word I said and would not allow me to respond to it, and the other is a guy who takes on the challenge of pointing out that rumors don’t always come to fruition. He fails to mention any rumors that I posted that did occur…

But I suppose that you didn’t really post that, just like you didn’t really swap IMs with me during the playoffs last season?

I think I picked the wrong time to declare a moritorium on dealing with you, Dwayne-o….

By Ryan

January 30, 2007 12:12 AM | Link to this

You should all put the game first and not your ego.

Paul Kukla be thankful you have employment or have a game to write about at all. And be glad that anyone gives a crap to read what you have to say anyway.

You are not special, you are fortunate. The game is bigger than any of you.

By The Acid Queen

January 30, 2007 01:05 AM | Link to this

Heaven forfend anyone should have an opinion, right?

By Greg Wyshynski

January 30, 2007 09:13 AM | Link to this

“I can tell you that I have obviously addressed your questions with many people to this point, but as long as I want to stay anonymous, and not sell some of my sources down the river, I can’t give you those answers.”

I’m really, really trying to live and let live with the whole Eklund thing, but after reading several of the typically tepid Kumbaya defenses from hockey blogging’s most industrious Messiah complex, I felt compelled to respond.

Journalists work off-the-record with sources every day. I’ve never needed a nickname to keep a source. And I’m pretty sure, during the apex of Watergate, Bob Woodward never bylined under “Pelle.” The notion that Eklund’s network of sources would unravel if Eklund dropped the pseudonym is historically unfounded and a bit far-fetched. The notion that “I have obviously addressed your questions with many people to this point” could be categorized as an “answer” is laughable.

That said, the “Eklund” name game is part of the shtick, so to each his own. The posting of rumors culled from Internet message boards and invented by gabbing friends in a press box doesn’t do it for me, but to each his own. Where I draw the line on this Eklund thing is the notion that fabricating a résumé to “protect” anonymity is some sweet, innocent parlor trick. Not when Eklund’s site began charging fans money with the understanding that they were reading someone who had worked for the NHL and had worked as a freelance hockey writer…only to have that résumé later change to someone that claimed to have nothing to do with hockey after college (via Eklund’s blog) and/or someone who was a Philadelphia Flyers fan who worked in the entertainment industry (ESPN). Contradict much?

The other issue of this ever-changing back story is how it reflects on the rest of the Web-based hockey writers. Eklund has represented himself as a day-trader, a musician who befriended Flyers players and several other variations to mainstream hockey media and the league itself; I’ve had a beat writer who interacted with his site later e-mail me infuriated that they’d been duped. Clearly, these flubs have helped Eklund’s site — what with the intense coverage of the Philadelphia-Pittsburgh-Nashville-St. Louis-Toronto Hockey League on a daily basis — but have damaged the reputation of all hockey bloggers, who now have to jump through hoops with team media relations for a game pass because they might “make stuff up” (as one DMR told me).

I’ve written about Eklund before, and have heard I’m not exactly on his Valentine’s Day list. I respect Eklund’s passion for hockey, his ability to build relationships with peers, and many of the innovations of his Web site. But questions about his credentials and methodology are like cars in a game of “Frogger” – you can only dodge so many before getting flattened.

By Eklund

January 30, 2007 12:49 PM | Link to this

Greg, I respect your opinions and understand them as well. Thak you for understand that the Eklund name game is part of my shtick. Some of the stuff you are writing about here are true, and some are part of the continuing urban legend about Eklund. (like I never once said a thing about being a day-trader…don’t like to play the markets at all)

When it comes to bloggers not getting creds because some are “making things up,” I personally have never run into that issue with teams or the NHL, so how do you draw the conclusion that I am to blame? I do believe that there are bloggers out there who are making things up, but I have found that DMRs are capable of discerning between the good, bad, and the ugly.

I don’t have an issue with you personally however, and greatly enjoy your columns on thefourthperiod.com. (except for the one that took a cheep shot at me, but hey it is you forum and the way you worded it was actually pretty hilarious)

For valentines day, send me your address and I’ll send you some chocolates.

By Peter

January 30, 2007 01:06 PM | Link to this

I would like to comment briefly on blogging and the NHL and also Eklund.

Blogging: First off, teams and the NHL beat writers will have to recognize bloggers as this is becoming THE medium of communication exchange for hockey fans. Clearly the NHL and NBCSports have adopted this model and every hockey fan I know go to Eric’s, James’ and Ek’s blog almost daily not only to hear the latest but discuss among hockey fans about the league. With the exception of Red Sox fans, I haven’t heard about too many independent blogs/discussion forums in the other sports. Blogging is the way forward and if NHL teams start credtentialling the serious ones (I will leave that definition to the teams) then it will make the sport even more enjoyable.

About Ek: I am a paying member of his site. Whether you think he is Dwayne and making things up, you can’t argue with the legit writer’s on his site or with the fact that it is a great place to discuss everything going on in hockey. I do not view my money as going to support a liar for fake rumors (whether that is true or not), instead I see my money as a donation to a PBS-type organization where I am supporting the website, the discussion of hockey and the great blogs by legit bloggers. If people have a problem with Ek’s supposed lies, his cloaked identity or with Ek personally then maybe either don’t read the site or learn to appreciate the other positive attributes of it.

By David Johnson

January 30, 2007 01:18 PM | Link to this

I think one of the great thing about bloggers is that they are 100% independent. They have no allegiances to anyone. They aren’t there to sell newspapers or radio ads nor do they have any connection to the team(s) or player(s) they are writing about. Plus they don’t always suffer from the ‘Group Think” that I believe many in the main stream media suffer from.

To answer the question though, I don’t see what is wrong if the NHL or a particular team wants to give a blogger media credentials. The only thing is, I think to some extent as soon as a blogger gains media credentials he has the potential to lose some of that independence. As a blogger myself (HockeyAnalysis.com), I am not sure if I would want media credentials for that reason though I could see the benefits of having one. I will accept any front office job (or commissioner because Bettman is horrific) if a team is offering me one though.

By joe

January 30, 2007 01:28 PM | Link to this

Yes bloggers should be allowed access. I think it shouldn’t be across the board but the NHL has been spending attention and time reaching out to bloggers and in a positive way. Blogs attract the core audience of passionate hockey aficionados and with traditional press coverage in almost of all the major cutbacks gone, there is a need to reach out more. Yes, bloggers should be treated as serious journalists as many of them are.

By Anthony SanFilippo

January 30, 2007 02:26 PM | Link to this

Hey Craig… nice job on developing a feisty blog about…well… blogging! I’ve been riveted for the past half hour!

Anyway, some of you may recognize me, others may not. For the sake of those that don’t - and I’m sure it’s most of you - I am a travelling beat writer in the NHL covering the Philadelphia Flyers.

At the same time, and I know I am in a minority here working both sides of the fence, I am also a blogger for Eklund.

I know, as a beat writer, I am going to be held to a much higher standard on the blog. Otherwise, my credibility, not only on the blog, but also in any of the seven newspapers that publish my work, would be lost.

And that’s fine. That I understand. Which is why you will never read a rumor on a blog I write that hasn’t been substantiated from someone in an official capacity on a hockey team.

Yet, with that said, that doesn’t mean there aren’t other rumors out there. And while more often than not those rumors do not pan out, there is some semblance of truth to them.

Why? Because they come from connected sources - like player agents or players themselves.

Does anyone think that G.M.’s don’t talk about hundreds of trade possibilities or free agent signings on a daily basis?

And yet, they only follow through on maybe 1 percent of them.

That’s the nature of sports.

Now, while I can’t toss those said rumors around personally because of my day job, that doesn’t mean there isn’t a forum for them to be bounced around.

Which is what makes Eklund’s site, among many others, so brilliant.

Eklund could get a phone call from a player agent saying his client is going to be traded, and that sneaks onto the site as a rumor.

Could it be that the agent is just trying to stoke the fire of the G.M. for whom his client plays? Possibly. Is it possible that there has been some discussion about moving said player? possibly. Is it possible that it could be done for a free agent to drum up interest? Again, possibly.

The fact is, it’s out there. It’s not like Eklund is just making it up out of the blue.

So he reports it, gets conversation started, and there is a buzz (thus the name of the Web site) that forms around it.

It’s all good.

Now, as for other situations - like take for example the problems surrounding Peter Forsberg in Philly - Isn’t it possible that teams and players may play the rumor game as well as the credentialed media and the bloggers alike?

For example - both Eklund and my colleague Tim Panaccio from the Philadelphia Inquirer have been insisting Forsberg won’t be traded.

Meanwhile, I’ve offered a contrarian opinion that he will.

They have sources. I have sources. Something tells me, that in one instance, we have the same source - and yet, different stories.

Does that discredit us as journalists? No. So, why should it discredit bloggers who post rumors and opinions as well?

Simply put, it shouldn’t.

But, for some reason, there are people out there who are full of pent up anger and vitriolic anxiety about the whole scenario, and take it too far.

Look, what we do for a living is fun. We write about sport. Sport, while competitive, and a business, is still, in it’s simplist form, fun.

So, why do so many people want to treat it as if it’s not fun?

If Eklund wants to have fun discussing possible trades and trading partners, why shouldn’t he?

If I want to write a blog that has a clear and concise point, but at the same time stirs up the emotions of an entire city (I love ya’ Buffalo) then why shouldn’t I?

It is a children’s game played by adults, let’s not lose sight of that fact.

As often as I read blogs like Eric’s and Paul’s and others, I never really anticipated that they would be so shortsighted about the whole changing landscape of our field.

I always assumed they were all on the cutting edge, realizing that this is going to be the way news and sports and entertainment and everything else is going to be communicated between people in the future.

But, after reading their responses, it seems like they took the old dinosaur mentality that is killing newspapers and are trying to apply it to blogging.

Such a shame.

Give it a rest boys, because in actuality, we’re all in this together. And when you start making it personal, that’s when it all begins to crumble.

If we all want blogging to sustain a long life of communicative value, we need to support one another, even if we are in direct competition with one another.

Because, if we go the other way, and try to discredit each other around every corner, then the whole premise will fail and blogging will only be recalled as a miserable experimentation on the sociopathic interaction between Type A personalities.

Let there be guidelines for the bloggers to get credentialed. And phase them out if they prove to be phonies.

But give them their due. They are passionate about their sport. Let them put that passion to good use.

By Paul Kukla

January 30, 2007 02:41 PM | Link to this

Shortsighted Anthony? Has Dwayne told you what he has done to some of the bloggers in the past, including myself? Feel free to contact me and I will let you know and I would be interested in what he did say to you about it. If Dwayne wants to have a blog, I agree, that is his priority, but the way he has handled himself is another matter.

By Peter

January 30, 2007 02:57 PM | Link to this

Anthony- a Buffalo ex-pat gives you a big hug!

And I agree with you, this is a sport (a game) and while there is a LOT of money involved in it and there is WAY too much press about it, in the end it is not the most important thing humanity should be focused on.

That being said- hockey is part of my life and I love having a site or 4 I can go to every day to discuss the thing I love. Ek provides this for me and countless others. I am not blind however, he is clearly rubbed/deceived (?) others the wrong way with either his actions or inactions which he should be accountable for but if any of you think he isn’t providing a valuable outlet for hockey discussion on both the blogger/professional and fan level then you don’t understand what is going on at hockeybuzz.

I love that all of my fav hockey bloggers are commenting on this thread. To each of you, keep it up- I love reading your great takes!

By Jonathan Probber

January 30, 2007 04:03 PM | Link to this

Well, Craig, you’ve certainly livened up an otherwise dreary Tuesday afternoon.

I belong to HockeyBuzz and enjoy the site very much; we’ve lively forums and a friendly, active chat room.

I don’t particularly care who Eklund really is or about internecine blogger squabbles. I don’t recall that he’s claimed his rumors are anything but rumors (although he does weight them).

I’m much more concerned about the quality of writing and - especially - editing in these blogs. On HockeyBuzz, the entries range from quite professional (Panaccio and SanFilippo, e.g.) to near-illiterate.

Too many rambling, self-absorbed posts (“I was painting my toenails as Larionov scored. It was cool.”) which are irritating as hell. Couple that with an utter disregard for even the rudiments of grammar and spelling and you’ve really got something special.

(I’m sure this is true not only of HockeyBuzz, but of many other blogs.)

I’d credential bloggers whose sites come close to the standards of newspapers. Since editing standards at newspapers are plummeting daily, blogs should have less and less problems tightening up.

This would work to get bloggers to act a little more like beat writers - talk to someone, verify facts - and beat writers to be a little more imaginitive.

It kills me to say this, but it soon won’t matter whether the words appear on newsprint or monitor. Judgements on credibility and integrity will still be made on the quality of the information presented and the words chosen for the task.

So let’s let the good bloggers on board and get them to work a bit harder.

By Tim Panaccio

January 30, 2007 06:33 PM | Link to this

Someone at the All-Star Game asked me what is a blogger.

I told them that I had to read hundreds of political blogs in the U.S. to figure out exactly what a blogger was. I’m still not sure but I’m getting closer to what I think I am supposed to be when I put this hat on.

As a journalist,for the past 32 years, I probably bring a different approach -more news-oriented. I’m less likely to throw something out there and hope it sticks.

I try to do this in my blogs: incorporate my feelings and the surroundings into what I write, especially, if I am on the scene. I try to personalize the reporting a bit more than a column.

What’s that phrase we hear? “How do you really feel?” That should be in the blog. You can’t always say that in a newspaper story.

I am CONVINCED blogging is the “next” wave of journalism and sports is a late entry given political blogs have been out there for four or five years already.

Yes, there is a credibility issue. But that exists on every website in the world. The difference is, when you begin to edit bloggers and chats and comments, the law says you are taking responsbility for content and that means, responsibility for libel purposes.

I get defamed frequently on Philly.com. I have been called horrible things. I have been accused of being drunk at a post-game news conference. I never drink at the game. A glass of wine after. When I complained to the Inquirer about this, it was explained to me that if they start editing the “chats” the paper takes responsibility for it. That is why so many sites use disclaimers.

The Daily News and Inquirer have blogs, chat rooms and all kinds of on-line things and they are not editing the fans and people outside the realm of the papers involved because their lawyers tell them once they do that, they are accepting responsbility for content.

At Hockeybuzz.com, we do our best with software to catch profanities and eliminate such.

In the months ahead, we hope to introduce more journalists as bloggers to raise the bar on our website.

We’ll still have fan bloggers, but we agree that having reporters, who have been reporting for their entire careers, gives us more credibility.

By tomorrow night, Hockeybuzz.com will have 6 million page views for the month of January.

That makes Eklund’s site one of the largest, hockey websites on the planet.

And I agree, that with such a distinction, we should try to raise our standards.

We will.

But I find all this Eklund bashing to be sophomoric. Most blogs are rumors and opinion and a hodge-podge of what’s out there on a certain subject.

Take a close read of every NHL Sunday notebook. They contain rumors - rumblings, as some writers call them _ throughout the league. We pass them off as “notes.”

Bloggers are a new genre of journalist.

They won’t be as skilled, as schooled or as reporter-trained as people like Anthony SanFilippo, Howard Berger and myself, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t some good ones out there who try to bring a higher level of credibility with everything they write.

We’re trying to be better and will continue to do so.

Tim Panaccio

By noah

January 30, 2007 08:14 PM | Link to this

I’m going to continue with this side-tracking of the original topic.

I’ve been reading hockey blogs for some time now, and I agree with what Timmy P said previously: if bloggers want to be taken seriously, they need a modicum of professionalism.

My favourite blogs have been from sportswriters; the departed JABS, for instance.

Eklund, on the other hand, was interesting for a while. It was not the false rumours or the hubris he used in his rankings that turned me off of him, although those did play a part - it was the spelling and grammar. Eklund - use spellcheck. And if you can take a moment to say that “no, i’m not drunk, I just have a child in my hand that I’m putting to bed so I can spend some time with my wife” use that moment instead to correct the pitiful grammar and spelling. And if what you say is actually true, and responding to posts on the internet is more important to you than taking proper care of your (presumably) small child, I have news: he’s probably not actually yours.

By The Acid Queen

January 30, 2007 08:39 PM | Link to this