One Reason I'm No Longer ClipperSteve
I know we're supposed to be all Blake Griffin all the time around here, but a quick meta-post, blogging about blogging...
The SBNation Colts blogger, BigBlueShoe from Stampede Blue, was recently called out by Indy Star columnist Bob Kravitz. Kravitz' point, such as it was, was that BigBlueShoe has no credibility because it's impossible to hold BigBlueShoe accountable for what he writes without knowing his real name.
The debate went from the newspaper, to the blog, and eventually to the airwaves, where BigBlueShoe was a guest on Kravitz' show. The timing of this incident, a couple of months after I made the decision to stop using a pseudonym for Clips Nation, is very interesting.
Let me just say, that listening to Bob Kravitz' inanely simplistic arguments makes me wish in a way that I was still ClipperSteve. The feeling that I have somehow acquiesced to his banal position is quite distasteful to me. But at the same time, it's one more roadblock to credibility that bloggers don't really need in the end - it's a battle I'm choosing not to fight.
I'm not going to get into the larger philosophical questions at this time. If you're interested and you've got the time, read about it and listen to the discussion.
29 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I think the name change was a good decision for you
It is probably more congruent with your goals. It is important that writers and journalists assemble at portfolio at some point. And since your name is Steve Perrin, it seems wise that you should write under that name.
I personally never saw the name change as capitulating to “the man”. These newspapermen are clearly butt-hurt about the perceived added competition from bloggers. I see reporting and blogging as separate entities. Blogs have filled a void left by the traditional media.
My question is, why does BigBlueShoe have to be accountable to anyone? He/she has First Amendment protections and is free to use his/her blog to write, cite, embellish, lie, hope, wish, dream, etc. If he/she gets things right, if that is in fact his/her goal, then people will deem the blog to be credible. If BigBlueShoe is a wing-nut, it won’t be credible.
I haven’t read the discussion, but I am interested in the big picture. It’s old vs. new, controlled flow of info vs. wide open marketplace of ideas. I love it that we know have access to so much information, true, false or otherwise. We get to decide for ourselves what is or isn’t credible.
F-Elton!
"These newspapermen are clearly butt-hurt about the perceived added competition from bloggers."
I actually think its more than that Mikey. I think they are genuinely fearful of bloggers and I think many of them blame bloggers (in some way) for ruining their profession. They are afraid of these guys who they see as underqualified becoming more popular than them. Plus the access issue. Access for the mainstream means access to players/coaches/GM’s etc. The access I care about is between me and the author. Steve receives criticism from us and this blog, and he backs up his points. We interact with one another. Many journalist types, especially the ones on their way out, feel like that interaction is beneath them.
Blogs have filled a void left by the traditional media
Very true. As we all know, the Clippers have no beat writer. So where do I get all my clippers news? This site of course. I think the Clippers would be smart to operate as the Dodgers have (maybe they are doing the same things and I don’t know it.) The Dodgers have completely embraced the blogs. The guys at TrueBlueLA, get access to games and are sent information by the club daily. The reason for this is simple. Like the Clippers, the Dodgers are basically down to 1 beat writer only (not including the guy who works for dodgers dot com since he is an employee of the organization.) So if we want information regarding the daily lineups, or injuries, etc. blogs have really become the best medium to get that information from the club to the fans.
I do like this topic. I think we are on the front lines of a major change. I’m excited to see how this all plays out.
by Michael White on May 21, 2009 8:13 AM PDT up reply actions
Some great points....
To mikey’s point re: “My question is, why does BigBlueShoe have to be accountable to anyone? He/she has First Amendment protections and is free to use his/her blog to write, cite, embellish, lie, hope, wish, dream, etc. If he/she gets things right, if that is in fact his/her goal, then people will deem the blog to be credible. If BigBlueShoe is a wing-nut, it won’t be credible.” In fact, think this is exactly what makes bloggers accountable. Strictly speaking, a blogger does not have to be accountable. But if you want to build and maintain a readership, you absolutely have to be accountable to that readership.
To mw06 – I think the interaction point is spot on, and something that Kravitz and others are totally missing. What’s more accountable than reading and responding to comments from the blog members? Does Kravitz do that after his columns? It’s the ery essence of accountability, and it doesn’t matter whether you’re using your real name or a pseudonym. If the blogger known as BigBlueShoe writes something, gets criticized for it, and engages in a discussion with his critics, then he is being accountable to his readers.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
by Steve Perrin on May 21, 2009 9:00 AM PDT up reply actions
I'll always remember you...
as ClipperSteve in my heart.
this guy and TJ are one in the same...
when he had the radio show, his reasoning vs bloggers was the same…all i gotta say, get with the times!
Roger Sterling: I bet there were people in the Bible walking around, complaining about "kids today."
Don Draper: Kids today, they have no one to look up to. Cuz they're looking up to us.
A rose by any other name?
My anonymous sources are confused about why its so important for everyone to be named all of a sudden.
If a blogger ran around doing random things like declaring Allen Iverson was definitely going to be a Clipper tomorrow then they would have something to be concerned about.
As for the name change, another way to go would be to keep up the use of a psuedonym as is traditional in the internet format, but have an “about me” section.
"So what are the odds that the Clippers can compete next season given their limited flexibility? Slim and none."
Anonymity for anonymity's sake
Some bloggers simply want to keep their anonymity. These reasons can be pretty mundane, mostly along the lines of “I don’t want my boss to know that I’m blogging at work.” But I agree with you that having an internet ‘handle’ while and at the same time being up front about your real name via an available profile, is possibly the best of both worlds.
I hadn’t given it any thought when I started blogging. At best, I had some vague pseudo-paranoia that said “Most bloggers don’t use their real names, I wonder if there are valid reasons to do so, I guess I’ll do that.” There was a time when I was advised not to have an email address on the blog, for concerns about spam. But it’s obviously grown to the point where the environment is different. Still I never worked very hard to conceal my real name, and I think the first season-preview I wrote, way back in Oct. 2006, was by Steve Perrin, simply because Jeff at CelticsBlog knew my name, and I didn’t tell him to use ClipperSteve.
But if you want to refer to me as ClipperSteve around these parts, it’s great with me.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
by Steve Perrin on May 21, 2009 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah...
I think that was his point. I’ve become more circumspect as I’ve gotten older. Besides, about 95% of the citizenry around here doesn’t even know that story.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
by Steve Perrin on May 21, 2009 8:55 AM PDT up reply actions
It was, but it wasn't
I mean thats one oops in the 3 years now or whatever. The market works here. If someone is constantly doing that, it won’t matter what they write because noone would stick around and read it. The big boys don’t have to worry about THAT blogger because he will run himself out of town, if anyone was even reading him in the first place.
But if what is being written is generally accurate, makes sense, and is entertaining, who cares about the occasional mistake. I’d rather have the information than not.
The Enquirer was the only one that got the John Edwards cheating story right.
"So what are the odds that the Clippers can compete next season given their limited flexibility? Slim and none."
Well put
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
by Steve Perrin on May 21, 2009 9:01 AM PDT up reply actions
I think we should look back on that time fondly
That is how I found the site. Technically, you were reporting the truth. A source gave you some info, you passed it along to us. Perhaps you would have treaded a bit more cautiously today, but I think blogs are, and ought to be, about fans having fun. I sure had fun that day, waiting for the news to break on ESPN and elsewhere. When it didn’t go down it was not a big deal. I was more pleased that I had found information. Many of us stuck around. So it worked out.
F-Elton!
True enough...
It was a watershed for the blog. There was of course a huge spike on that day, but many new readers like yourself stuck around. But John’s point is well taken – if that’s the rule as opposed to the exception, then there’s no long term growth.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
by Steve Perrin on May 21, 2009 9:09 AM PDT up reply actions
Ah, the salad days
"So what are the odds that the Clippers can compete next season given their limited flexibility? Slim and none."
There's a lot more changes yet to happen...
As far as the Clipper Steve/Steve Perrin thing goes, it’s a non issue. SP was never hiding behind his blog name… and as Mikey said, eloquently, using his real name is more “congruent” with his aspirations.
Obviously, what hasn’t fully happened yet is access and accountability… and these are huge issues, but an even bigger thing, ultimately, might be independence… Kevin Arnovitz works for Henry Abbott and ESPN. Does he have to observe a different standard than SP?
So, what happens when the Clippers or a big media conglomerate wants to co-opt Steve Perrin? Can he maintain his integrity? His balance?
It’s kind of ironic, because KA and CS have never (in my experience) taken a radical attitude regarding the team they cover… and this is at least one reason why they seem to have such faithful readership (the other being that they are both high quality writers). Neither is the kind of writer who enjoys starting fires (for fire-sake alone). They are both careful, reserved, responsible… and in SP’s case anyway, he rather carefully polices his site for content. Using his real name is simply a natural extension of that responsibility.
The other thing that SP seems to understand that traditional media hasn’t entirely caught on to (yet)… is that blogging is dialogue. It’s arguing opinions in a credible, defensible manner… then arguing and editing them again. It’s give and take with the hoi-polloi. That’s really the beauty of this site and others like it.
+100
well put, all around. In my opinion, CS benefits from his autonomy vis-a-vis the Clippers and the media conglomerates. I haven’t noticed too much of a change in KA’s approach since joining ESPN, other than the one time he seemingly carried Chris Ford’s water.
You also nailed it on the dialouge. I think that is what we are looking for. How many of us have tortured our friends and wives with endless talk about the Clippers, a team that most people could absolutely care less about (I’m lucky, my wife is as big a Clips fan as me). But these sites provide the outlet. The traditional media does not.
As Steve pointed out above, who are these walled off reporters accountable to? They are very inaccessible, and a few exceptions aside, are not all that interested in debating their points once they make print. It’s the like it or lump it approach at the LA Times and other venues. Bloggers have to answer to their readers. Newspapers should, but don’t. Look at which medium is tanking and which is growing.
Costas, Kravitz – these other smug types that assess qualifications by how well read one is – they simply don’t get it. That’s their problem.
F-Elton!
Hey! You with the movie quotes!
“You’ll always be ‘sweetheart’ to me.” W. C. Fields in “Million Dollar Legs” to his future son-in-law.
Part of the juvenile fun of this place is that we have secret code names. Another part is that, behind those secret code names, we put out some pretty high-class analysis and writing.
And yet another part is that I’m ‘in the know’ — f’rinstance, for a price I’ll tell you the real first names of JohnR and MikeyP.
SBNation?
Of course, SBNation would like to think of itself as a ‘big media conglomerate’ – just not an ‘old media conglomerate.’ In that sense, I was co-opted early – I joined SBNation in September 2006, before I really had any readership. And there are some growing pains within SBNation as the organization comes to grips with issues network wide; things like profanity, civility, etc.
Access is changing slowly, and may change more quickly at this point. KA has a credential at this point because of his ESPN role – and happily for me, he can well-demonstrate to the Clippers that ‘blogger’ does not necessarily equal ‘raving lunatic’. I was at Neil Olshey’s press conference yesterday, and the climate within the organization is clearly changing towards bloggers. I suspect that I will have more access this season – probably about as much as I want.
And that’s the other question. I know many bloggers, many with significantly larger readership and influence than I, who have no desire to gain access. They feel, and it is a great point, that bloggers are best as outsiders. That the community relates to the blogger as ‘just like us.’ I’m hopeful that increased access can only benefit the community with better information, but it certainly changes some things.
Here’s the classic access conundrum – let’s say I had an opportunity to interview MDsr. Well, I’ve called for him to be fired on this blog. Does that hurt my chances of getting to interview him? Would I edit myself more in the future (even subconsciously) if I was dealing directly with him, either because I felt more empathy, or simply because I didn’t want to lose the access gained? Journalists deal with this problem all the time and are often accused of getting too chummy with those they cover.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
Wait!
I don’t want to miss this. KA was at the Olshey press conference and he wrote about it. Why not you, SP? There was excellent stuff in there.
I read something about a conference call as well. Is SP gaining access? Were you invited to these things? Are the Clippers AWARE? Has the Frankenstein moment arrived? Have the Clipper’s hierarchy become… SENTIENT?
In the words(?) of my 13yr. old daughter: OMG!
I was there...
post coming soon.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
by Steve Perrin on May 21, 2009 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions
who else was there?
Roger Sterling: I bet there were people in the Bible walking around, complaining about "kids today."
Don Draper: Kids today, they have no one to look up to. Cuz they're looking up to us.
by Lawler's Law on May 21, 2009 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions
I didn't know everyone
Shelley Smith of ESPN and Cheryl Miller of TNT (Nuggets were using the facility for their practice, so they were there mostly for that). I didn’t actually recognize anyone else – Lisa Dillman was not there, nor was Ramona. As a recent fanpost points out, there’s a new guy posting on the Daily News Inside SoCal blog, so I’m assuming he was there (John Wareham). Kevin, Shelley Smith, myself and one other guy (maybe that was Wareham) were the only ones asking questions.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
by Steve Perrin on May 21, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions
did he look like Jimmy Hart from the WWF? if so, that was him...
Roger Sterling: I bet there were people in the Bible walking around, complaining about "kids today."
Don Draper: Kids today, they have no one to look up to. Cuz they're looking up to us.
by Lawler's Law on May 21, 2009 2:10 PM PDT up reply actions
congrats on getting in the "inside"
how did it all come about? it’d be an interesting read (as well as any other inside stuff you’ll have access to this upcoming season).
Roger Sterling: I bet there were people in the Bible walking around, complaining about "kids today."
Don Draper: Kids today, they have no one to look up to. Cuz they're looking up to us.
by Lawler's Law on May 21, 2009 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions
Things Evolve
Including Clips Nation. And CS/SP. And newspapers. And blogging.
This is a great topic. I’d like to see some more Blake Griffin/state of the Clips analysis at the moment since we’re in the midst of our first uptick and good news in a long time, but that’s okay.
Blogging is an incredible innovation, especially when you put it alongside the devolution of the mainstream press. It’s a writer’s dream, a great thing for anybody who likes words and social networks of any kind, who likes information. And it’s in its infancy—who knows what it will be like 5 years from now, 10 years from now, 20.
One of the best things about blogging in this specific instance, in terms of ClipsNation and The Artist formerly known as ClipperSteve, is that it’s perfectly organic. ClipsNation began because SP had something to say. He cared deeply about the Clips, loved to analyze them and follow them in detail. He was already bugging his friends with emails about what was going on with them. SP wasn’t trying to gain anything by starting ClipsNation, aside from self-expression and discussion with other people interested in the Clippers. He called himself ClipperSteve in part because it was designed to be a serious enterprise, it certainly wasn’t required to be professional, and no one knew whether Steve Perrin might need to do something in his life that didn’t exactly jibe with the rantings of ClipperSteve.
Then it turns out that the Clippers are a meaty and compelling topic. But it also happens that they have what is called, I guess, a micro-audience. There aren’t many of us out there. Again, this is a beautiful thing in its own way, because it couldn’t matter less. As long as there are some of us who care about the Clippers and who enjoy and thrive at ClipsNation, it’s all good.
In the meantime, however, this market pressure has an effect on those who used to cover the Clippers for a living—the newspaper business. They’re in crisis, and Clipper coverage is not surprisingly an early casualty. Too bad, but that’s the way it goes. It will be even harder when that old model sinks even lower and it becomes unsustainable for things that have a bigger audience, and that’s just the cultural coverage, which includes sports. The future of journalism that matters, that’s a crucial part of a civilized society, is a very tricky question.
But the decline of newspapers was a surprising, important item in the development of CS/SP. No Clipper coverage made ClipsNation an important resource. This was circumstance, but it was also the result of the hard work and excellence of CS and the way that he managed the site. The quality of content developed organically. SP/CS didn’t intend for ClipsNation to become what it is, the initial intention was just self-expression, but there’s a level of seriousness and excellence that more than justifies direct ownership and responsibility for it by Steve Perrin. As he said when the change came, it was probably overdue, but it was managed with characteristic humor and good timing.
The fact is that ClipsNation turned into something unexpected, something both necessary and excellent. And this evolution just happens to be a sign of the times. Steve P. worked his way into becoming a real person in the world of the Clippers over a significant period of time, through a consistent effort and, again, excellence.
The interesting thing is that it’s an ongoing process. It’s something we’ve been wondering about for awhile: what happens to this humble little satellite/website, chugging along through the media stratosphere, when the Clippers actually get it together and gel and compete and matter and start to get broad attention? That’s going to be the fun part. But one thing we know for sure is that SP knows how to do the job, knows how to write about the Clippers and analyze the NBA, on a level of very high competency that could just as easily be called professional, except it’s not professional. He gets to be exactly who he is, do it exactly the way he wants to, and has no worries or issues, while the guys on the other side of the equation are desperate, panicked and defensive.
Good times.
Good stuff
If ClipperSteve Perrin weren’t a very good writer (and he has improved measurably over the last tow years to a great writer) and if he weren’t also very knowledgeable about basketball, the thing probably wouldn’t work.
But he is, and it does. Thank goodness we don’t have to wait for the newspapers to become interested in the Clippers to read about them.
F-Elton!
It's funny Steve
It’s not like your name wasn’t out there when you had “Clipper Steve”. I remember a few places where you were referred to as Steve Perrin.
But, even then, Kravitz’s argument was churlish and plum dumb. I found it, through Ridiculous Scott, err whatever his actual name is yesterday, and as such I found the whole incident amusing.
All Bob Kravitz did was prove how juvenile he is.
Steve Perrin or ClipperSteve is the same to me. It doesn’t change Clips Nation at all. That’s the point. (Right?)
Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwin' Suckaz over since Nineteen Eighty-Five.....
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by 












