If you haven’t gotten enough of me griping about media coverage of sports economic reports here — or just want to read about it all in one place — hie thee to FAIR.org’s newly expanded website, where I’ve written all about how the media all too often parrot claims of economic windfalls from sports without even checking if they have any basis in fact.
There are occasional exceptions, obviously (I cite several), but as one journalist who has done time fact-checking his peers says:
“For every one good article you see, there are ten others that don’t bother to do it, and the good ones just get lost,” says Noah Pransky of WTSP-TV in Tampa Bay, who also reports on sports economics at his own website, Shadow of the Stadium. “An industry joke is that reporters have always been mathematically challenged, but the problem has been magnified in recent years by the 24-hour news cycle and staff depletion at traditional media outlets.”
Remember, kids: Just because you read it in the newspaper doesn’t mean it’s true! Blogs, though, are 100% accurate. I read a study that said so.
Great job Neil. It seems though, that this some logic and poor reporting is in place for almost all public projects that even have a whiff of public benefit. Here is the Coachella Valley we are having the CV Link, a glorified bike path, crammed down our throats. Apparently it will create millions in economic benefit and maybe even cure cancer.
There is an economic bump for hosting a Super Bowl, but nowhere near what its embellished to be… Right now:
Are the hotels full in the Phoenix metro? yes
Are there now more wealthy individuals in town dining, shopping a bit, treating their families? sure
Is there a large media presence? thats a given
Would any of that be happening in Arizona without the Super Bowl? maybe 1 out 500 would be covering the Waste Management Open(?) but comparing the NFL best event to an average PGA event is laughable.
It’s not like World Cup where the have to build a (5) new stadium(s) to keep the economic benefits, oh wait-
The problem of journalists blindly parroting back alleged facts their interview subject (or “guest”) provides is not just a sports news issue, though.
Listen to any of the alleged top news shows on almost any network today… they are essentially infomercials for whatever disgraceful and self serving ideas that the guest wants to ooze onto you.
And the allegedly trained journalist hosting the program? Just a pitching machine set permanently on “soft changeup”.
It doesn’t matter to me whether the shameless shill is trying to tell me how great it will be for me if I vote for a voluntary special tax to build a stadium I’ll never be able to afford to visit, or whether it’s a government official (who holds shares in defense companies) telling me how important it is we go to war with somebody we’ve never met and who has no ability to do us any meaningful harm.
It’s the same shakedown game, as Piggy would say…