Twitter for journalism: Is there a line?

This week I was working on a story about a high school athlete at one of the schools I cover. It was an athlete I had talked with and written about before and we followed each other on Twitter. We'd communicated various times on there.

So when I needed to get the student on the phone quickly at the end of the week before my story was due, I used Twitter. I said I'd like to talk if the student had a chance. The student sent me a cell phone number. We talked for maybe 10 minutes for the story.

An official at the school found out what I had done and called me on Friday. This is a school that likes you to go through administration or coaches before you talk to students, which I normally do. But when I was looking to get in touch with the athlete quickly, I used the best way I knew how.

The official wasn't mad at me, per se. It was more curiosity: Are other journalists talking to students this way? Is this something the school should be watching out for? Does the newspaper have a policy about contacting student athletes?

I understand the concern. The school doesn't want a journalist talking to a young kid who says something he/she shouldn't. But as a journalist, I'm going to use the best and quickest way to get in touch with a source that I can and social media makes that very easy sometimes. And the student agreed to talk to me.

I talked to one of my editors and he agreed with me. Even before social media, we would get students cell phone numbers to call them with questions about stories. If they agreed, we had no problem using them.

So here's the question: When it comes to high school students, should there be rules in how you should be able to contact them?

If a student-athlete I cover has an unprotected Twitter account, is there anything wrong with me following it?

Should schools (high schools or colleges) have policies that force journalists to go through certain channels to talk with students? If the student agrees to talk outside of those channels, should the journalist be punished?

Take this case study from last year at the University of Kentucky, when a journalist with the student paper approached two walk-on basketball players directly for an interview. The publication was banned from an upcoming press conference.

What do you think? I'd love to hear your thoughts in the comments.

What if Andre Agassi had a Twitter?

Agassi circa 1989. Courtesy of Carine06 on Flickr.

Well apparently he does now, but that's not what I'm talking about.

What if he had one back in the 90s? Back in his "bad boy" days?

I'm in the middle of Agassi's autobiography, Open, which is a well-written and incredibly detailed, look at the tennis pro's life, especially the early part. It's often not pretty, from rebellion to mental breakdowns to drug use.

Something Agassi discusses at length in his book is the way he is - often unfairly, in his mind -characterized by the sports media. It starts with his hair and bad boy attitude, then continues with his "Image is everything" persona and then goes to writers saying that he is dropping matches on purpose. It's not pretty and, at least by his account, it's largely not true.

When these events are taking place, in the early and mid-90s, the sports media controls the conversation. Agassi doesn't really have a voice of his own other than the few quotes reporters throw into their stories. Writers characterize him by the way he looks and by his actions on the court, whether it's fair or not. Agassi's thoughts and ideas were filtered through a camera lens or a reporter's notepad.

But what if he had the technology of now? What if he had Twitter? What if he could control the conversation, say what's really on his mind, explain to his fans and followers why he does things? How would that have changed the perception of him?

Obviously, part of the answer lies in how he would have used the medium. Would he have been open and up front, or would he hide behind an image and not put much substance out there? There's no way of telling. But I imagine, reading his book now and seeing how open he is, that the public would have gotten a view of him they wouldn't have imagined.

I imagine sometimes it would show a young kid who is doing everything he can to get used to this international tennis stage, trying hard to succeed but failing more often than not. Possibly followers would see that the hair and the outfits were just show. At the same time, I imagine there would be dark moments after tough losses, where he would rant about how he hated the sport, how he felt about opponents and officials and reporters.

That's the risk athletes take when they join social media. Yes, the fans can get a clearer, less filtered look at the people they see on TV. But some things need to stay hidden, at least for a while. It's just so easy for someone to punch a few keys on a phone and press send.

Why I'm sick of Tim Tebow (and it has nothing to do with his religion)

Tim Tebow is, at the absolute best, a very mediocre quarterback. If you don't agree with that statement, stop reading now because we live on different planets.

Everyone else still with me? OK.

If you watched ESPN at all this week, you would think Tebow was Joe Montana, Dan Marino and Steve Young all wrapped into one. You would have thought he was the second coming (pun intended). I wanted to tear my eyes out.

In an earlier draft of this post, I listed out all of Tebow's stats in his games this year, but that's not really the point. Suffice it to say that in the regular season he completed less than 50 percent of his passes, was sacked 33 times and threw 12 touchdowns and six interceptions. He rushed for 660 yards and six touchdowns.

He did win six straight games. It was crazy. It was newsworthy. Tebowing became cool. I got it. It was fun to watch.

Now for the last three games of the season, games that were crucial in Denver's bid for a playoff spot. The Broncos lost all three. But let's look even closer at the final game of the season against Kansas City.

If Denver wins this game, they win the AFC East. In that 7-3 loss, Tebow was 6-22 for 60 yards. He ran the ball six times for 16 yards. He had a fumble and an interception. If it wasn't for the Oakland Raiders losing to the Chargers, the Broncos wouldn't even be in the playoffs.

It seems we've all forgotten that now, that Tebow had some really awful games this season against not great teams.

The Broncos win in overtime, again, in the first round of the playoffs, beating a Pittsburgh Steelers defense that is normally very good. Tebow is King. He threw for 316 yards and two touchdowns, including the game winner in overtime. He still only completed 10 of his 21 passes.

Now I know you're going to say, "But Corey, he's a winner!" Sure, sure. He is. He has some intangibles. It was an incredible game.

Others will assume that I am tired of Tebow because of his religious beliefs. Completely untrue, though I was really scared of the people that made so much out of the 316 passing yards (John 3:16. Get it?!?).

Here's my gripe: The love fest that ESPN and many other sports journalists had with him over this past week has been absurd. I barely heard anything this week about the three other games that happened last weekend or the three other games that will be played this weekend.

You've got Drew Brees, who broke Dan Marino's passing yards in a season record this year, and Tom Brady and Aaron Rodgers, two of the best quarterbacks in the game, playing this weekend, yet they barely warranted a mention.

I didn't hear anything about the Denver defense, which has been so good this season and has been a huge part of the team's success. Did anyone even mention the receiver that had four catches for 204 yards, including the game winning catch (and stiff arm) in the playoff game? Quick,name him.

If anything, credit should go to the Broncos' offensive coaches, who confused the Pittsburgh D with option runs and passes that Troy Polamalu looked like a pinball running around in the secondary. It was a well drawn up gameplan.

But ESPN has deified Tim Tebow. The few times I watched SportsCenter this week, I kept track of how much he was mentioned.

And.

And this.

The "Worldwide Leader in Sports" even did a "You Don't Know Tebow" faux game show. It was hard for me to not throw a remote at the TV at work.

My problem isn't so much with Tebow as it is with the way he's been covered this week, the way all other games have been pushed aside for him this week. Did you know there were NBA, NHL and college basketball games this week?

So I'm sick of Tebow. He's a good kid, so far he's a winner, but if I hear his name one more time when it's not warranted, I might just lose it.

Tebow photo credit to Jeffrey Beallon Flickr.

Everett, Tom, you boys play nice

Two boys are in the back yard playing football. Things get rough. Boy 1 says something mean about Boy 2's mom. Boy 2 yells back something equally bad about Boy 1's sister. Boy 1 throws a punch and the two are rolling around in the dirt.

The boys' mothers come out and break up the fight.

"Now, Everett, you apologize to Tom!"

Everett, with a smirk and not looking a bit sorry, says "Soooorry, Tom."

"Tom, apologize to Everett."

Tom, with fists balled and still shaking with rage, says "Sorry" through gritted teeth.

"Now you boys play nice."

---

That's basically what happened this week between North Carolina football coach Everett Withers and N.C. State football coach Tom O'Brien leading up to Saturday's rivalry game.

It started when Withers made some comments on Raleigh sports radio Wednesday about N.C. State's academics. Then O'Brien fired back, visibly upset, at a press conference the next day talking about UNC's academic violations.

Should Withers have said what he did? No. Should O'Brien have fought back? Probably not. But you know what? I love it. As a Carolina graduate, I love seeing the Tar Heel coach openly show his dislike for football rival N.C. State. (Notice I said "football rival.") After four years of watching Butch Davis downplay the game and proceed to lose, I'm glad there's some intensity coming into the game.

Then UNC chancellor Holden Thorp had to ruin it by calling and apologizing. N.C. State chancellor Randy Woodson also apologized. C'mon, guys! This is a big rivalry. This is ACC football. It can use all the excitement it can get.

I believe the reason Carolina lost most of those games was because the State players were more excited about the game that the Tar Heels. Not this time. You'd better believe that the Tar Heels and the Wolfpack will both be fired up and ready to play at 12:30 p.m. Saturday.

Dust off your britches, boys, because UNC at N.C. State is going to get rough Saturday and it's going to be fun.

Shorthand > scribble

I've been watching a lot of "Mad Men" recently and it's made me realize several things, like everyone cheats on everyone and I would love to work in an office where people wear three-piece suits and drink scotch at 10 a.m.

I also realized something that's relevant to work. There's a scene in Season 3 (or Season 4 .. they're all starting to run together) where Don Draper gets interviewed for an article in Advertising Age. Don and the reporter are at a restaurant and the reporter has a standard steno pad on the table. There's one quick shot that shows him writing on the pad, and it's all in very neat shorthand.

"Man, I wish I knew shorthand," I said to the dog asleep on the couch beside me. "That looks much easier to read."

I think all journalism students should learn shorthand. It's a lost art. I don't know a single reporter my age that uses shorthand (I'm sure they exist, I just don't know any). The closest thing I have is nearly-illegible scribbling that I can make out only if I look at it soon after writing. I'm sure I still miss tons of good quotes doing that way, even if I do get all the information.

Nearly all of my interviews are recorded now and I hate it. It's nice for an interview that I think is going to be especially long or something I need to save for the future, but it gets excessive when I'm recording post-game interviews because I don't trust my handwriting on deadline.

I think it's a mistake to just rely on recorders and technology for every interview. It's something I'm guilty of and am working on changing. It would be nice to have a short class in journalism school, or, if nothing else, make it a solid portion of news writing and reporting classes.

I'm all for journalism moving forward with new technology, but knowing how to use the old pen and paper is important. With just a few shorthand classes, maybe I wouldn't be stuck looking at this:

[The Corey Project] One year later

I was thinking in the shower a week ago (where all my good thinking happens) and I realized an important anniversary was coming up. One year ago this past Sunday, I made a snap decision that changed my life. 

I went to Walmart and bought a scale and got a couple pairs of gym shorts from the Reebok outlet store. I joined the YMCA. I replaced frozen pizzas with the occasional home cooked meal and -- more often -- with frozen Lean Cuisines.

I dove in head first and, surprisingly, stuck with it. I lost weight quickly, made it through Christmas without gaining weight and donated 90 percent of my closet to Goodwill when I moved out this summer. I am regularly running three miles and planning on signing up for my first 5K race sometime this fall or winter. I've gone down two shirt sizes and about seven or eight pant sizes. When I got refitted for a tuxedo for a friends wedding, my jacket size was five sizes smaller than it was in January.

One year ago, I decided to change my lifestyle. I still have the mentality of a fat kid, but I've managed to temper my cravings. I still love burgers, hot dogs, barbecue, tacos and pizza, but I eat them sparingly.

I still don't see a huge difference when I look in the mirror, but I know I am very different. If I forget, friends and family are nice enough to remind me.

I still have a belly and I'm still technically "overweight," but I'm 60 pounds lighter than the obese Corey of September 2010. 

Taken in October, 2010, about a week after I started the Corey Project. I was about 248 pounds.

Sixty pounds. That's a Gracie and a half. Sometimes in the gym I pick up two 30-pound weights just to see how much 60 pounds really is. I don't understand how my body carried that around.

Taken a couple months ago. 

I'm still not done. My optimistic self thought I would be down to 170-ish at this time, but that's a bit unrealistic. I have gotten stuck in a rut with my weight, but that was to be expected. I'm looking for ways to ramp up my workouts and to control my diet more. I would love to get down to 170. Really, I would just love to get rid of the little belly I have left.

What's more important than the numbers, though, is the change I've made in the way I think about food and working out. I like to run (most of the time). I want to eat healthy. If I have a couple bad meals in a week, I feel like crap. I rarely drink sodas and drink a lot more water.

I refuse to let myself go back to what I was a year ago. Let me type that again, just to reinforce it: I refuse to let myself go back to what I was a year ago.

That's what's important.

My editor would kill me if I tweeted

I heard something yesterday that really bothered me.

I was sitting in a session about social media at the Watchdog Journalism Workshop hosted by McClatchy and Queens University of Charlotte and someone asked the inevitable question about scooping themselves on Twitter.

Why, they wondered, would you post breaking news on Twitter when you're not linking back to your site and don't get the pageviews? Isn't the point of Twitter, he said, to drive people to your site?

That part bothered me enough that I actually spoke, something I normally try to avoid in those situations. But what he said next was worse.

"My editor would kill me if I tweeted."

Even the leader of the session was taken aback and said he hoped that wasn't true. Whether it's true or not, the fact that a reporter in 2011 is scared to tweet or use social media is frightening.

First, he is missing the point of social media, which both I and others in the audience tried to drive home: social media is about building a community and interacting. As a reporter, you build your brand and reputation through social media. Even if you're not driving traffic with every tweet, if the community comes to trust you through Twitter they will come to you both for information -- going to your stories online and in the paper -- and with information, leads and story ideas you can use in the future.

If my followers on Twitter trust me as the go-to source for sports news in south Charlotte, when I tweet something about Providence High football, they're probably going to click the link because they trust me and have interacted with me in the past. If all I do is spit out links, they'll likely get bored and move on.

If there is an editor out there who is so against social media, we need to have an intervention. Reporters should be tweeting. All of them, in my opinion.

Good journalists should engage with their audience and start conversations. It's a big part of what we do. That's why I make a point to respond to every tweet, answer every email and return every call. You never know what may come of it.