Mavericks owner too harsh about lack of real online journalism

Online journalism is often accused of allowing aimless articles, inaccuracies and sloppy reporting. Mark Cuban, the owner of the Dallas Mavericks, is one of the foremost critics of the rising online journalism industry. He believes that majority of online journalists are negligent about upholding the values of journalism and are not as committed to “real” reporting as traditional print journalists are.

In a blog post on April 4, Cuban wrote, “I’m a firm believer that [Internet reporters’] interests are not aligned with sport teams like the Mavs, but in fact are diametrically opposed. They tend to look at the number of page views they get of any article as their ‘ratings.’”

Cuban gives examples of traffic-generating questions he hears from online writers. “‘Are you upset about your divorce?’ or Who is better: Kobe or Babe Ruth?’” He believes these types of shoddy questions “make a recipient look at the person asking and either roll their eyes or wonder why the person is even there.”

But such qualms are unfounded; online journalists should be considered legitimate reporters because of the speed and magnitude with which they can spread essential content to the public.

In a world where the media options are so diverse, it is difficult for a reporter to compete with a plethora of other stories and their often-freelance writers. Cuban’s views are only factual toward the few online reporters who feel the need to dig up insignificant facts and rumors that pique the public interests.

Although journalism is about taking a subject and looking and discovering the person or topic from a different angle, this commonly used tactic of public provocation shames the name of journalism. It is unfair for Cuban to stereotype against an entire profession because of the actions of a very few.

Despite the lack of depth in some articles floating in the web, readers still encounter a wide variety of legitimate stories, from an in-depth obituary to a witty opinion piece on court affairs.

There are still genuine online reporters who stick to the code of journalistic ethics, especially the ones who report to the international audience. With the power of the Internet, writers can spread the information of global affairs, such as that about the Japanese tsunami and the 2011 Egyptian revolution, to readers incredibly fast. This speed is incomparable to the amount of time it would take for such vital news to be delivered onto print paper.

Cuban’s criticism of online journalism stems from his comparison between print and online journalism. He praises the newspaper for its detailed accuracy and depth of reporting. However, his generalization should not be assumed correct because not every newspaper reporter maintains integrity like Cuban expects.

Falsifications can be committed anywhere, including in traditional journalism. A Pulitzer Prize-winning story about the life of an 8-year-old heroin addict, “Jimmy’s World,” by Janet Cooke, was found to be completely fabricated. Scandals, defamation, slander and outright fraudulent stories are not unique to the online journalism realm.

Although online media is perceived to many such as Cuban as another media to access tabloid journalism, it enables the quick relay of crucial information, which Cuban disregards in his criticism. As long as online journalists continue to produce a balance of crucial and trivial journalism, then the media is still an indispensable source to the world.

To see Cuban’s blog entry, visit http://blogmaverick.com/2011/04/04/whats-the-role-of-media-for-sports-teams/