It’s hard to go a day without noticing yet another instance of hypocrisy from The Kansas City Star. At parent company McClatchy stock price tumbles toward zero what’s even more interesting is that the so-called journalistic integrity of the failing local institution also diminishes faster than a divorc
Hilariously, you’re wrong
OK, let me get this straight.
You say, “NOBODY consistently calls out the mediocrity routinely displayed at The K and a daily newspaper that has never really called the team to task.”
Really?
Meanwhile, the Star has a WHOLE WEBSITE devoted to tracking EVERY SINGLE THING the Royals are doing on the field this year. The commentaries by Lee Judge are pointed, insightful and also pretty damn funny.
Seriously? You think that?
Then, you’ve got Sam Mellinger writing about how the Royals need to make a trade now because winning 70 games versus 68 isn’t that important, it’s the future that matters
No. Really? This was an idea you came up with on your own?
Last – but not least – you’ve got a Royals blog and a stats blog that point out the bad and the good with the Royals at every turn.
And you can sit there with a straight face and say The Star doesn’t criticize the Royals?
Finally let me straighten you out as to how it works. The Star has a huge mailing list. The Royals pay them to access it. Get it?
This is by far the most poorly thought-out opinion piece I have ever read, period. Hearne, you are capable of much better; this bitter schlock looks terrible on your website. Because it’s totally, totally incorrect. It’s a misguided opinion at best.
Kyle Rohde
Wish I knew how many times the Star rejected Tony’s job application to make him this bitter. The above is 100% correct.
the birdman
The only thing Tony does not suck at is looking incredibly stupid:
http://www.kcconfidential.com/?page_id=11601
Such a rebel he is with that middle finger extended, as if to say, “screw you logic, I’m talking here…”
Eric
‘The Star
Bob Loblaw
FAIL
randyraley
A question..was this a direct mail piece or an insert in the paper? I wonder if anyone has cross checked the number of readers of the Star as opposed to the demo that the Royals want to reach. Yes, circulation is down but I’ll bet the unique daily visitors to the Stars website would probably dwarf anyone’s in KC. If this was an insert, then it was a “bundle” deal where the inserts run in the paper and go online too.If a direct mail piece, the Royals did get the mailing database, but it wasn’t for free. The demos to the website are skewing younger and the demos for the paper are probably older. The Star has the reach, the Royals provide the frequency, the message is pretty strong and the call to action is palatable. That all adds up to an effective campaign, covering the demos desired. It’s all about getting the message out the best way they can. And that’s the word from an advertising side of things.
Dexter Morgan
Aaaaaand the pudgy Mexican’s growing reputation of being an idiot continues to gain momentum.
MoCrash
Newspapers sell advertising; that is how they make the bulk of their money. Newspaper-owned web sites sell banner ads and access to mailing lists, some of which could be unique contacts for the advertiser. For what Tony routinely refers to the “dead tree media,” it is becoming an increasingly necessary revenue stream. Its content, as that of the display advertising in both broadsheet and broadband, is not produced by the editorial department. Neither are cross-promotions.
Gee, Tony, before you start ripping into newspapers, wouldn’t it be helpful if you had a basic knowledge of how one functions? I’ve worked in the media for 40 years and cannot recall seeing anyone offering critique who knows so little about its basic operations — unless their doing so for purely political, ideological or personal reasons.
Oh No
This is damn good stuff. Tony caught the paper doing sponsored content. As for The Star doing criticism, not really.