The CardBoard
The ubiquity of news - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: The ubiquity of news (/thread-9380.html)


The ubiquity of news - Redrum - 06-25-2015

I consider myself a member of all three boards and a paying member of the Bootleg and Cardinal Report.  If I've learned anything in the last 15 or so years, it's that college sports, Stanford sports, news cannot be contained.  My stance is that premium (paying members) get the privilege of reading breaking news first and --perhaps-- in more detail, but it's unrealistic to think those members "own" news first released on a paying site.  I suppose, in some instances, the rules of copyright could concern the owner/operators of those sites, but in practical terms those concerns might not be worth much.  If  Andy Drukarev gets a great story on some new recruit and claims copyright on it, how can he claim copyright on the fact of , say, a commitment although the actual body of the story is protected?  In practical terms, he can't.  Same with the Bootleg.  It's a fool's errand to try.  Right about here is where Yvonne might swoop in, but that doesn't change the way things work.


That said, quite apart from the above,  I think it is poor form to be instantaneously propagating news from one of the paid boards to here.  I tend to use the standard of whether it is available in any of the multitude of alternative channels surrounding college football.  Once it's out and running, then an embargo is silly.  I note that news I read on our two premiums sites invariably ends up posted here before I ever could, even if I wanted to.  There are just faster internet gunslingers in town.  For what little it's worth, I think it's poor form for a handfull of Stanford fans to be openly and repetitively recruiting Bootleg members, on the Booty's own boards,  to join the other commercial site.  Just like -- back in the Pleistocene, it was poor form for Bootleg die-hards to come over to the Cardboard spitting hostility and trying to strangle this internet baby in its crib, so to speak.  The way its working out,  Cardinal Report has Drukarev, the hardest working man in the Stanford football recruiting biz...but a very small paying corps of posters.  The Bootleg has its network coverage advantage, a large membership and is struggling with local coverage. Abetting their own vulnerability to the competition.  And we get to sit here with some sort of Paradise,  with some of the most fun, articulate posting members.  It's just much more fun here with all of y'all.  Let's hope we don't **** it up.

Re: The ubiquity of news - CowboyIndian - 06-25-2015

Where is the "Like" button?


You pretty much summed up my feelings but much more diplomatically than is my wont. Thumbs up!





Re: The ubiquity of news - Hulk01 - 06-25-2015

I wish I could endure the Bootleg, but the fumes for the toxins overwhelm me.  I no longer have the stomach for it.

Rivals actually suffered a bit of that recently, but the storm left town.

It seems imperfect that most non Rivals subscribing Stanford fans have decided they are willing to get the recruiting news a couple days late, so why subscribe?  But I also realize there are many fans who don't care that much about recruiting, and certainly not enough to pay for what is primarily a Stanford football recruiting news site.  Perhaps we will have to leave that to Rivals to figure out.  I don't think anyone is going to see dollar value in covering Stanford football recruiting, frankly, and that it leaves when Andy does, which cannot be that many months from now.




Re: The ubiquity of news - PrinceLightfoot - 06-25-2015

(06-25-2015, 01:06 PM)Hulk01 link Wrote:I don't think anyone is going to see dollar value in covering Stanford football recruiting, frankly, and that it leaves when Andy does, which cannot be that many months from now.

:o :'(

Re: The ubiquity of news - BostonCard - 06-25-2015

The reason to subscribe to Rivals is not the news, since facts are not copyrightable, and always come out sooner rather than later (and in today's twitter age, mostly sooner).  If it's your cup of tea, the reason to subscribe to Rivals is getting Andy's analysis and interviews with recruits and prospects, which are subject to copyright and which can't simply be retransmitted here.  It isn't worth it to me personally, but it is to a lot of people, and if so, you should subscribe and respect Andy's work.

BC

Re: The ubiquity of news - oman - 06-25-2015

Got my mindfulness gong working and I'm about to quit all news any day now.

Well, except for checking 247 for recruiting updates every few hours.

Re: The ubiquity of news - TrumpCard - 06-25-2015

How many subscribers do the Cardinal Sports Report have and how many does it claim to need to stay afloat?


Full disclosure:  I subscribe to the CSR, but I read here more.  In fact, I was getting enough information here to satisfy my craving and I prefer the broader scope of discussion here, but I felt that too much of the football information here originated from the CSR and I perceived myself as freeloading. 

Re: The ubiquity of news - BigEasyCard - 06-26-2015

(06-25-2015, 08:07 AM)Redrum link Wrote:I consider myself a member of all three boards and a paying member of the Bootleg and Cardinal Report.  If I've learned anything in the last 15 or so years, it's that college sports, Stanford sports, news cannot be contained.  My stance is that premium (paying members) get the privilege of reading breaking news first and --perhaps-- in more detail, but it's unrealistic to think those members "own" news first released on a paying site.  I suppose, in some instances, the rules of copyright could concern the owner/operators of those sites, but in practical terms those concerns might not be worth much.  If  Andy Drukarev gets a great story on some new recruit and claims copyright on it, how can he claim copyright on the fact of , say, a commitment although the actual body of the story is protected?  In practical terms, he can't.  Same with the Bootleg.  It's a fool's errand to try.  Right about here is where Yvonne might swoop in, but that doesn't change the way things work.


That said, quite apart from the above,  I think it is poor form to be instantaneously propagating news from one of the paid boards to here.  I tend to use the standard of whether it is available in any of the multitude of alternative channels surrounding college football.  Once it's out and running, then an embargo is silly.  I note that news I read on our two premiums sites invariably ends up posted here before I ever could, even if I wanted to.  There are just faster internet gunslingers in town.  For what little it's worth, I think it's poor form for a handfull of Stanford fans to be openly and repetitively recruiting Bootleg members, on the Booty's own boards,  to join the other commercial site.  Just like -- back in the Pleistocene, it was poor form for Bootleg die-hards to come over to the Cardboard spitting hostility and trying to strangle this internet baby in its crib, so to speak.  The way its working out,  Cardinal Report has Drukarev, the hardest working man in the Stanford football recruiting biz...but a very small paying corps of posters.  The Bootleg has its network coverage advantage, a large membership and is struggling with local coverage. Abetting their own vulnerability to the competition.  And we get to sit here with some sort of Paradise,  with some of the most fun, articulate posting members.  It's just much more fun here with all of y'all.  Let's hope we don't **** it up.

Well said, Redrum.  Extra points for correct Southern English!

Geaux Cardinal!

Re: The ubiquity of news - winflop - 06-26-2015

(06-26-2015, 05:13 AM)garvin link Wrote:Sorry, but my reaction to posting here or anywhere else of facts first reported on a premium board is, tough. Nobody thinks twice about repeating news broken in stories in the Chron or the Mercury. There is no reason a website should expect more gentle treatment.


What if your premium [size=78%]membership agreement to states that you will not repost information disclosed there?[/size]

A couple of comments - Redrum - 06-26-2015

I agree that Drukarev is likely to be heading out of the the CSR,  either because he needs to earn a real living wage or his focus and drive will be raised to a national or regional level.


I also agree that Twitter could put the coverage of recruiting-- as we have been used to it-- in history's trash bin.  Recruits seem perfectly able, indeed enthusiastic, to shape and control their own public image and recruiting history.  The only obstacle would be a kind of bandwidth limit of the recruiting audience.  Aggregating and sorting out recruiting news is the value-add for the college pay sites.  Personally, I don't have the bandwidth or the drive to navigate a world deluged with recruits' special Twitter language and conscious (playful or scheming) manipulation of their recruiting news.  It's their right to do that, but not my interest to follow along.

Re: The ubiquity of news - BobK - 06-26-2015

I'm been a Rivals member for about 9 years a bootie for 20 or so.  And have been here off and on since the beginning.  All great sites.

Far more subscribers to Rivals than people might think.  Posting is low reading is not.

Great to have all three sites.

Andy is bright and certainly knows how to make a living.  Never assume



Re: The ubiquity of news - Hank 91 - 06-28-2015

I've never understood the rivalry between the three sites, probably because I found the Cardboard after the Great Board Wars. At any rate, I subscribe to CSR because Drukarev is phenomenal, and like Boston Card, I enjoy his interviews with recruits. Also, the recruiting chats that he occasionally hosts are great. As for bulletin board conversation, nothing beats this place. I've enjoyed conversations about TV shows, movies, music, tea, coffee, and grammar -- oh, and Stanford sports, too. What more could you want?

Re: The ubiquity of news - 81alum - 06-29-2015

I thoroughly agree with all that Redrum said, but would like to extend it a bit.  In WBB there is still the fine Fast Break Club site.  It does not have a board, but Marian Cortesi and our own Bob K blog there.  I often get insight from things that they post and sometimes private offline conversations.    While the FBC site is not a paid site, I always try to credit it when it has inspired some insight, and with Bob's generous knowledge I like to wait for him to post here himself.  In other words, observation of good form is important whatever the legalities.  The FBC often links the Cardboard posts I do on the list of press coverage articles they post after each game, so that give the Cardboard a link to the greater WBB community. 

I've also noticed some friendly sharing and conversations that go on at the Boneyard and at the Bear Insider.  I've not posted in either place, but there are a few Stanfordian WBB fans who circulate here and also put in appearances in enemy territory.  Once in a while I glean information from those boards and when I transmit it here, I try to credit the home boards.

There is also a bit of discretion involved in transmitting the information from the "chalk talks" hosted by the WBB assistant coaches before home games.  The coaches are very discrete--I think this is Tara's way of giving her junior most assistants a very friendly crowd to practice for the day when they regularly face sports reporters at real press conferences, and so they don't normally betray any confidences or say anything overtly negative about anyone.  But I think it important to be clear when insights come from.  And since I like them to be open with us, I don't want to jeopardize the content of their presentations by writing it up in an embarrassing or indiscreet way. 

As for the various WBB recruiting sites, my rule of thumb is that I don't pay for any of them, so if I can access the information it must be in the public domain.  Bob I know does subscribe and it can be difficult under those circumstances to know where the paywall ends and the more publicly accessible information begins.  But when I do link a story of interest the chances are it the power of Google that tipped me off.