MFS62 wrote: We're not the only ones concerned with current baseball writing. http://www.billjamesonline.com/modern_baseball_writing/ Interesting read. I think the reduction in the number of newspapers, and the resultant reduction of newspaper sports writers has been off set by coverage in other media. But I feel that has made the writers who remain get snarkier and more outrageous as they battle for readership and that had made them less readable. Not sure if this should be spun off into a separate thread. Later This this is the key paragraph: It’s not all good. There are team-centric, unpaid bloggers and writers for mainstream, or wanna-be mainstream sites, some of them even making decent money, who do little more than regurgitate passages from other sites’ stories, maybe adding a few sentences of "analysis" that add nothing of value. All that "content" does is crowd good writing and original analysis out of the sports space. The Internet creates more noise, and sometimes it's harder to see the signal. But it's there, and it's strong. And the thing about the noise is, sometimes it's not just noise, but someone else signal. You may find tweets about food/dinner annoying, but someone else in the same space enjoys them. There's no more "I can't believe the Times wasted space covering X" because we have unlimited space. There are more great writers out there, it's just less linear. You have to put in the work yourself to find them, they're not automatically the regular columnist at the New York Times. And that's the real key. Previously it was a bit of a tautology, "This guy's the best because he writes for the Times. He writes for the Times because he's the best" There were almost definitely better writers out there that didn't go into sports writing or get the chance, that today could spend a few hours a week on a blog and get noticed.