Everyone who regularly reads this column knows my take on the current state of boxing media.
I mean, really, just look at the supposed news coverage of events with affiliate links built into the story, leading to sales pages for those same events. Look at the volumes of milquetoast editorials that pick only on safe targets and, very often, don’t say much at all. Look at the gushing profiles written as if they came right off the desk of a public relations firm. Look at the endless wasted space devoted to “So and so is eager to fight for a world title/is in the best shape of his life” pap.
Hell, boxing’s oldest (American) publication, Ring Magazine, is now in the scythe-handed editorial clutches of a guy in Turki Alalshikh, who reportedly had a kid sentenced to 19 years in prison for an insulting tweet and is funded by a Saudi regime that, per the CIA, actually murders journalists.
Oh yeah, and the “Bible of Boxing” is also staging their own shows now, dispatching their writers to cover those events glowingly.
Anyway…
I decided to take myself out of the equation in this piece and let others do the talking. So, I reached out to some respected (respectable) boxing media people and posed them questions regarding the state of current boxing media and their ideal media world. Many, of course, didn’t respond. Some wanted to contribute anonymously. Others were fine with matching their names to their ideas and ideals.
Here’s what I got:
Jake Donovan of Boxingscene pointed at the current dynamic, where money has bought alliances and the pursuit of sustainable paydays has replaced the pursuit of proper coverage.
“The race to align with the new powers-that-be creates an unfortunate trickle-down effect,” Donovan said. “The sport’s top/best-known writers have become reliable allies with and a soft landing space for promoters, managers, etc., watered all the way down to where objectivity is now viewed as unfavorable coverage. Meanwhile, those who still take pride in their job wind up left out in the cold, with limited-to-no-access.”
As for who gets in and gets to wield disproportionate influence, Donovan also feels that some questions need to be asked in an ideal boxing media world.
“There would be a vetting process,” he added. “We keep welcoming new money with open arms, yet never ask even the most basic questions.”
And what would those questions be? A veteran writer who chose to remain anonymous, refused to point fingers, but was eager to spotlight a major problem.
“There’s no money in being a journalist these days. If you want to be a working boxing writer, you almost have to compromise yourself because those paying a living wage are the people, like promoters and like certain foreign interests, with a vested interest in sponsoring media coverage.”
“Nobody’s figured out how to monetize good journalism in boxing,” another writer added.
“In an ideal world, boxing would generate the audience to demand deeper coverage and encourage media investment in a range of independent reporting,” a veteran scribe added. “As it stands, that isn’t there and the type of reporter we used to have in the States who hung out in the gyms and grinded it out is largely extinct. Without that, what’s left does what they have to to pay the bills.”
Gordon Marino, veteran boxing writer and Professor Emeritus of Philosophy, feels that the current media scene is too focused on salacious eye-catchers and has deviated from coverage of the actual sport.
“Too much click bait from WWE type frays at weigh ins, Instead, feed me more in-depth analysis of the technique that makes boxing the sweet science,” Marino commented. “As for live commentary, give me Don Dunphy, instead of madly talking heads precipitously framing the way viewers see the action.
“Sadly, driven by the number of views, the boxing media today seems reluctant to make readers think and would prefer to highlight some scandalous act than dig into the rich inner lives of the fighters who make their daily bread and house payments by risking it all under the lights.”
One anonymous veteran writer opined as to why boxing media these days is heavy on fluff and light on insight.
“These guys don’t really know boxing. They don’t know anything about the sport or the athletes and they don’t care to take the time to learn. They’re comfortable kids who see that the only way to make money is through scoops and by playing the game of proximity as power.”
“Breaking news has become the driving force in the sport,” Donovan noted. “Our best-known journalists would rather race to tell you that a fight is done, rather than expose the MANY, many ills of the sport. Writers choose to protect their source(s) at all costs, and flat out take sides. Even simple fact-based reporting is now tainted with alliance-influenced opinions, to where the level of distrust between the fans and media is at an all-time high (or all-time low, depending on the viewpoint).”
“I’ve never seen a group of people so perpetually afraid,” said another anonymous veteran boxing writer, in reference to boxing media. “They all run in the same circles, speak to the same people, read the same writers, and cycle through the same jobs. They’re deathly afraid of being ‘out,’ so they never push too hard. You can’t be an effective journalist or communicator like that.
“That’s why I enjoy your work, Paul, and consider you an essential voice. I don’t always agree with you, but you are fearless and you don’t care about stepping on toes. I’m convinced you actually like stepping on toes. That’s good. We need more of that and less politics of quid pro quo access and polite banality. The fact that you don’t have a larger platform is a testament to the lack of a backbone in this industry.”
Mario Salomone of the Italian boxing site, boxepunch.com, meanwhile, chose to focus on the intellectual honesty (or lack thereof) among many in the media today.
“Too often, we see media figures going to great lengths just to avoid admitting they were wrong. They twist themselves into knots and cling to the most far-fetched justifications in a desperate attempt to prove they were flawless, coming up with all sorts of excuses to explain developments that clearly contradicted their original predictions,” Salomone said.
“The egos of some journalists are so inflated that they convince themselves of their own infallibility, building a fictional world in their minds where everything aligns with their preconceived view of events.”
So, if this boxing media of ours is in a bad place, how can we get it right? What’s the ideal?
Cliff Rold, formerly of Boxingscene and currently the owner of The Corner Stool substack, makes the case that things have always been problematic.
“I don’t know what the ideal is. Never had it,” Rold said. “Looking back, there were pubs in the bag for networks and promoters…sports reporting in general has always been messy.”
“Ideally, you wouldn’t be working for the people you have to cover,” said another boxing scribe, who chose to remain anonymous. “But if that has to be the case, then those people paying the bills should have the courage to let their writers have full editorial freedom.
“When all is said and done, I point to that old saying: Journalism is saying something that the powerful don’t want to be said. Everything else is public relations.”
Got something for Magno? Send it here: paulmagno@theboxingtribune.com
