While I do appreciate what USCHO does for our women and their/our sport, if you check today of the cover pages for both genders, you'll notice that the men have an article dating June 18, where the women's cover story is from March 29! Seriously! Like there's nothing going on since then?! Maybe cover the National team tryout camps...there's a thought. My annoyance with this issue goes back years and it never seems to be addressed. I enjoy and favour USCHO for my women's hockey coverage, but even ESPN took the hint with their upgrading to ESPNW!! C'mon USHCO, I'm sure you could find some retired parents with plenty of collegiate hockey insight to help your coverage....heck, just read your own threads! I'm just saying....
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
An Issue with USCHO and their Women's Coverage
- Thread starter zoofer
- Start date
Hux
Alfond to Ridder & rinks in between
Re: An Issue with USCHO and their Women's Coverage
Blame it on ARM...he is a summer slacker. Seriously though, just what kind of coverage do you expect when nothing really happens in the world of women's COLLEGE hockey between the months of March and October?
Blame it on ARM...he is a summer slacker. Seriously though, just what kind of coverage do you expect when nothing really happens in the world of women's COLLEGE hockey between the months of March and October?
Re: An Issue with USCHO and their Women's Coverage
So it's now a couple of weeks before school begins....both Canada and USA are having their respective tryout weekends, and the cover page on USCHO Women's hockey is from March 29!! Seriously! Not one story out there to be written on the women's game in 5 months? Somehow I don't find the effort put forth at all....
So it's now a couple of weeks before school begins....both Canada and USA are having their respective tryout weekends, and the cover page on USCHO Women's hockey is from March 29!! Seriously! Not one story out there to be written on the women's game in 5 months? Somehow I don't find the effort put forth at all....
UCONN FAN
New member
Re: An Issue with USCHO and their Women's Coverage
This complaint appears every 4 years or so...Just the way it is.
This complaint appears every 4 years or so...Just the way it is.
Re: An Issue with USCHO and their Women's Coverage
Not that it reaches the same level but should women accept .76 cents to a man's dollar earned? Why is it that movie trailers always show the male star's name but not the female lead? I'm sure that every woman can give more examples of inequalities....why accept that the coverage isn't what it might be? I thought the reason for a chat board was to bring up sh*t to talk about.....go back to sleep for another month....sorry to wake you!
Not that it reaches the same level but should women accept .76 cents to a man's dollar earned? Why is it that movie trailers always show the male star's name but not the female lead? I'm sure that every woman can give more examples of inequalities....why accept that the coverage isn't what it might be? I thought the reason for a chat board was to bring up sh*t to talk about.....go back to sleep for another month....sorry to wake you!
Re: An Issue with USCHO and their Women's Coverage
You're right. It doesn't reach the same level. It's not even in the same stratosphere.
This is a FREE college hockey website staffed primarily if not entirely by volunteers. If you want new content in the summer then feel free to volunteer and help create some. USCHO doesn't owe you anything.
You're right. It doesn't reach the same level. It's not even in the same stratosphere.
This is a FREE college hockey website staffed primarily if not entirely by volunteers. If you want new content in the summer then feel free to volunteer and help create some. USCHO doesn't owe you anything.
Re: An Issue with USCHO and their Women's Coverage
The problem as I see it is that USCHO wants to have it both ways. They want us to believe that they are serious journalists who cover college hockey. They want us to believe that their operation ought to be taken seriously as people who cover the sport, not just as a bunch of volunteers but as professionals.
My problems with their operation go back a long ways, pretty much to the founding of the website. Adam Wodon (back when he was a part of USCHO) and I got into some heated discussions about it. Several others people who are still a part of the operation objected to my comments without ever offering rebuttals that actually addressed what I was saying. The issues with the website's coverage of women's hockey are pretty much at the bottom of the list of ways that I think USCHO's self image bears no resemblance at all to the reality of what they produce. But it is emblematic of the problems.
Either they're a bunch of volunteers who owe us nothing or they are people we should take seriously as the leading source of coverage of NCAA hockey. They can't be both, at least not as they themselves have defined their role. (Though, admittedly, they could be neither. They could be, as I have argued elsewhere, people who desperately want to be journalists but have gotten way too close to those they are supposed to be covering.) But the defense you are offering is a cop out.
The problem as I see it is that USCHO wants to have it both ways. They want us to believe that they are serious journalists who cover college hockey. They want us to believe that their operation ought to be taken seriously as people who cover the sport, not just as a bunch of volunteers but as professionals.
My problems with their operation go back a long ways, pretty much to the founding of the website. Adam Wodon (back when he was a part of USCHO) and I got into some heated discussions about it. Several others people who are still a part of the operation objected to my comments without ever offering rebuttals that actually addressed what I was saying. The issues with the website's coverage of women's hockey are pretty much at the bottom of the list of ways that I think USCHO's self image bears no resemblance at all to the reality of what they produce. But it is emblematic of the problems.
Either they're a bunch of volunteers who owe us nothing or they are people we should take seriously as the leading source of coverage of NCAA hockey. They can't be both, at least not as they themselves have defined their role. (Though, admittedly, they could be neither. They could be, as I have argued elsewhere, people who desperately want to be journalists but have gotten way too close to those they are supposed to be covering.) But the defense you are offering is a cop out.
Re: An Issue with USCHO and their Women's Coverage
Sorry but if you want to come on here and expect something for free without offering any way to make it better, then you don't deserve to complain about the product you're receiving.
If you don't like the content, offer a way to help produce more content, or go find another free website where you can get more/better content for the price you're paying currently. Beeyatching about a lack of content, during the offseason, when you're not willing to contribute anything yourself is really pointless.
Sorry but if you want to come on here and expect something for free without offering any way to make it better, then you don't deserve to complain about the product you're receiving.
If you don't like the content, offer a way to help produce more content, or go find another free website where you can get more/better content for the price you're paying currently. Beeyatching about a lack of content, during the offseason, when you're not willing to contribute anything yourself is really pointless.
Re: An Issue with USCHO and their Women's Coverage
We're in the off-season, and other than speculation and gossip there's not a lot happening or much real news to write about. Beyond this site, the amount of coverage (pub) devoted to men's vs. women's college hockey is roughly proportional to the average attendance of men's vs. women's hockey. Although I'm a big fan of the women's game, this seems fair to me.
We're in the off-season, and other than speculation and gossip there's not a lot happening or much real news to write about. Beyond this site, the amount of coverage (pub) devoted to men's vs. women's college hockey is roughly proportional to the average attendance of men's vs. women's hockey. Although I'm a big fan of the women's game, this seems fair to me.
Re: An Issue with USCHO and their Women's Coverage
A classic "Chicken and Egg" argument, which in this case, one could argue, has merit. But the counter-argument is, "at the end of the day" if the game is truly compelling enough the fans will come, and the publicity will follow. We began to see some evidence of this towards the end of last season here in the Twin Cities, as the Gophers' winning streak continued and ultimately resulted in a second-straight national title. Hopefully the fan base and the corresponding level of 'pub' will continue to grow this season.
A classic "Chicken and Egg" argument, which in this case, one could argue, has merit. But the counter-argument is, "at the end of the day" if the game is truly compelling enough the fans will come, and the publicity will follow. We began to see some evidence of this towards the end of last season here in the Twin Cities, as the Gophers' winning streak continued and ultimately resulted in a second-straight national title. Hopefully the fan base and the corresponding level of 'pub' will continue to grow this season.
But yet colleges and university's consider USCHO a legit media source and recognize their USCHO All Americans in March. I don't agree at all with that. Same with sites like D3hockey.com
These "volunteers" have no idea who players are and go by what SID's have to say.
Re: An Issue with USCHO and their Women's Coverage
USCHO is a business, not a charity. If they would like to hire me, well, hey, starting next Monday I'm available.
There are a lot of things in this world which have a monetary cost of zero that still deserve to be criticized. The websites of most newspapers are free; that doesn't stop people from complaining about bad reporting, nor should it.
The much better response, as approximated by D2D, is that USCHO has made a rational business decision that customer demand doesn't justify more coverage of women's hockey. Which is fine. I don't have a problem with that in the abstract. My response stems more from the amount of sanctimony I heard from some of the sites founders about what their role in the college hockey world is. Admittedly, though, it's been more than a decade since I talked to any of them and so things may have changed since they became a part of the Bristol Behemoth.
(Having a monetary cost of zero is not the same thing as free. Things often have costs that are measured in something other than money, as I spent a lot of effort trying to teach my students over the past few weeks.)
USCHO is a business, not a charity. If they would like to hire me, well, hey, starting next Monday I'm available.
There are a lot of things in this world which have a monetary cost of zero that still deserve to be criticized. The websites of most newspapers are free; that doesn't stop people from complaining about bad reporting, nor should it.
The much better response, as approximated by D2D, is that USCHO has made a rational business decision that customer demand doesn't justify more coverage of women's hockey. Which is fine. I don't have a problem with that in the abstract. My response stems more from the amount of sanctimony I heard from some of the sites founders about what their role in the college hockey world is. Admittedly, though, it's been more than a decade since I talked to any of them and so things may have changed since they became a part of the Bristol Behemoth.
(Having a monetary cost of zero is not the same thing as free. Things often have costs that are measured in something other than money, as I spent a lot of effort trying to teach my students over the past few weeks.)
David De Remer
Moderator
Re: An Issue with USCHO and their Women's Coverage
It's obviously true that an organization cannot collect revenue while at the same time claiming that the volunteer status of much of its workforce gives it immunity from criticism. Anyone who has ever said that regarding USCHO clearly was not speaking for the organization as a whole.
But when it comes to criticizing individual staff or volunteers, fans don't have much ground to criticize individuals who have volunteered or accepted low salary during the season for not doing more work in the offseason. The only exception would be if the individual agreed to take on responsibility and failed to do so AND crowded out a willing volunteer from taking on that responsibility.
What to do in the offseason is a challenge for any organization focused on college sports. You see that with ESPNU too, which mainly seems to replay championship events in the offseason rather than providing any new content.
My opinion is that the difference in men's and women's coverage in the offseason is much more about intrinsic motivation of the staff rather than the organization making a conscious decision to disregard women's hockey. That doesn't mean the current women's staff is less intrinsically motivated on average -- the men's staff is much larger. Note also that the site is still posting women's news in the offseason, though clearly there is less feature coverage.
When I was women's editor from Fall 2004-Spring 2007, I did make some effort in the offseason to cover national team news. (Note I haven't been paid by the site since 2007 or held any staff position, unless you count permanent moderator status on this forum.) I went to at least one Under-22 event in the summer that happened to be within driving distance of my day job. I believed the prevalence of recent college players and alumni made women's hockey unique among Olympic team sports and I liked to promote that. But no one in the USCHO organization obligated me to do any of that, and only during that point of my life have I been willing to take on that effort. I do think in the grand scheme of things, offseason coverage of women's hockey at USCHO is small potatoes in terms of growing the sport. The primary effort I still make for women's hockey is to criticize media outlets that I feel aren't treating the sport fairly, particularly those endorsing the removal of women's hockey from the Olympic program.
I'm sympathetic to the concern that the difference in men's and women's coverage propagates inequities between the two sports, and I wish I could still do more. This reaffirms my disgust when anyone claims that the current attendance and television ratings of men's vs. women's sports are a pure reflection of the quality of the two and have absolutely nothing to do with persistent effects of past discrimination. Media coverage and fan bases and history are a huge part of being a sports fan, and women's sports can't simply catch up to men's sports overnight.
Lastly, I would guess that covering women's hockey has most likely been a money-losing proposition for USCHO based on direct accounting. But I also would hope that the coverage of women's (and D3) hockey for USCHO has still boosted the site's brand relative to other college hockey websites, so that the decision to cover women's hockey has nonetheless been good business too. Yet at the highest levels, I believe the USCHO executive board does have intrinsic motivation to do what's right in promoting the growth of college hockey, so there's no question that its support of women's hockey is the right decision, and I greatly appreciate its unique efforts among the media in promoting women's college hockey.
It's obviously true that an organization cannot collect revenue while at the same time claiming that the volunteer status of much of its workforce gives it immunity from criticism. Anyone who has ever said that regarding USCHO clearly was not speaking for the organization as a whole.
But when it comes to criticizing individual staff or volunteers, fans don't have much ground to criticize individuals who have volunteered or accepted low salary during the season for not doing more work in the offseason. The only exception would be if the individual agreed to take on responsibility and failed to do so AND crowded out a willing volunteer from taking on that responsibility.
What to do in the offseason is a challenge for any organization focused on college sports. You see that with ESPNU too, which mainly seems to replay championship events in the offseason rather than providing any new content.
My opinion is that the difference in men's and women's coverage in the offseason is much more about intrinsic motivation of the staff rather than the organization making a conscious decision to disregard women's hockey. That doesn't mean the current women's staff is less intrinsically motivated on average -- the men's staff is much larger. Note also that the site is still posting women's news in the offseason, though clearly there is less feature coverage.
When I was women's editor from Fall 2004-Spring 2007, I did make some effort in the offseason to cover national team news. (Note I haven't been paid by the site since 2007 or held any staff position, unless you count permanent moderator status on this forum.) I went to at least one Under-22 event in the summer that happened to be within driving distance of my day job. I believed the prevalence of recent college players and alumni made women's hockey unique among Olympic team sports and I liked to promote that. But no one in the USCHO organization obligated me to do any of that, and only during that point of my life have I been willing to take on that effort. I do think in the grand scheme of things, offseason coverage of women's hockey at USCHO is small potatoes in terms of growing the sport. The primary effort I still make for women's hockey is to criticize media outlets that I feel aren't treating the sport fairly, particularly those endorsing the removal of women's hockey from the Olympic program.
I'm sympathetic to the concern that the difference in men's and women's coverage propagates inequities between the two sports, and I wish I could still do more. This reaffirms my disgust when anyone claims that the current attendance and television ratings of men's vs. women's sports are a pure reflection of the quality of the two and have absolutely nothing to do with persistent effects of past discrimination. Media coverage and fan bases and history are a huge part of being a sports fan, and women's sports can't simply catch up to men's sports overnight.
Lastly, I would guess that covering women's hockey has most likely been a money-losing proposition for USCHO based on direct accounting. But I also would hope that the coverage of women's (and D3) hockey for USCHO has still boosted the site's brand relative to other college hockey websites, so that the decision to cover women's hockey has nonetheless been good business too. Yet at the highest levels, I believe the USCHO executive board does have intrinsic motivation to do what's right in promoting the growth of college hockey, so there's no question that its support of women's hockey is the right decision, and I greatly appreciate its unique efforts among the media in promoting women's college hockey.
Last edited:
Re: An Issue with USCHO and their Women's Coverage
Thanks to all for the discussion I was looking for! Dave especially for your insights. We've all seen how different media outlets publicize the sports that return the most to the respective outlets. I mean we all see how ESPN dedicates more time than usual, off or in season, to basketball due to ABC having the contract for the NBA!
As for complaining about a free service WIrinkrat, I think that Eeyore and D2D answered better then I could.
As for the chicken/egg theory, I totally find this to be a key variable. If you happen to support a large school that has staff and money to promote all the sports your lucky. When the school has to choose where it gets the biggest bang for its buck, obviously more publicity begets larger crowds! How often are women's sports the lead story for the school's newspaper?
Anyway thanks to all for the insight and discussion. I hope that soon the issue will be moot!
Thanks to all for the discussion I was looking for! Dave especially for your insights. We've all seen how different media outlets publicize the sports that return the most to the respective outlets. I mean we all see how ESPN dedicates more time than usual, off or in season, to basketball due to ABC having the contract for the NBA!
As for complaining about a free service WIrinkrat, I think that Eeyore and D2D answered better then I could.
As for the chicken/egg theory, I totally find this to be a key variable. If you happen to support a large school that has staff and money to promote all the sports your lucky. When the school has to choose where it gets the biggest bang for its buck, obviously more publicity begets larger crowds! How often are women's sports the lead story for the school's newspaper?
Anyway thanks to all for the insight and discussion. I hope that soon the issue will be moot!
TonyTheTiger20
#SOAR
Re: An Issue with USCHO and their Women's Coverage
http://www.bcinterruption.com/boston-college-womens-hockey-2012-2013-season
I'm doing my part.
http://www.bcinterruption.com/boston-college-womens-hockey-2012-2013-season
brookyone
Deport Right Wing Nuts
Re: An Issue with USCHO and their Women's Coverage
One thing I would like is a little more, or a little more extensive pre-season buzz, general outlook...handicapping the teams, outlooks regarding team graduation losses vs. incoming classes...maybe summarizing staff changes, player transfers etc. I realize those who cover the sport for USCHO probably don't have the time or resources for all that...but it would be interesting stuff I believe.
One thing I would like is a little more, or a little more extensive pre-season buzz, general outlook...handicapping the teams, outlooks regarding team graduation losses vs. incoming classes...maybe summarizing staff changes, player transfers etc. I realize those who cover the sport for USCHO probably don't have the time or resources for all that...but it would be interesting stuff I believe.
Last edited: