Old media v. new media.

Two prominent NBA writers have had somewhat controversial interactions with blogs recently.

Peter Vescey of the New York Post recently wrote a column, some portions of which were remarkably similar to a post on a Los Angeles Lakers blog.

Vescey: “Exempting Bryant, no Laker apparently understands how to play the game – when it’s on national TV, anyway. Every time they’re showcased, and the floodlights are directed at him, I could swear, Kobe makes sure two or three times minimum to lecture someone on the team (usually Smush, his favorite whipping boy, I’m told) as if he’s the coach – almost always on the offensive end.”

Blog: “And every time there is any nationally televised game … Kobe makes a point of making sure that at least three or so times during the game he is seen lecturing someone on the team as if he is a coach … but usually it is almost always on the offensive end.”

The glaring simliarities immediately trigger thoughts of plagiarism. Vescey says that he and the blogger share e-mails, and the similarities might just be a case of ‘great minds’ thinking alike.

“I’ve never seen his blog … but we talk, we e-mail and obviously I believe most of what he says.”

Fair enough, if one is to believe Vescey never read the guy’s blog. How professional is it to repeat virtually verbatim the opinion of someone else, even if you share that opinion? Vescey could at least have quoted the blogger, acknowledging that he came up with the basic premise for his argument from a source other than himself. Better yet, he could have actually come up with his own argument.

This exercise in plagiarism was pointed out by Los Angeles Times writer TJ Simers, giving the story much more credibility than if it had been posted on the AOL Fanhouse or Deadspin or The Big Lead — that is, at least, according to Chicago Tribune writer Sam Smith.

Smith, who already has a high profile detractor in Mark Cuban, wrote this response to a question about what blogs he read.

“How is it I can work for decades developing contacts around the NBA and traveling regularly around the NBA and talking with the decision makers and some guy in his basement in his underwear is writing something that has credibility? As close as I can figure, these bloggers are the electronic version of the neighborhood tavern. You used to go in and hear people wailing about sports or politics and offering opinions on all the major issues. We did our man in the street interviews when such issues came up. Now, these people we used to ask for opinion started these blogs and are supposed to be experts. How can that be? I never see any of them, I never hear the coaches and general managers and players I talk to saying they talked to them. So where do they get their information?

People often doubt the traditional media, but we are out asking questions, developing sources of information and interacting with the participants. What are these bloggers doing? I’m fortunate on some level to be getting close to retirement because if these blogs are credible sources of information, there’s no point in spending all the time on the road that I do.”

Smith certainly comes off as petulant with these comments; he tries to diffuse that with a tongue-in-cheek series of complaints in the next paragraph, but that attempt is as flimsy as his argument. Certainly, Smith is far from alone in his dislike of blogs. Sean Salisbury and Jay Mariotti are not fans, and most longtime journalists likely feel some twinge of irritation that some schmuck can sit down at his or her computer and pound out an article that reads better than one that it took them hours to write — on deadline. After all, bloggers can simply roll out of bed and write garbage and made-up nonsense. Journalists have to take showers, get dressed and fact check.

Some disagree with that assessment. Could it be that some bloggers actually put out an effort and aren’t young, unproven slackers who haven’t paid their dues?

“And the “pajama-wearers” thing is always ridiculous, as is the “bloggers can just make up facts!” thing. The vast majority of popular non-personal (as in, non-“I am so sad today because my man dumped me”) blogs – be they news-, sports-, or entertainment-related – specialize in opinion, not covering stuff. And the ones who are doing real reporting, like Michael Yon or Michael Totten, are at least as credible and probably more credible than most newspaper-employed people.”

Evidently, the empire of sports media, ESPN, also agrees that blogs have some redeeming value. Not only did ESPN acquire the TrueHoop.com blog, but the writer of that blog, Henry Abbott, has been added to ESPN.com’s stable of NBA writers — meaning that more people will be exposed to the work of a blogger than to the work of Sam Smith. Meanwhile, the Fanhouse on AOL.com has given increasing exposure to several bloggers covering different sports.

All this for the undeserving, those who never made contacts and don’t have access. The people with nothing to lose from criticism and nothing to gain from praise — people that might actually make up an independent sports media, one with less hero worship and character assassination. People who, when they create a trade out of thin air, will acknowledge the fact that its speculation, instead of passing it off as fact.

Smith does have a point. There’s no point in traveling as much as an NBA writer has to travel if any information could easily be collected by someone “sitting in their underwear”. Especially when a sportswriter can simply sit at home, check a blog, and essentially recreate an entire post in an article.