Commentary: Clemson reinventing media access, 'sports communications' mission

'Perhaps you prefer a bit of salt with your sugar, a critical eye instead of a relentlessly rose-colored (or orange-colored) view'

ESPN Gameday was last held on Bowman Field  in Clemson before the Georgia Tech - Clemson football game on Oct. 21, 2006 - Chris Fowler (r) and Clemson SID Tim Bourret

Photo by Mark Crammer

ESPN Gameday was last held on Bowman Field in Clemson before the Georgia Tech - Clemson football game on Oct. 21, 2006 - Chris Fowler (r) and Clemson SID Tim Bourret

Tim Bourret arrived in Clemson in 1978, a product of Notre Dame and a protégé of its legendary sports information director Roger Valdiserri. For the next 35 years, he went about building goodwill for the Tigers’ athletics programs and – at the same time – good relations with the media who covered his teams.

Blending his solid sports knowledge base with the folksy management style of his mentor at Clemson, the beloved Bob Bradley (aka “Mr. B”), Bourret became, in most estimations, the best in the business.

Reporters from newspapers, TV and lately a growing online presence knew that Bourret, while always presenting Clemson in the best possible light – there was never any question who he worked for and pulled for – also understood the media’s job and would do his best to help them do it.

By now, you may be wondering: Did this guy Bourret die?

Thankfully, no. But his job – and, by extension, the relationships between media and Clemson – are changing. Whether that’s for better or worse is the question.

Last July, Clemson athletics director Dan Radakovich announced Bourret would in the future “concentrate solely on football,” saying that the move was “to take advantage of Bourret’s encyclopedic knowledge of the football program.”

In fact, that’s selling him short; Bourret knows more about EVERY Tigers team than anyone.

He’s been the basketball radio analyst since 1980 and even co-wrote hoops books with former Notre Dame coach Digger Phelps, including “Basketball for Dummies.” He also spent nine seasons as baseball’s postseason play-by-play announcer – and that’s just the revenue-producing sports.

But Radakovich apparently has a different vision. It’s no longer enough to be good at working with the media; in hiring Joe Galbraith as director of communications, Clemson is en route to becoming part of the media.

In fact, Radakovich wants his department to be THE source for all things Tigers sports.

That’s according to a memo sent to the athletics communications staff (and reported on by Ed McGranahan for The Clemson Insider web site), which states that they are responsible for disseminating “results, history and stories of Clemson Athletics. Our goal is to tell the story to the largest audience possible.”

As for the “competition” – traditional journalists – well … “It will always be of importance to treat the media professionally and provide them with the tools to do their jobs,” the memo states, but “it is not the singular focus, nor even foremost priority of our department.”

That means the folks who control access – to Dabo Swinney, Brad Brownell, their assistant coaches and players – will be more interested in telling their story than helping reporters who aren’t part of the program tell theirs.

Part of this is money-driven (surprise). Media, notably online sites via subscription, make money reporting about Clemson sports; why, the argument goes, should Clemson give away information that has a marketable value? If ESPN, ABC and others are paying for rights to air the Tigers’ games, why should others get access for free?

But make no mistake: the other factor is control. Athletics directors and many coaches always have hated that a reporter’s story might reflect poorly (if truthfully) on a player and/or his school. Swinney during his tenure has clamped down on access, and Radakovich’s recent moves suggest that will get worse, not better.

Another indication of where things are headed came recently when Clemson announced Don Munson, a school employee, will replace Pete Yanity (sports director for WSPA-TV in addition to doing play-by-play for football and basketball, and hosting coaches’ shows) as football “voice of the Tigers.” Munson, who is close to Swinney, might be a terrific play-by-play guy – though his experience pales next to Yanity’s – but this appears to be more about his loyalty than his skills in the booth.

Understand, this isn’t only Clemson’s path. Lest we forget, a decade ago South Carolina replaced Charlie McAlexander, a long-time broadcaster, with former USC quarterback Todd Ellis; then-athletics director Mike McGee made no bones about wanting “a Gamecock” in the booth.

Like Clemson, USC also places controls on reporters talking to players and coaches.

Maybe you’re thinking: Don’t Clemson, USC and other big-time programs have the right, even the obligation, to maximize profits and promote the home team? Also, given the state of journalism in 2014 – with news/sports departments often gutted – perhaps we should expect nothing more than in-house-produced cheerleading, so long as it’s well-presented and entertaining.

On the other hand, perhaps you prefer a bit of salt with your sugar, a critical eye instead of a relentlessly rose-colored (or orange-colored) view. And though some college fans get up in arms when traditional media reveal embarrassing facts about their heroes – I’m looking at you, Jameis Winston – do you really want Clemson or USC coaches deciding what you know?

Fortunately for many reasons, Tim Bourret isn’t going away at Clemson. He’ll still be there, reciting obscure bits of Tigers trivia as no one else can and quietly doing his job well. Like Bob Bradley before him, he’s an institution; his new bosses no doubt realize you don’t replace a guy like that.

But unlike Bourret always did, the athletics administration likely won’t be trying to balance making Clemson look good with getting the facts out. They know what the priorities are going forward, and helping those who cover the Tigers but don’t toe the company line – according to that memo – is well down that list.

CLEMSON MEMO

PHILOSOPHY: We work for Clemson University and serve the Director of Athletics. The athletics communications department is the voice of the athletic department. We are responsible for informing donors, fans, potential student-athletes and all who care about Clemson Athletics the results, history and stories of Clemson Athletics.

Our goal is to tell the story to the largest audience possible. Through the official athletic site and social media channels, we can reach more than ever before. By concentrating on those outlets, we will continue to grow their reach. It will always be of importance to treat the media professionally and provide them with the tools to do their jobs. However, it is not the singular focus or even foremost priority of our department.

© 2014 OrangeAndWhite.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

  • Discuss
  • Print

Related Topics

Comments » 9

lhaselden writes:

Orange and white does an excellent job of covering Clemson athletics. The State is pathetic, most stories on Clemson are simply AP stories are from other publications. I think the those paid by the athletic dept. should have their priority set to get the Clemson story told to as wide as an audience as they can... the Clemson story is no longer a priority for most traditional media in this state.
As for Yannity, I do not think I will miss him... I still miss Jim Phillips and Yannity was a poor replacement. I hated listening to Yannity do basketball. When Jim Phillips was doing football I would turn on the TV and listen to the radio... but I stopped doing that when Yannity took over the play by play. U hope Munson is better if not replace him.. but we needed a change.

Bigboots writes:

Munson is not even a lateral move.
Clemson takes a step back with this move.

lhaselden writes:

I do not know if Munson will be better than Yannity until I hear a football broadcast! I know Yannity was 2 or 3 steps back from Jim philliips... If Munson does not improve the product then hire someone else... I am not sorry Yannity was replaced.

BlueRidgeBengal writes:

I respectfully disagree with your opinion on Yannity. I thought he did a solid job. Of course he was never gonna replace Jim. Also,I never want a blatant homer as an announcer, but that's just my taste. Not that anybody cares but I don't like DRad. He wants to put his stamp on things in a hurried manner.Also, I don't want the regime to control every aspect of athletic information.

YabbaDaboDooDoo writes:

"Part of this is money-driven (surprise). Media, notably online sites via subscription, make money reporting about Clemson sports; why, the argument goes, should Clemson give away information that has a marketable value? If ESPN, ABC and others are paying for rights to air the Tigers’ games, why should others get access for free?"

1) Broadcasting games live and reporting results after the fact on the internet are 2 COMPLETELY different things. ESPN and ABC aren't paying Clemson to interview Dabo and print it later. They're paying to air football games.

2) Everyone makes money reporting about Clemson sports not just subscription services. Since when was journalism ever non-profit? Reading the Wall Street Journal online requires a subscription but I haven't heard anything about WSJ reporters being denied access anywhere because of it. Why vilify subscription services b/c they try to make money? Before the internet people would read about Clemson sports in newspapers delivered to their front doors... which required a subscription. I didn't hear any complaints. This website runs ads. What's the difference b/t this and a subscription website? Either way you're trying to make money off reporting Clemson sports online. The only difference is the method.

This actually explains a lot about the kind of reporting you see in the upstate about Clemson sports. You almost never see an article that appears even somewhat critical of a Clemson coach and now you can see why. Writers are afraid they'll lose access. That's why no one will ever write the thought-provoking article that questions whether Brad Brownell can cut it at Clemson and turn them into an NCAA tournament regular. Instead you'll read a lot of articles about how a great coach paid Brownell a compliment... in the post-game press conference after he beat Brownell. Clemson basically outlaws anything critical. It's cheerleading articles only. Very Chinese of you Clemson.

TigerFan95 writes:

"This actually explains a lot about the kind of reporting you see in the upstate about Clemson sports. You almost never see an article that appears even somewhat critical of a Clemson coach and now you can see why. Writers are afraid they'll lose access".

Do you think the same doesn’t happen elsewhere? Perhaps you should ask Ron Morris of The State what happens when you write something critical of the Ole A-hole down in Columbia.

lhaselden writes:

I have read articles critical of Clemson football and basketball and baseball... What I want is not sugar coated fantasy nor negativity from the Athletic dept... but I would like info on Clemson sporting events with a write up of each... I cannot get that from the regular media nor the 4 letter network. I hope to get that now from the Clemson sports information from the athletic department.

YabbaDaboDooDoo writes:

in response to TigerFan95:

"This actually explains a lot about the kind of reporting you see in the upstate about Clemson sports. You almost never see an article that appears even somewhat critical of a Clemson coach and now you can see why. Writers are afraid they'll lose access".

Do you think the same doesn’t happen elsewhere? Perhaps you should ask Ron Morris of The State what happens when you write something critical of the Ole A-hole down in Columbia.

Actually no. It doesn't happen to the degree that it does at Clemson. I've seen coaches who've won national championships get more criticism in their local press than Brad Brownell gets. What's so surprising about all of this is the fact that Clemson basically says "yeah, we're going to control the narrative and we're going to tell everyone what to think". Yeah, we lost but the other team's coach says Brownell is doing a great job so let's print that.

I don't know or care about what happens in Columbia.

KIMOSAMI (Inactive) writes:

'We work for Clemson University and serve the Director of Athletics.'

Did Radakovich write this?

Share your thoughts

Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.

Comments can be shared on Facebook and Yahoo!. Add both options by connecting your profiles.

Features