I just listened to your Klosterman dialogue, (between him and Simmons) and I felt that he missed a critical issue in the relative nature of your ESPN position “the box” versus a columnist for a paper, and that would be the threshold. What I mean, specifically, is the level of difficulty needed to find an alternative. On the internet, you are displayed prominently, which is good for me because I specifically remember searching for your column. But, save for the truly technologically illiterate, this was not a terrible challenge. In the same sense, it isn’t hard for me to find someone else. It is the ease of finding someone else that makes all the difference in the world. Chuck even commented on this on how he often quickly clicks on a ‘most mailed’ link, finds out he isn’t interested, and moves on. But he could easily stay. If it was interesting he could stay, and what did it take him to find out…..5 seconds perhaps?

Can you do that with a newspaper? Lets say there are 5 newspapers in your area. You buy one…you don’t love it….and now your going to buy another? Really? See the threshold is too difficult.

This goes back to how all these talented writers left the newspapers. The internet lets you throw them all up on ESPN, granted some more prominently featured, but they are all there, and can be accessed. The newspapers have a finite space…they all aren’t there…and it is much harder to actually get to an alternative if you are dissatisfied…the finger click verse the acquisition of a second newspaper. That’s the difference.

This is not to say the writers at the Boston newspapers (never read any B.T.W.) never once made it on merit…but once they did…that was it….you (and others on ESPN) have to make it over and over again…because your competition is only a click away

I like Unions for giving you a good wage for good work. That is why I support them, but there needs to be a fine line between making living wages possible, and allowing people who don’t deserve to, to keep their job.