Goals

Jay Mariotti, Sun-Times sports columnists, has resigned from the paper stating that he now believes newspapers are dead and the internet is the future. So what is his legacy?

If Sox and Cubs fans agree on anything, it is that they hate JM. He was rather universally reviled. The comments on the Sun-Times website show this clearly. Why was he hated? Some think he is a hack writer, some think his points are idiotic, some think he was never accountable for what he wrote, some hate that he had the privilege of access but has not been in a locker room in five years, and some likely think all those, plus some. But he positioned himself as a contrarian and turned that into national fame with ESPN.

He got people talking. He got himself noticed by getting people to revile him. He became infamous when two radio guys launched a website that was basically a takedown of every column he wrote.

Think about that for a second. How many writers can you think of with regularly updated posts about a freaking sports writer? The Sports Guy has a message board devoted to taking him down, Mike Lupica has at least one possibly two (though the second does not seem to focus on Lupica anymore), this guy hates Will Leitch but it is not a frequent topic on the blog, KSK hates Peter King, and there are probably some more out there but it is a pretty elite class of established, widely-read columnists. (Note: Firejoemorgan hates everyone.)

So what does this mean, other than the obvious? People know who Mariotti is. Does this make him a success? There are two ways to look at this. First, he wrote for the Sun-Times. The goals of the Sun-Times are to sell papers and sell ad space, the former obviously contributing to the latter. The first question then is, did Mariotti increase the Sun-Times circulation? This is arguable, I have no data on this. I know that at times Mike & Mike in the Morning would discuss something controversial he had written, and likewise for Mac, Jurko, & Harry. That may have sold a few more papers on that given day, but overall, who knows. The Sun-Times likely thought he did, which is why the signed him to a large contract extension two months ago.

The second prong of this first inquiry is about the traffic to the website. I would assume that he likely spiked traffic on the site, particularly given his national promenance with ESPN and the fact that people like to read and watch things that piss them off (e.g. Bill O'Reilly). So the Sun-Times likely valued him for the increased traffic his columns may have brought to the webpage.

The Second inquiry is whether being reviled is good for Mariotti himself. I would venture to say it is. It got him on national tv. It got him a radio show (which did not last long because it is one thing to spend two minutes reading a column and a whole other thing to listen to him for three hours). It got him a hate webpage. It got him in the news when people fucked around with his wikipedia page.

I do not know if they say this, but they should, "If you cannot be good, be controversial." After all, every story needs a villian.