Welcoming Sports Media's Mass Collaboration Era

Sports media is in the midst of the most exciting age in its history but is not being met with as much optimism as it should be. 

The information at our fingertips today dramatically exceeds the amount available even 10 years ago. That's exhilarating. 

In May, I came across Warren Buffett's column in Forbes on why he's so hopeful about the future of America.

He's worth more than $50 billion dollars, so I figured it'd be worth the read.

The Berkshire Hathaway CEO's opinion piece focused on the fact that the United States experienced unprecedentedly rapid growth, expansion and rise to international prominence with women—half of the country's talent—"relegated to the sidelines."

Essentially, he's bullish on America's future because it's finally tapping into the rest of its resources by providing women more career opportunities in power positions.

The sports media industry is currently experiencing a comparable progression due to the widespread accessibility and circulation capabilities of the Internet. "Talent" that wouldn't have been heard beyond the bar room years ago now has a platform. The utilization of as much talent as possible is an encouraging development in any field.

Actually, it's easy to take Buffett's theory a step further. Sports media is undergoing the same mass collaboration phenomenon that has changed many other aspects of our everyday lives for the better over the past decade.

It's a continually evolving sensation that fosters the sharing of knowledge and insight from a diverse population in every imaginable niche. 

Of course, we should be grateful for the way the Internet has cultivated mass collaboration. It should be a welcomed facet of today's society, and we should be thrilled by its potential.

However, an over-saturation of info can be problematic. There's no doubting that. But eventually, natural selection takes its course. For the most part, the illogical and uninformative are disregarded. Meanwhile, the logical and informative are rightfully highlighted, followed, and now, retweeted.

The good is becoming easier to distinguish from the bad as the number of people publishing information online is growing at an exponential rate.

Mass collaboration's built-in "survival of the fittest" process will only continue to take its course if we legitimately focus on independent thinking when reading. 

It's smart to think for yourself when you read anyone's writing, regardless of that writer's affiliation, his or her background (within reason) and the topic or type of article. To me, the importance of independent thinking can't be overemphasized in any walk of life.

While I've read some of the most engaging, thought-provoking and downright brilliant pieces from the country's most renowned writers, I've also been lucky enough to stumble across similarly enlightening work from relatively unknown bloggers, online journalists and everyone in between.

In a time when the Internet world is seemingly overtaking the newspapers of old, we can't lose sight of the value of traditional beat writers and credentialed reporters—sports' true insiders. 

They provide scoops, quotes and otherwise classified information regarding our favorite players and teams. Reporting the news will never go out of style, regardless of the medium in which it's disseminated. Furthermore, years of experience behind the scenes gives those journalists one hell of a vantage point from which to pen an opinion column.

Don't forget that. 

On the other hand, with game film easily accessible, a collection of tremendous, all-encompassing, advanced statistical websites and mass collaboration's immense teaching powers a few clicks away, locker room access is no longer an absolute requirement for someone to be able to astutely analyze a sport or have a logical and respect-worthy opinion on it. 

Should the overwhelming majority of people who can't approach Tom Brady after a game automatically be considered ignorant about football? 

I'm having a harder time buying into that logic as each day passes.

The most common knock on bloggers goes something like this: "Why should I read this? It's merely a fan's commentary." My response—reading the blogger's column won't kill you.

Give it a shot. Maybe you'll learn something.

Just remember, you're being biased and prejudiced if you decide not to read because you expect eye roll-inducing biases and prejudices. 

I initially planned to keep names out of this, but my former Bleacher Report colleague and ColtsAuthority.com writer Nate Dunlevy expressed the goals of many bloggers so exquisitely, I couldn't help but to include his exact quote:

"

Most readers don't realize that when you cover something as a job, your point of view changes. I care far more about being right, being accurate and being entertaining and educational than I do advocating a partisan viewpoint.

"

Are slanted articles written by bloggers posted on the Internet on a daily basis? Certainly. But so are slanted articles written by "newspaper journalists." 

Place of employment doesn't necessarily make someone exempt from personal agendas and biases. Sorry. They're out there now and always will be.

Basically, in my short time observing the fascinating, ever-changing sports media world, I've found that if labels or job titles stop you from reading a column, you're doing it wrong, and eventually, you'll be missing out. We'll always be aware of labels, but let's not give labels the utmost power. They shouldn't limit us in any way. 

Above all, we must realize and come to terms with the fact that there's a difference between "traditional sports journalist or sports news reporter" and "sports blogger or analyst."

All are meaningful in their own ways and together yield a wide range of sports coverage. 

Frankly, there still seems to be some disdain between traditional sports journalists and the members of the blogger generation.

While I don't expect to be an ultimate peacemaker in this vast and occasionally hostile disparagement, try looking at it this way—if everyone in sports media vowed to take the effort exerted to bash or smear others and used it to improve themselves, coverage would be more compelling, thorough and, well, just better. I feel as though a variation of that philosophy could probably be applied to most career fields.

They say variety is the spice of life. That adage still resonates today. Although there'll always be differences in opinion regarding how to write, how to cover, etc., the breadth of content presented will promise to teach us about the sports we love and continue to stimulate our brains.

I'm down for that.

So, as the 2013 NFL season gets underway, let's greet this new era in sports journalism with the unabashed positivity it deserves.

Follow @ChrisTrapasso