USA Today firing of soccer writer demonstrates its low esteem for
the sport.

By Robert Wagman
SoccerTimes

(Tuesday, July 17, 2001) -- Silly me. On a number of occasions recently, I bought a copy of USA Today to get its take on upcoming Major League Soccer or United States national team matches, or to find what happened in the previous day or weekend’s matches.

For instance, before the three-day Memorial Day weekend, I picked up a copy of the holiday weekend edition, in part to see how the newspaper was treating the upcoming three days worth of matches in MLS and the Women’s United Soccer Association.. The Tuesday following the long weekend, I purchased a copy of the post-holiday issue to get some of the details of WUSA matches I missed, and to see what it had to say about the Miami Fusion’s continuing strong MLS showing and the MetroStars’ victory over Bayern Munich’s B team.

As I said, silly me. There was not a word about soccer in either issue, not a word. There was a 16-page special supplement on the Indianapolis 500 and the Coca Cola 600 automobile races. Sixteen full pages. But not a word, not a syllable, about soccer.

I should not have been surprised that there was nothing about soccer before or after Memorial Day, or that in the weeks since, this national newspaper has only occasionally covered soccer, and then usually simply with a brief compilation of rewritten wire service copy or some short feature story of marginal interest.

Earlier this summer, USA Today fired its long soccer beat writer of the past three years, Peter Brewington. In the interest of full disclosure: Peter is more than a colleague, he is a friend, and I have always considered him someone who knows the game of soccer, and whose reporting I respected highly. Moreover, because Peter was so well liked by the people within MLS, WUSA and U.S. Soccer, he had the kind of access a reporter needs to bring quality reporting to his readers.

Peter had been with USA Today for 18 years. In January, he had been involved in a nearly fatal automobile accident, but fought to get himself back to work as quickly as possible because there was a new MLS season to be covered.

These are apparently what pass for hard times at USA Today. In the first quarter of this year, even though Gannett, USA Today’s parent company, had operating revenues of $1.5 billion, up some 19 percent over a year ago, poor USA Today saw advertising revenues decline by 20 percent because of a weakening economy.

As I understand it, each editorial department was instructed to fire two people. So the sports editor looked around to see who he considered the least important to what USA Today was doing, and that, of course, was the soccer writer. As I understand it, Brewington was the only reporter let go.

This is a shame. USA Today considers itself America’s national newspaper. All the "McPaper" slurs to the contrary, it truly is. In many small- and medium-sized towns across America, USA Today represents the only locally available newspaper covering many national and international issues. Certainly, it would be the only locally available newspaper covering sports like soccer. For those who do not live in a big city, and usually a big city that has an MLS franchise -- and sometimes not then -- there simply is no place to go on a daily basis short of the Internet to get soccer news.

USA Today was, and potentially is, very important to the sport of soccer in this country. But in what it has done, it has made it abundantly clear, soccer is not important.

A case in point. Two weeks ago in Mexico City, the U.S. men faced their sternest test of the CONCACAF final qualifying round. A victory would have given the U.S. a lock on a place in the World Cup. Who did USA Today send to cover this important match? It’s Mexico City-based, Latin American correspondent, a fine fellow who can speak knowledgeably about the unkept promises of Mexican president Vincente Fox or the political turmoil in Peru or Colombia. But, it apparently had been a considerable time since he had last seen a soccer match, and he was not exactly up to date and familiar with coach Bruce Arena, his players,or soccer at the professional and international level.

If you think this is wrongheaded you might want to contact eports editor Monte Lorell at (800) 872-3410, extension 3743, or at (703) 276-3743 and tell him so. He can be e-mailed at mlorell@usatoday.com.

This is not first time USA Today has dismissed a soccer writer without apparent logic. In the spring of 1998, just prior to the World Cup in France, award-winning writer and soccer editor Jerry Langdon was let go. In 1994, with the approach of World Cup USA '94, he was asked to take on the soccer editor's responsibilities in addition to his job as Gannett News Service sports editor. (Gannett owns USA Today). For four years, doing two jobs while only being paid for one (at GNS), and with a token budget, Langdon elevated soccer coverage to universal acclaim as the best soccer section anywhere. His dedication was rewarded when, with no warning, he was told he was no longer needed, just as he was making plans for France.

In the meantime to keep up with soccer, unless you have access to one of the few major daily newspapers in this country who covers the sport in any depth, the Internet is your outlet. It’s just a shame the sport is all but ignored by so many in the daily printed press.

To change the subject, somewhat, I understand there is a very real chance that come 2002, whether the U.S. qualifies or not for the World Cup, there is a very real possibility that U.S. fans will not be able to see broadcasts in English either on free television or even pay-per-view.

On these pages and elsewhere, you have probably seen stories about the bankruptcy of the Swiss marketing firm ISL Worldwide, and its parent, International Sports Media and Marketing (ISMM), which held the contracts with world governing body FIFA to market the 2002 and 2006 World Cups.

The television rights situation for WC 2002 is confusing to say the least. FIFA has agreed to let German media giant Kirch handle the "commercial" (marketing) rights to the event, including world-wide World Cup television rights. Kirch had earlier acquired TV broadcasting rights for Europe and North America, while ISMM-ISL held the rights for the rest of the world.

Reportedly, Kirch has been asking a huge amount, in the $40 million range, for U.S. broadcast rights for the quadrennial event in South Korea and Japan.

That just for rights. Anyone broadcasting would have to add millions in production costs. Given the state of the economy, it would appear to be economic suicide for any U.S. broadcaster, network or cable outfit, to take the plunge and, apparently, all including Disney-ABC-ESPN had told ISL no thanks.

FIFA president, Sepp Blatter announced that the organization will begin a crash effort to rescue the marketing of the 2002 World Cup. It will begin by reviewing all contracts that ISL signed with sponsors, those deals in various stages of negotiation, an those which had been declined.

Blatter has said that ISL has already sold enough television rights to WC 2002 to ensure FIFA will receive at least 650 million Swiss francs ($364 million). But he also says he will undertake to ensure the competition is better marketed to areas of the world that have not been cleared yet.

The assumption is FIFA, and Kirch will reopen negotiations for a U.S. English language broadcast partner at some reasonable level that would afford a U.S. broadcaster the chance to show the World Cup and actually make a profit.

Even if no English language broadcast partner is found here, U.S. fans would probably still be able to see most matches, in Spanish. The parent of Spanish-language networks Univision and Galavision, has acquired North American Spanish-language broadcast rights and will likely show all the matches live.

Senior correspondent Robert Wagman's "It Seems To Me . . . " appears regularly on SoccerTimes. He can be e-mailed at bobwagman@soccertimes.com..