Last week, The Spectrum had the opportunity to talk with Will Leitch, editor of the sports humor Web site, Deadspin.com, as well as the author of the recently published book, God Save the Fan. Leitch is also a contributor to The New York Times, as well as magazines GQ, New York, and Slate. God Save the Fan is Leitch's third book. He has previously written the novel Catch, as well as his memoirs, Life as a Loser. In God Save the Fan, Leitch talks about the problems in sports, and how fans need to take back the game.
The Spectrum: In your book, God Save the Fan, you don't paint the prettiest picture of the life of a sports reporter. What advice would you give to someone looking to pursue a career in sports journalism?
Will Leitch: I think being a reporter teaches you a lot of things, I'm glad I did it at some point, if just to understand why I was rejecting it... I'm generally of the rule that if you're not busy writing something, you're not busy getting better... I don't think I'm this brilliant writer. I work hard, I turn my stuff in on time, I'm not a diva, and I think that makes a difference... Honestly, writers are flakes man... When I came to New York I was like 'no matter what happens, I'm not going to have anyone outwork me.' If I were like a banker, that might have been hard, but out here, writers are flakes, man.
TS: What was the easiest chapter of the book, where you just sat down and it came flowing out?
WL: The essay that flowed the smoothest is probably the Arenas-LeBron essay (where Leitch explains that Gilbert Arenas is who LeBron James strives to be off the court). That one struck me as if it were a piece of slate or something. I think that was the easiest excerpt to write... The thing I like about that essay is it's speaking to the general idea... The major point I'm trying to make in the book, which is the world of being a fan has changed dramatically in the past few years, and I think that Arenas and LeBron are a really good example of why that is.
TS: During the chapter where you watched the ESPN network of channels for 24 consecutive hours, how did you manage to not succumb to the dreaded TV migraine?
WL: Contrary to what some people on [deadspin.com] suggested, I did not actually use any illegal substances at this time... There's a misconception that I somehow hate ESPN. No, I don't hate ESPN. Any sports fan that likes sports and wants to have something to do with sports, ESPN is a large part of your life... I think it's best to not think about ESPN as some journalistic enterprise covering sports, but think of them as, like, another sports league. They're bigger than the NHL, they're bigger then most of the teams... One reason I've always been impressed by them (is that) they fill 24 hours (of TV) on eight different stations. But when I watched it I realized, 'Oh I understand what they do; they just repeat themselves.' That was when I kind of learned a little bit, oh that's not really that impressive, they just say the same thing.
TS: In the book you made a list of the 10 ESPN personalities you dislike the most, who are some people that you like from ESPN?
WL: I think that Scott Van Pelt is very good. I think he's kind of a hark back to the days of when Dan Patrick and Keith Olbermann used to do it... They do college basketball really well, and I know that (Dick) Vitale is a walking caricature now, but Jay Bilas is good. They do have a lot of really talented people. The problem is that all of the people who used to be on Baseball Tonight are now on the Web site, and those are the ones that were really good... Jayson Stark is really good, Peter Gammons is really good, Buster Olney is really good...but unfortunately John Kruk gets all the airtime. I'm sure that John Kruk is a very fun guy to hang out with, and I'm sure he's very likeable, but I'm a baseball fan, man. Talk about baseball... Their problems tend not to be from talent in a lot of ways, as much as it is kind of corporate philosophy.
TS: Your book came out before ESPN.com sports columnist Bill Simmons' new book. Was that one of your goals, to make sure it came out before his?
WL: I think Simmons is a better writer then I am... I like Simmons, he gets hammered a lot by people on the Web and I think even the people that hammer him have to at a certain level owes him a debt. Frankly, I don't think he likes that. I think he always feels like 'look what I have launched.' I don't know if he's a big blog guy... Up until recently he's been writing three columns a week for like seven years. Inevitably, you're going to repeat yourself. Inevitably, there are going to be times when you sound like a caricature of yourself... There aren't many people who I read every single one of their columns, and Simmons is one of them.... He and I used to have a little bit more of a relationship than we do now...but I think the day the commenters all hopped on his site and all started leaving messages, after that I don't think he liked talking to me anymore.
TS: Is there any sporting event, or occurrence in sports media that could still catch you by surprise?
WL: Yeah pretty much everyday, it's pretty wild... I think of the Dana Jacobson story that happened... My coverage of her I think has been pretty sympathetic. I feel kind of bad for her. They basically invite all of these ESPN personalities to go to this roast where they're supposed to curse and be crazy and be over the top, and then someone does it and they get really mad at her. I think the mistake that she made was that she forgot that Notre Dame was a Catholic school. She just thought of them as a team, and I think that's understandable.
TS: With the nature of Deadspin, has there ever been a post or an article that you have written that you regretted, or felt crossed a line?
WL: The only time I've ever regretted something is when I've gone with information that turned out to be wrong. I think that's something that any journalist can tell you, that just kills your soul.
Photo: Courtesy of Laron Fomby
