From JVG to Jalen B: How the Knicks’ media coverage has evolved in the past 25 years

Jalen Brunson was introduced as a Knick last week in front of season ticket holders, in what should have been a celebration. However, the narrative was instead on the lack of media availability at the event, reaching up to national TV programs and publications. How did we reach this point, both from the Knicks’ and the media’s perspectives? And how does it get better?

For much of the past week, the topic of attention was Jalen Brunson’s introductory welcome fan event. However, the center of attention wasn’t Brunson, but instead that credentialed Knicks beat reporters were not invited. To be clear, there are no league-wide rules requiring reporters to be present at fan events or to hold official press conferences for newly-signed free agents. Despite that, there’s been a firestorm amongst members of the NBA media at large regarding the “lack of accountability” and “lack of access” to the team. The Knicks’ beat constantly reminds fans that team president Leon Rose only held one press conference in his 2.5 years with the organization, a policy out-of-the-norm, but not illegal per the NBA media access rules. 

Before diving into the elephant in the room, it’s important to understand the full historical perspective of sports journalism. This goes back way before many of the readers of this site were born, but it’s equally important to understand the deeper complexities of the subject.

A brief history of sports journalism

Sports journalism originated in the late 1800s, but became popular in the 1920s. At that time, the focus of coverage in print newspapers was game scores and short recaps. This was important, since many people did not have the ability to listen to or watch games at the time.

As sports became more popular in the 20th century, newsrooms started to invest in beat reporters to focus on all aspects of their respective teams, including player interviews. In return, teams began to implement press boxes in their stadiums so that the press could watch the games live. 

Eventually, a market started to exist in the 1950s for long-form sports journalism. This is how publications like Sports Illustrated and The Sporting News became popular. Radio and cable television further provided fans with more access to watch games over the years.

The onset of the internet in the 2000s and social media in the 2010s meant greater access to information. This coincided with the decline of the print newspaper industry, as legacy media failed to embrace the digital competition, both in terms of viewership and advertising dollars. It didn’t help that the legacy print media consortium were highly leveraged entities with little path of viability.

How this relates to the Knicks, a historical context

From the 1970s through the late 1990s, the coverage of the Knicks centered around three major publications: The New York Times, The New York Post, and the New York Daily News. The latter two publications embodied the controversial format of tabloid journalism¹. Some of the prominent beat reporters during that era included Harvey Araton, Mike Lupica, Mike Wise, Peter Vecsey, and Frank Isola.

Throughout the 1970s to 1990s, access to the players was mostly unfettered. Reporters got firsthand information of anything from player/coach disputes to contract negotiations. Disputes between the front office and players (hi, Rod Strickland and Al Bianchi) was a feature, and not an anomaly. Patrick Ewing’s public trade requests were public. Araton, in his 2020 book Our Last Season, even hilariously mentioned how he’d get access to players’ hotel rooms on road trips for player interviews².

Even during the Knick playoff runs of the late ‘80s and ‘90s, reporters still got generous access to the players, coaching staff, and the front office. From “first-hand” accounts, the Knicks’ public relations department and front office were quite chummy with the media at large. In one of the few articles they and their supporters will cite, that included catered boat trips and jogs.

As the NBA became a billion-dollar enterprise, the players started to become the greatest priority for teams. In addition to protecting the players, the teams and the league started to rein in the access to players and team officials gradually for purposes of tightening public relations and protecting all stakeholders. 

The turning point in the Knicks’ relationship with the media was during the 1998-99 season. With the team hovering in mediocrity, there were plenty of calls for coach Jeff Van Gundy’s job. This led to a public and bitter feud between the coach and Ernie Grunfeld, the general manager of the Knicks at the time. The feud originated after Grunfeld (intelligently) traded John Starks and Charles Oakley, two of Van Gundy’s trusted veterans, in separate deals for Latrell Sprewell and Marcus Camby, respectively.

Van Gundy wasn’t a fan of those moves. He retaliated by playing both players sparingly to start the season. The combination of their lack of minutes and losses further fueled the tension. These tensions leaked out in the press, with both making public statements bashing one another. It also created an undue — but probably expected — tension between the three major publications. Van Gundy leaked information to Frank Isola of the Daily News and Mike Wise of the New York Times. Grunfeld leaked information to the New York Post’s Peter Vecsey. Checketts leaked information to Mike Lupica of the Daily News.

For then-new owner James Dolan, the drama was all unfolding in front of his eyes in public. He has said in previous accounts that the 1998-99 season was one of the worst seasons because of the public drama. Because of that season, Dolan sought to limit most, if not all, access to team officials and players in the now-infamous media policy set forward in 2001. 

The new policy not only curtailed access, but it manifested a belief of one uniform message communicated from the team, to the media, to the fans. This also came hand-in-hand with a public relations official being present at every interview. It was a policy met with obvious scorn and debatable success. However, the addition of a PR official became commonplace in all press conferences throughout the 2010s and forward.

Through the 2000s, the curtailed media policy frustrated everyone, alongside the constant losing. They complained that the team was “censoring” them and that they could only write positive articles about the team. In other words, the beat felt the team could not be held accountable. 

1: Also known as yellow journalism in journalistic circles.
2: Pat Riley axed this after becoming head coach in 1991.

How the internet changed sports reporting for the better (or for the worse, for a few)

However, as mentioned above, the internet upended sports coverage in the 2000s. Sites like Sportsnet New York and the original Posting and Toasting began to create fan-centric sports content that served as a direct competition to the reporting from legacy print media outlets. Advancements in technology led to fans having access to games and game-related information in real-time, worldwide. Consequently, there was a new and heightened demand for nuanced content. Understanding film, advanced statistics, and the salary cap became a new prerequisite for not just Knicks fans, but fans of all sports teams.

Along the way, sports journalism also evolved, but in a way that left many in the industry perplexed. Advocacy journalism became an acceptable norm in sports reporting. It was OK, and even encouraged, to express fandom in long-form pieces. While many reporters continue to maintain the stance of not being a fan of the team they’re covering, others believe that expressing fandom allows the writer to connect with its audience better.

The 2010s saw tension between reporters and Knicks fans reach an apex. The reporters of legacy print media still held gripes over the lack of access. With declining subscription revenues, the narratives shifted to an adversarial and gossipy tone. The fans, however, sought for nuance rather than news about injury transparency and things of the like. Those fan demands were often lampooned by certain former members of the Knicks beat. It even spilled into some threatening DMs on Twitter by reputed reporters³. The effect of this tension led to content creators like The Strickland, Knicks Film School, Knicks Fan TV, and Nothin but Knicks, amongst many others.

At the same time, the wave of content creation resonated with many in the national NBA landscape. People, from former coaches to video coordinators, started to leverage their knowledge into creating content⁴. The Athletic was created as a result of a greater demand for long-form journalism and deep-dive analysis across all sports.

The proliferation of content creation didn’t help subside deep fissures between Knicks fans and the Knicks beat. Even during the unfathomable acts of retaliation — including not inviting the New York Daily News to the Kristaps Porzingis trade phone conference or the RJ Barrett draft press conference — fans weren’t as sympathetic. Most did not agree with the decision, but also disagreed with reporters⁵ who considered the motion an act of censorship. Others believe that these outlets only served to fuel tension and not to provide coverage of the team that the fans would clearly pay money to read.

3: Frank Isola.
4: BBallbreakdown is a good example, but even sites like The Stepien and Cleaning The Glass.
5: Howard Beck

The NBA’s evolving landscape on player-media availability

While reporters continue to chide the Knicks over the lack of front office availability, it’s important to note that the National Basketball Players Association (NBPA) has repeatedly encouraged restricting player access over the past 10-15 years. It was a point that former NBPA Director Michele Roberts publicly emphasized as an “invasion of privacy.” 

The NBA has also honored the request of the players union by loosening some of the media availability rules over the years. Tim Frank, Senior Vice President of NBA League Operations Communications, previously admitted in 2013 that changes were made to achieve consistency and redundancies. He effectively admitted the rules hadn’t changed for more than 30 years.

It’s worth noting that neither the NBA media website nor the Professional Basketball Writers Association website publish the media access rules for the public to see. Only credentialed writers can request access. Therefore, the public at large has no idea what the actual rules are in terms of required media engagement between front office personnel, players, and fans. 

The loosened media guidelines clearly correlate with boiling tension between the players and the media. One great example is the Oklahoma City Thunder of the early 2010s with a younger Russell Westbrook and Kevin Durant. Both weren’t much of a fan of the local Thunder beat. There were also personal conflicts with several reporters in Oklahoma City. The Thunder shielded both of their stars a bit by limiting their availability to interviews between 2013-15.

In more recent seasons, the Brooklyn Nets’ superstars also mastered the art of skirting media responsibilities. Kyrie Irving and the Nets were fined multiple times for skipping media obligations throughout the past few seasons. The availability of Sean Marks is not enough to compensate for the lack of availability from the franchise cornerstones.

Where to go from here

Repairing this frayed relationship between the Knicks, media, and fans will require a coordinated effort from multiple stakeholders involved.

First, Knicks content creators should continue to create and provide innovative content to their readers. Note that while this is fan-centric, it must remain objective, whether in a positive or negative depiction of the team. They should also push to break barriers within the confines of a traditional press coverage function of the Knicks (to be explained later).

Next, the traditional Knicks beat must continue to embrace innovation and creative and nuanced reporting. Note that lack of access has not prevented a curious reporter from finishing the job. Fred Katz of The Athletic recently wrote an excellent piece on Miles McBride’s upbringing and how it helped embody his defensive intensity. He got some quotes from McBride, as well as a couple from Summer League coach Dice Yoshimoto. Excellent reporting can exist with a team that wins nine games or a team that wins 59 games.

A market exists for objective and nuanced reporting, whether it’s a positive or a negative depiction. It’s incumbent on everyone in this space to recognize the demand and continue to publish excellent content. It’s even more important for legacy reporters to immerse themselves in the digital space. You’ll see it with reporters like Marc Berman hopping on podcasts on occasion. The Athletic does a great job with film breakdown, but you’re starting to see depth of conversation in legacy print journalism, even if begrudgingly so. However, chiding the work of content creators as “fluff pieces” or “propaganda” doesn’t help anyone’s cause.

Additionally, the Knicks’ public relations staff should consider expanding their credentials to content creators. It’ll allow for more nuanced discussions while in a positive light with the team. Furthermore, it’ll allow the front office to reach a younger market and sell their message clearer to a hungry fanbase.

Finally, the NBA needs to be more transparent about their media availability rules. I believe this is the biggest source of tension for everyone. Knicks fans have no idea on media availability requirements because it’s not published on any of the league websites. Most of the Knicks’ beat are chiding the team for not following the “honor code,” for a lack of a better term. If reporters have an issue with the Knicks’ lack of availability, that issue should be broached with the NBA rather than the Knicks. 

It’s time to accept that the rules of yesterday are not the rules of today or tomorrow. The days of greater access to players are mostly gone. I believe that locker room access will continue to remain limited for the foreseeable future. Additionally, the methods of reporting must and will evolve to meet the needs of a society at-large that demands clear and concise information. Accepting these realities will result in a greater relationship between the organization, media, and the fans.