By JASON CARRIS
Vineland (N.J.) Daily Journal

Web this. Web that. Web, Web, Web.

The W-E-B is used in some variation of catch phrase in every newsroom in America these days. Write for the Web. Refer to the Web. Don't jump on the Web.

But for today's sports editor, especially those at small- and medium-sized papers, producing an online sports product is as foreign a concept as biochemistry or cattle futures.

Since few sports editors are versed in the intricacies of the Internet, training and resources are obstacles to a timely, high-quality Web product.

Just ask Kirk Seminoff of the Wichita Eagle.

"Dear Santa, please bring me a Web guru who can handle all sports questions and works exclusively for us. Here are some milk and cookies. Love, Kirk."

Brad Zemanik of the Appleton (Wis.) Post-Crescent had similar feelings.

"Who is going to do it? And what gives elsewhere when you make that decision?" Zemanik said.

Asked what he needed to improve his paper's sports site: "Several full-time bodies to pull it off correctly."

Those remarks were symbolic of most of the respondents to this month's survey of under-100,000 and under-40,000 circulation papers. Staffing and training continue to be the biggest stumbling blocks to better Web sites. However, most sports editors said they don't feel pressure from their superiors to improve the site, either.

"The upper management's mindset about the Web site drives me crazy," said Scott Faldon, sports editor of the Southwest Times Record in Fort Smith, Ark. "We are totally squandering our opportunity with it, but nobody seems to care or even realize what we're missing. ... I've volunteered to update the site myself, but I'm just banging my head against the wall."

Here are some of the survey results:

Eighty-five percent of respondents said their newsroom has at least one full-time online producer. Few, however, have sports-only online producers.

Twenty-five percent said they require writers to file for Web deadlines.

About half said they emphasize breaking news on the Web site.

Sixty percent said they have Internet-only products (Supplemental items, such as photo galleries, blogs, forums, audio/video, etc.).

One of the more interesting debates among sports departments is the idea of posting breaking news. In the major markets, it's a no-brainer. But in smaller markets with less competition and fewer online-dedicated resources, papers oftentimes refrain from overusing the Web to break news.

"This is where the battle between the sports department and the news side heats up," said Jeff Brown of the La Crosse (Wis.) Tribune. "News posts breaking stories on the site immediately. In sports, we pick and choose (much to our editor's displeasure). Why? Because even though we are a smaller market, we have two TV stations that regularly check our Web site."

Generally speaking, sports editors consider online demands a no-win situation.

"We have expanded in so many areas in the editorial department in the last few years, including the Web, but actually decreased in staffing," said Tom Housenick of The Daily Item in Sunbury, Pa.

It's a unilateral problem for sports editors.

 Back to index