Many of the reporters and editors who have joined “Gov & Beyond” have some experience with government, policy or the military from the start of their careers. In this episode, hosts Luca Pagni and Joyson Cherian sat down with Matt Bracken, editor-in-chief of FedScoop, who took a decidedly different route to the federal tech beat: by way of the sports desk.
Born and raised in Michigan, Matt graduated from the University of Michigan, where he dreamed of becoming a full-time sports journalist. After graduation, this dream carried him to Tucson, Arizona, where he worked for the Arizona Daily Star before moving east and joining the Baltimore Sun as a sports producer, editor and writer.
“I was very motivated to be a sports journalist when I was in college, and I feel very fortunate that I was able to do that at the Sun at a young age,” he shared.
While sports journalism might appear to be an entirely different world compared to Matt’s current role covering the intersection of technology and the federal government, he and Joyson discussed how the two beats overlap more often than you might expect – from stadium construction projects to drones deployed by the FBI and Department of Homeland Security to secure World Cup venues.
From Box Scores to the Beltway
So what pulls a career sports journalist into the world of federal IT? Part of it, Matt admitted, was simple fatigue. Sports coverage meant long hours, nights, weekends and holidays – and, after a while, reporting the same kinds of stories over and over again. Still, Matt was quick to point out that sports journalism was an ideal training ground for policy reporting.
“As a sports journalist, you have to be able to write all sorts of different kinds of pieces,” he explained. “You’re writing breaking news, you’re writing long features, you’re writing analysis pieces. It really pushes you to flex different writing muscles… and you have to be able to write quickly and efficiently because it’s a very deadline-oriented journalistic discipline.”
Following his tenure with The Sun, a new role in communications brought Matt to Washington, D.C., where he decided to “take the next step” in his career and dig into federal government topics as a policy journalist at Morning Consult.
“Morning Consult was a very good intro to that world,” Matt remarked. “Especially because it allowed me to focus not just on one area of government policy, but four, in tech, energy, finance and health.”
Matt led polling-driven coverage of these policy areas, but resonated most with technology after realizing just how much federal technology decisions impact every aspect of life around the country. This interest led him to Scoop News Group, where he assumed the role of managing editor of FedScoop and CyberScoop before being promoted to editor-in-chief of FedScoop.
Today, Matt oversees FedScoop journalists as they report on government modernization efforts, how agencies use Artificial Intelligence (AI), cybersecurity and “essentially, anything that’s related to tech that’s going on within the federal government.”
In addition to his editing duties, Matt also reports on various federal agencies, including the federal financial regulatory agencies, the Department of Housing & Urban Development, the Department of Labor and more.
AI, DOGE and the Inbox in Between
When asked how the government media landscape has evolved over the past couple of years, Matt pointed to his observation of how far some long-running stories have come. Just a few years ago, much of the conversation centered on agencies completing their AI use case inventories; those efforts have since progressed considerably. Other stories, like the Department of Veterans Affairs’ long-running electronic health record modernization, are still very much in progress.
But the biggest change Matt described stemmed from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which fundamentally altered how federal agencies operate, with a major push toward efficiency and fraud detection. In Matt’s view, the effort was ultimately unsuccessful, but it tapped into an interest in leaner, more efficient government that cut across party lines.
As the government media landscape continues to evolve, AI-related topics have also become a significant focus area for the FedScoop team, though Matt shared that he has noticed “a huge push” in the past few years to label everything as AI, resulting in an influx of requests from communications professionals in his inbox.
“I think, just because of the proliferation of AI, we’ve been drowning in pitches,” he hypothesized. “I think what I’m [more interested in] is industry folks who are kind of, like, up front and honest about AI not being the solution to every problem that there is.”
Despite the drawbacks of the recent AI boom, Matt acknowledged one silver lining: the flood of AI-related pitches has made it easier than ever to spot – and skip – pitches from people who lack real expertise in the technology they’re promoting. He went on to share that, when reviewing media pitches, he is always looking for experts with genuine federal government experience.
“[There will always be a place for] those people who are boots on the ground, who have been there and done that and can give our readers a sense of what things might look like from the inside now,” he emphasized. “It’s much tougher over these past two years to get participation from the agencies… so we really do rely on that federal expertise, those alums that are working with various vendors and industry groups after having served the government.”
Listen to the podcast or read the transcript below to hear more from Matt, and stick around to the end of the episode to learn which movie he and Joyson share a love for, and why his niece blames peanut butter for the size of his brain.
Timestamps
0:36 – From box scores to inside the beltway
6:54 – The evolution of the government media landscape over the last two years
13:54 – Defense tech may be hot, but the everyday citizen still matters
15:52 – The recipe to a useful pitch
18:14 – Matt’s movie club
20:06 – His disdain for peanut butter and the Ohio State fight song
Transcript
Intro: Welcome to Gov & Beyond. I’m your host. Luca Pagni, here with my co-host Joyson Cherian. This podcast features conversations with the newsmakers and influencers at the center of today’s public sector news cycles from our studio at W2 Communications, let’s go Gov & Beyond.
Luca Pagni (LP): Welcome, everyone, to Gov & Beyond. I’m your host, Luca Pagni, here with my co-host Joyson Cherian. We’re excited to be joined today by Matt Bracken, Editor-in-Chief at FedScoop. Matt, welcome to the show.
Matt Bracken (MB): Thank you guys for having me. Glad to be back with the W2 crew.
LP: We’re glad that you joined back. Matt, just for the folks that maybe didn’t get a chance to listen to you when you were on our Inside the Media Minds podcast, but we’d love to start by learning more about your background and role at FedScoop. Tell us a little bit more about yourself and your journey to this point.
MB: Yeah, for sure. So yeah, starting back at the very beginning, born and raised in Michigan, graduated from the University of Michigan, did a lot of sports media coverage there while I was in college. started my journalism career at the Arizona Daily Star in Tucson, jumped over to the Baltimore Sun. I spent a decade at that paper. First as a sports producer and editor and writer. And then capped off my tenure there as director of audience engagement, where I led social media and digital projects for the newsroom. Did a quick stint in comms, so spent a little time in in your world. That got me to DC and then I pivoted from there to to digital media and and I guess more specifically policy media with Morning Consult, a now defunct newsroom unfortunately. But at that place I led polling driven policy coverage of tech, finance, energy, and health. Was there for about four years when the higher-ups decided they no longer wanted to do journalism. And I found myself dealing with my first newsroom layoff. But it turned out to be a blessing because I landed here at Scoop News Group, was hired three years ago, actually, almost to the day, as managing editor of FedScoop and CyberScoop. And then a year ago I was promoted to editor-in-chief at FedScoop. and I’ve been doing that ever since. overseeing a team of reporters that cover federal government technology, how agencies use AI, modernization efforts, cybersecurity, essentially anything that’s related to tech that’s going on within the federal government, we want to cover. And then I guess additionally, in addition to my editing duties, I also cover the federal financial regulatory agencies plus HUD, Department of Labor, Social Security Administration, and a few others.
Joyson Cherian (JC): It’s quite a diversification, you know, starting in the sports realm and coming into the government space and government tech space. What connections or similarities are there in sort of covering both sides of two very disparate industries, but then separately, you know, what inspired you to get into covering government news and policy?
MB: Yeah, it’s a really good question. I was very motivated to be a sports journalist when I was in college and feel very fortunate that I was able to do that at The Sun at a young age, but eventually grew pretty tired. You know, long hours, nights, weekends, holidays. just kind of a sense of covering the same type of story over and over again. But I do think it gave me a really good foundation for policy journalism just because as a sports journalist, you have to be able to write all sorts of different kinds of pieces. You’re writing breaking news, you’re writing long features, you’re writing analysis pieces. It really pushes you to flex different writing muscles, I think. and you also have to write quickly and efficiently because it’s a very deadline-oriented journalistic discipline. So I think that set me with a good foundation for policy journalism. But I think first I had to sort of get outside of the sports guy branding, so to speak. You can get labeled that way pretty easily, and it can be tough to move on to something considered more serious within journalism. So I was lucky at The Sun to be able to move within the newsroom to lead audience engagement. And in that role, I was able to work with every department. Do some, you know, real bread and butter community journalism there. Was on a team that was named a Pulitzer Finalist for breaking news. So a really rewarding and valuable journalism experience. And, you know, I love local journalism, will forever be a big champion of that. But then I think I was increasingly interested in sort of like taking the next step and and wanted to come to DC and dig into more federal government issues and you know, the newsroom that I was at prior to Scoop, Morning Consult was a very good intro to that world, especially because it allowed me to focus not just on you know, one area of government policy before in tech, energy, finance and health. and tech really resonated with me the most. I think, you know, we live and breathe this stuff every day. But when we kind of escape the D.C. bubble and and go back to wherever we’re from, at least in my case, I go back home to Michigan and you know, we we maybe take for granted how much happens in this city and the impact that it has all over the country, especially with tech. federal government tech decisions affect every aspect of of life throughout the country. So, you know, I feel really grateful to be able to do it on a daily basis and just really proud of the work that we get to do here at FedScoop.
JC: It’s interesting, especially in the last, you know, year in the DC area, you really get an understanding of how interconnected government and sports can be as well because of the interconnected policies. We’ve seen that just in the DC area of the, all the effort that goes into creating the next Commander’s stadium and all the efforts that have gone into and the negotiations that have gone back and forth about the Washington Wizards arena as well.
MB: Yeah, absolutely. And Lindsey Wilkinson, an excellent reporter on the FedScoop team, did a lot of great work over the summer about what the FBI and DHS were doing with regard to drones in the World Cup. So there’s just a bunch of crossover there.
LP: I kinda wanna dive into this rabbit hole a little bit further just because, you know, as I alluded to at the beginning of the recording of, it’s been two years since you’ve been on the podcast. How have you seen the media landscape and just government evolve in that time frame?
MB: Yeah. I mean, a lot has changed. Some things remain the same. I think a couple of years ago we were probably talking a lot about how agencies are completing their AI use case inventories. Things have very much progressed on that front. I think anyone interested in that coverage should seek out Madison Alder, a senior reporter at FedScoop. She did great work back then and is continuing to do great work on that front today. Other things like, you know, we covered a lot back then the VA’s electronic healthcare modernization record. And and sure enough, two years later we still are. Sophie Will, our newest reporter, at FedScoop, is still digging into that and broke some news on that in terms of a contract hike that caught lawmakers by surprise. So some things stay the same, twists and turns. But I would say the biggest difference, when we spoke last, it was in the pre-DOGE era. And that that’s kind of changed everything in terms of how agencies are operating. You know, there’s obviously this big splashy push for more efficiency and fraud detection within agencies. I think now we’re far enough removed. We’ve read enough independent watchdog reports, we’ve crunched the numbers. I think it’s, you know, fair to say it was a huge bust, but there was interest, I think initially across party lines in the things that that group was at least paying lip service to, despite the failed effort. So I think companies in particular, if we’re talking about like the industry perspective, they’ve sort of picked up that mantle and run with it. And I think it seems like just based on the pitches we get, there’s a lot of earnest efforts in terms of thinking about ways to provide more efficiencies, work to eliminate fraud. It feels like that that language has increased and you know, while the DOGE effort I think again was quite unsuccessful, there are people who really do care about these things and are trying to make a difference within agencies.
LP: Absolutely. And yeah, you hit on the, I’ll call it the word de jour from last year of “efficiency” kind of, you know, seemed to be the prominent word. And just kind of going back and touching on another aspect of my previous question of how have you seen the evolution of the media landscape or the government media kind of influence the way that you know, different companies are trying to approach you and the FedScoop team.
MB: Yeah, well I think just because of the proliferation of AI, we’ve been drowning in pitches. You know, our product does this, our product does that. And it just, it feels like in the past two years there’s just been a huge push to say everything is AI. So I think what I’m interested more, is in industry folks who are kind of like up front and honest about AI not being the solution to every problem that there is. Certainly there are very targeted use cases that can be game changers in in various fields, but the hype around the technology has often not matched up to the reality. So we do want to keep reporting on AI very critically, but digging into, I guess the uses of the technology that actually do make a positive difference for agency workforces and the public more broadly. I would say relatedly it has become probably easier to ignore pitches that clearly don’t have the expertise when it comes to pitching the technology. I think W2, you guys, you know, like we read your pitches for sure. It feels like you really do your homework, you know what we’re covering and can cite back to things not just via like a quick Google search of “what did Matt write recently?” It’s like you guys I think are really like well versed about what we’re all doing in this area and that stands out. but yeah, there’s just been a lot of people that throw AI on every single pitch they send out. And it’s very easy to separate the ones who know from the ones who don’t. I think a new one that I expect to see more that’ll be easy to dismiss is people who adopt language, new alternate phrases for AI. You know, it my eyes just roll in the back of my head when I see that being sent out. Those are pretty easy to dismiss and tune out. We’ll see if things change as we get further down the road, but right now that’s one that you know, is pretty easy to dismiss.
JC: Speaking of citing back to other things that, you know, what you just talked about in terms of areas of interest and how things are helping, you know, government employees, how technologies are actually helping government employees. that actually echoes of an the a very similar point that your colleague Drew Lawrence at DefenseScoop made to us where he wants to know, you know, how are things and technologies helping things for the warfighter, people, personnel in the military and and telling that human component seems to be an actual differentiator versus, you know, someone trying to, you know, talk to you about the speeds and feeds of the technology that’s they’re trying to get in front of the government.
MB: Yeah, I agree with that completely. Drew’s a great reporter and yeah, I think we take our responsibility pretty seriously to separate fact from the fiction to avoid buying into various hype cycles. You know, they’re again using AI as a catch-all is is something that we’re constantly on the lookout for especially you saw in the DOGE era agency, using AI as a cover to downsize workforces.
JC: Mm-hmm.
MB: And then obviously the natural evolution from that is too many cuts, DOGE having to reverse some of those decisions, agencies bringing back people, because not all things can be done with a flip of the switch or just pushing an AI on button. I think we really saw in real time how important career civil servants were to the federal government and technology more broadly. So that’s something that FedScoop we’re really interested in covering even more.
JC: So speaking of FedScoop’s areas of coverage, you know, I think you know in government and government technology in general, it feels like the defense sector seems to gain the lion’s share of updates and interest in terms of technology changes and innovation. But from a Fed Civ perspective, what are the topics and trends that are catching your interest?
MB: Yeah, I mean, we’re always going to cover sort of FedScoop’s bread and butter very closely, which is modernization efforts within agencies, cybersecurity investments, the use of AI. But I think, yeah, the workforce issues are of particular interest to us in this new era as well. One thing we’re especially looking out for going forward is sort of this push and pull within agencies between longstanding tech staffers within agencies and the DOGE adjacent people that have been brought in within the past couple of years. Obviously DOGE as a body has morphed and evolved and now technically doesn’t exist. But Russell Vogue, the OMB director, said before a congressional hearing earlier this year that DOGE has essentially been institutionalized within agencies, meaning people who abide by that kind of ethos are scattered throughout various agencies. And, you know, I think maybe some have adapted well to the old way of doing things, others maybe not so much. But I think I get the sense that there is this kind of push and pull between the careers, between the newcomers, the Silicon Valley influenced tech workers who are still spread throughout the federal government and I think that’s a dynamic that we’re gonna be watching very closely going forward.
LP: You know, kind of just going back a little bit of, you know, how we were talking about with the proliferation of AI and just kind of the differentiating yourself in this new world. And like you said, you guys are getting spammed with tons of pitches on a day to day. What really makes vendors or certain pitches stand out as unique and novel and of value to you and the FedScoop team?
MB: It’s a really good question. I mean, we’re always looking for pitches that present experts that have federal government experience. There will always be a place for us to work with PR firms so we can get those voices, you know, those people who are boots on the ground, who had been there and done that, and can give our readers a sense of what things might look like from the inside now, ’cause it is really tough. It’s much tougher over these past two years to get participation from the agencies and even some communication staffs. So we really do rely on that federal expertise. Those alums that are, you know, working with various vendors and industry groups after having served the government. You know, we do appreciate it if or it catches our eye, I guess I should say, if we can get a sense that the person pitching us is familiar with our, not to say that they can read our minds and know exactly what we’re gonna want to write about, but if there is a familiarity and not just, I just Googled this person’s name and this is the most recent thing that they wrote, I’m gonna refer back to that and that’s gonna be like a an easy trick. It’s pretty easy to tell the difference between people who have done their homework and who are really living in this space versus ones who are sending a hundred of the same pitches to various tech reporters throughout the industry.
LP: Absolutely. I mean, definitely can’t be mind readers as much as we try, but like you said, it just comes down to the intimate knowledge and understanding of, you know, staying on top of the latest stories that you are covering and kind of seeing the trend that underlies all of them.
MB: Definitely.
JC: Matt, as we close the podcast, we have a few questions that are designed to help us get to know you, the personality behind the bylines and the editorial work a little bit better. And it helps reveal you know a little bit behind the curtain of who we are talking to a little bit more than just the professional side of things. So I’ll start with our first get to know you question. What is one of your most frequently watched movies? If you come across it, you’re gonna stop what you’re doing and start watching.
MB: Yeah, man, this question makes me miss the days of cable TV, the pre streaming era. ’cause I am a bit of an annoying film bro for sure. So it’s I guess I stumble across things more rarely these days, but I can get very sucked into crime movies like Heat, a lot of the Michael Mann films, The Town in a similar vein. Bank robbing movies. I think Groundhog Day still might be like my most rewatchable movie of all time. This is kind of like a dark one in more recent development, but The Worst Person In The World. I don’t know if you guys are familiar with that one. It’s a film out of Norway from a few years ago. It’s really about millennial ennui, I would say, in a very dark, uh Nordic, kind of tone. So yeah, I could talk about movies all day. I don’t wanna ramble though.
JC: It’s funny, I literally brought up Groundhog Day the other day as one of my most rewatchable movies.
MB: Nice, yeah, it’s classic, man. It just it feels like it will be timeless. Yeah, I’ll come back to it in fifty years and it’ll still be as resonant.
LP: Well, kind of flipping the direction here a little bit, ’cause as Joyson and I have done these podcasts, you know, we’ve learned that when you ask people what they like, they’ll tell you. But when you ask them what they hate, they get really passionate and heated about it. So to that end, what is just one, you know, either dish, food ingredient, or something that you just absolutely do not like, you hate it.
MB: Super easy answer, peanut butter. I’ve hated peanut butter my entire life. I know it’s a hot take. I see your face, Joyson. Yeah, it’s to the point where I have a five year old niece who loves peanut butter as most children do. And my sister in law, I think, read a study that said peanut butter helps improve brain function. So my niece has sort of extrapolated that to mean that I have a smaller brain than her because I hate peanut butter. So shout out to Adelina. She’s the best, but peanut butter, no thank you.
JC: And then our closing question for today. If you never had to hear this song again, you would be extremely happy. What song is that?
MB: Alright, this is tough. I thought about this a lot. I’m gonna say the Ohio State fight song because if I never heard the Ohio State fight song again, that would probably mean that maybe they’ve been disbanded as a college football program. They would never, you know, play for a national championship again. Maybe they’ve been kicked out of the Big Ten. So no more Michigan-Ohio State games. They would just be just completely wiped off the map in terms of a college football program. So yeah, that would be my take. The Ohio State fight song.
JC: Luca, any commentary on that?
LP: Out of my dearest respect for Matt, I will keep all comments to myself on that one.
MB: Wait, Luca, are you a Buckeye? Did I not know this?
LP: I’m a Maryland alum, but I grew up an Ohio State fan, so…
MB: No, I didn’t know.
LP: Well, truth comes out. I’ll let it slide.
MB: I’m so sorry. I have no beef with the Terps. I wish them the best. But, you know, I…
LP: They’re never relevant, so it’s okay.
MB: …That’s amazing. I had no idea.
LP: Well all good. Matt, thank you so much for your time today. We really appreciated it. If any of our listeners wanted to learn more about you and the work you’re doing, how can they reach you?
MB: Yeah, come to FedScoop.com. you know, email me. can find me on Signal, Twitter, LinkedIn for sure, Matt Bracken, on all those platforms. Would love to hear from people and appreciate the time with you guys.
LP: Perfect. Well, thank you to everyone who tuned into this episode. And Matt, thank you again for helping us go, Gov & Beyond!
MB: Thanks, guys.
Outro: Thank you for joining us on today’s episode of “Gov & Beyond.” To learn more about our podcast and hear all of our episodes. Please visit us at w2comm.com/govandbeyond, and make sure to follow us on LinkedIn and Twitter at Govandbeyond. You can also subscribe anywhere podcasts are found.