ESPN Cleaning House

[Alford Bailey 13,233]

2 hours ago, Hovadipo said:

 

Michael and Jemele are right in the center of ESPN's new venture of trying to solve all of the world's social issues instead of actually covering sports. They aren't going anywhere anytime soon.

 

This

[Dalton26 17,210]

And our girl Sage Steele got demoted because her political views didn't line up with theirs.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

[IUfan_Charlie 3,867]

2 hours ago, Dalton26 said:

And our girl Sage Steele got demoted because her political views didn't line up with theirs.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

That's probably part of it but I can't be the only one who thought she wasn't very good at her job. Seemed boring and cold to me, spontaneity is needed in that type of role. 

[Old Friend 8,744]

ESPN has become an unrecognizable "embrace debate" and let's make this as controversial as possible network I can no longer tolerate unless they're showing a game I want to see.    The 6:00 SportsCenter is an abysmal piece of television, and the two idiots they've chosen to host it couldn't hold their own in a real sports conversation if their lives depended on it.   Give me Fox Sports, Charles Barkley, and David Feherty.

[Dalton26 17,210]

That's probably part of it but I can't be the only one who thought she wasn't very good at her job. Seemed boring and cold to me, spontaneity is needed in that type of role. 

 

That's not part of it that's the reason. She was instructed to be more political and when she did they received complaints over her political views. She has got racist and horrific messages based on those views and she said the worst came from fellow African Americans basing it on the fact she is black and married to a white man.

 

It's the same thing going on with YouTube right now and their sponsors. It seems like if you're a conservative republican you can't give your opinion anymore without someone attempting to silence you.

 

[Dalton26 17,210]

I would post her statement on it but I don't want things to get too political and she certainly didn't pull any punches.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

[Hoosierfan2017 25,333]

PTI is about the only show I like on ESPN these days. I liked First Take back when Screamin A Smith and Skip Bayless would go at it, I think I watched it every single morning the summer before college. It's boring now with Max Kellerman though.

NBA on TNT is better than anything on ESPN imo. 

[Hoosierfan2017 25,333]

48 minutes ago, Dalton26 said:

 

That's not part of it that's the reason. She was instructed to be more political and when she did they received complaints over her political views. She has got racist and horrific messages based on those views and she said the worst came from fellow African Americans basing it on the fact she is black and married to a white man.

 

It's the same thing going on with YouTube right now and their sponsors. It seems like if you're a conservative republican you can't give your opinion anymore without someone attempting to silence you.

 

It's weird to me that ESPN is pushing to inject left of center political opinions into their sports coverage when it's likely that a large portion of their customer base is to the right. A lot of the people that would like their political takes aren't interested in sports in the first place. ESPN isn't bringing in new viewers by doing this, they're just pushing away current ones. 

[BtownBanner6 1,298]

It's weird to me that ESPN is pushing to inject left of center political opinions into their sports coverage when it's likely that a large portion of their customer base is to the right. A lot of the people that would like their political takes aren't interested in sports in the first place. ESPN isn't bringing in new viewers by doing this, they're just pushing away current ones. 

This thought process is the problem with ESPN right now. Politics and sports have no reason to mix and there's no correlation between the two.

[Alford Bailey 13,233]

4 hours ago, BtownBanner6 said:

This thought process is the problem with ESPN right now. Politics and sports have no reason to mix and there's no correlation between the two.

Most people go to ESPN to get away from politics.

[KB0 827]

I don't think politics is ESPN's issue. People who complain about politics in sports are normally okay with it....when it's their politics. On both sides. 

Cord cutting is a major one. It hurts ESPN more than other companies, because they get a larger share of the cable fee. Something around $7 compared to $2 for most stations. ESPN has paid a large amount of money to have the rights to games (MNF, NBA, etc) and those costs continue to rise. 

To some extent, I understand why ESPN shifted away from being a highlight show. We can now get highlights in real time on twitter and other mediums. We no longer have to wait until the next morning to see a dunk or game winning shot. I think ESPN recognized this and tried to become something more than just highlights, but so far it isn't working. 

Personally, I desperately would love to see them go back to it. Focus on the games and analysis from actual experts. Show some interviews with players and coaches. Talk about match-ups and things to watch for. This is what would interest me. I haven't watched ESPN for a while now. Unless there is a live sporting event. I watch less TV than I used to and if I need background noise I have Netflix to throw on.

It is also alarming to see that ESPN is willing to pay Skip Bayless, Stephen A. Smith, etc multi-million dollars a year, but can't afford to keep around people who do actual real reporting like O'Neil and Werder. Quality journalism is slowly fading away and we're worse off for it as a society.

This response is a little longer than I originally intended, but I think this is a fairly complex issue.   

[Uspshoosier 54,840]

Andy Katz as well. I'm shocked by that one


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

[Stuhoo 91,720]

I don't think politics is ESPN's issue. People who complain about politics in sports are normally okay with it....when it's their politics. On both sides. 
Cord cutting is a major one. It hurts ESPN more than other companies, because they get a larger share of the cable fee. Something around $7 compared to $2 for most stations. ESPN has paid a large amount of money to have the rights to games (MNF, NBA, etc) and those costs continue to rise. 
To some extent, I understand why ESPN shifted away from being a highlight show. We can now get highlights in real time on twitter and other mediums. We no longer have to wait until the next morning to see a dunk or game winning shot. I think ESPN recognized this and tried to become something more than just highlights, but so far it isn't working. 

Personally, I desperately would love to see them go back to it. Focus on the games and analysis from actual experts. Show some interviews with players and coaches. Talk about match-ups and things to watch for. This is what would interest me. I haven't watched ESPN for a while now. Unless there is a live sporting event. I watch less TV than I used to and if I need background noise I have Netflix to throw on.

It is also alarming to see that ESPN is willing to pay Skip Bayless, Stephen A. Smith, etc multi-million dollars a year, but can't afford to keep around people who do actual real reporting like O'Neil and Werder. Quality journalism is slowly fading away and we're worse off for it as a society.
This response is a little longer than I originally intended, but I think this is a fairly complex issue.   

For me?
This post is so incredibly spot on.
I get my highlights ala carte and online. Interesting personalities and investigative reporting are the niches that ESPN could potentially carve out to keep ratings .

[ramadden13 908]

Andy Katz, Dana O'Neil, and Eamonn Brennan could form one heck of a spin-off college basketball reporting entity all on their own. Dana O'Neil's 2013 piece on basketball in the state of Indiana is a masterclass.

[bigrod 3,214]

4 hours ago, KB0 said:

I don't think politics is ESPN's issue. People who complain about politics in sports are normally okay with it....when it's their politics. On both sides.

I agree with everything you've said except this. Personally, I like to watch sports to get away from the constant political assault it seems you get from almost any other news source. I don't align myself to either party. I think the whole idea that there are only two ways to solve our problems is a level of insanity, and I try to limit my exposure to that drivel as much as possible.

I do not want ESPN or anyone else to tell me how I should feel about the issue of the day. Personally, and it's not a conscious decision, but I have been watching less and less ESPN over the last year. I can see why they feel changes need to be made. I'm just not sure they will make the right changes.

[theriverpilot 6,758]

Reminds me of when MTV stopped playing music videos.  ESPN, for me, got too caught up with shows where a few obnoxious hosts or trying to infuse controversy and drama into every story.  Sometimes, simpler is better.

[Walking Boot of Doom 18,170]

Reminds me of when MTV stopped playing music videos.  ESPN, for me, got too caught up with shows where a few obnoxious hosts or trying to infuse controversy and drama into every story.  Sometimes, simpler is better.

Except when you consider ratings.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

[Dalton26 17,210]

11 minutes ago, Walking Boot of Doom said:

Except when you consider ratings.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Well in this case the ratings show simpler is better thats why ESPN's ratings have went down.

[KB0 827]

24 minutes ago, theriverpilot said:

Reminds me of when MTV stopped playing music videos.  ESPN, for me, got too caught up with shows where a few obnoxious hosts or trying to infuse controversy and drama into every story.  Sometimes, simpler is better.

I keep seeing the MTV example thrown around a lot. Do you think MTV would still be around today if all they showed was music videos? I don't. YouTube exists. We have smart phones. They adapted to survive. 

I think the better argument is that they didn't adapt in the correct way. Perhaps MTV should have shown more up and coming artist videos. Or maybe they should have produced features similar to the 30 for 30 models on popular bands. Things of that nature.

I'm not an MTV fan by any means, but they read the the tea leaves and made adjustments. MTV is still around today. Many brands fail to adapt (Blockbuster and Kodak instantly jump to mind) and either die off or become significantly less profitable.

ESPN is trying to adapt. Many, myself included, just don't think they have done a great job with it so far.

[Dalton26 17,210]

Just now, KB0 said:

I keep seeing the MTV example thrown around a lot. Do you think MTV would still be around today if all they showed was music videos? I don't. YouTube exists. We have smart phones. They adapted to survive. 

I think the better argument is that they didn't adapt in the correct way. Perhaps MTV should have shown more up and coming artist videos. Or maybe they should have produced features similar to the 30 for 30 models on popular bands. Things of that nature.

I'm not an MTV fan by any means, but they read the the tea leaves and made adjustments. MTV is still around today. Many brands fail to adapt (Blockbuster and Kodak instantly jump to mind) and either die off or become significantly less profitable.

I think you make great points, ESPN thus far has completely missed the boat when it comes to changes while MTV actually got better IMO. They jumped on the reality tv train before it was really a huge thing and now every channel has some reality tv in some way shape or form.