FBallFan123
Active Member
Money quote:
“They’re nervous,” says Windy Dees, a sports-administration professor at the University of Miami. “They have to be. They’re hemorrhaging viewers left and right.”
ESPN Hemorrhaging
- Thread starter Pharm Frog
- Start date
Money quote:
“They’re nervous,” says Windy Dees, a sports-administration professor at the University of Miami. “They have to be. They’re hemorrhaging viewers left and right.”
Deep Purple
Full Member
I don't really care about political biases at CNN or MSNBC or Fox News because those are ostensibly "news" channels, and every knowledgeable person understands that bias is implicit in their reporting and analysis, no matter what fake claims they make to fairness, objectivity, and balance. They all have their political point of view, or bias, even as they all claim that they have no bias in the face of patently obvious evidence to the contrary.
I do get pretty ticked about political biases on ESPN, because it bills itself not as a "news" channel, but as a "sports" channel -- meaning you wouldn't expect to encounter political content there.. But you do, and quite regularly. And all very discernably from the perspective of the left.
I don't want politics mixed in with my sport news, whether I agree with the politics or not.
FBallFan123
Active Member
This one may not go away for a while....
So, Miami fan in the early 90s, nebraska in the mid 90s and OSU now? Did you pick back up your Miami fandom in the early 00's then move on to USC in the mid 00's and now like Bama and OSU?
Fred Garvin
I service the entire Quad Cities Area
Nice use of key word from thread title
netty2424
Full Member
Trump needs to worry about more important ship than ESPN's viewership. Good grief.
Pharm Frog
Full Member
Excerpt from an article by ESPN's Public Editor earlier this evening...
As to the larger question of ESPN’s overall political climate, I still stand by what I wrote late last year: If you consume as much of ESPN’s content as I have for the past 22 months, it seems clear the company leans left. I don’t think anyone ever made an executive decision to go that route as much as the personalities the network has promoted into high-profile positions tend to be more liberal, and as their voices are amplified, the overall voice has shifted with it.
But I still think it’s a problem that needs to be addressed if ESPN plans to better navigate the intersection of sports, politics and culture, and if it wants to hold onto a larger share of its audience in these days of unbundling. Bringing back Hank Williams Jr. for Monday Night Football isn’t the answer; the answer is improved ideological diversity in ESPN’s overall products.
http://www.espn.com/blog/ombudsman/post/_/id/871/espn-awash-in-rising-political-tide-2
As to the larger question of ESPN’s overall political climate, I still stand by what I wrote late last year: If you consume as much of ESPN’s content as I have for the past 22 months, it seems clear the company leans left. I don’t think anyone ever made an executive decision to go that route as much as the personalities the network has promoted into high-profile positions tend to be more liberal, and as their voices are amplified, the overall voice has shifted with it.
But I still think it’s a problem that needs to be addressed if ESPN plans to better navigate the intersection of sports, politics and culture, and if it wants to hold onto a larger share of its audience in these days of unbundling. Bringing back Hank Williams Jr. for Monday Night Football isn’t the answer; the answer is improved ideological diversity in ESPN’s overall products.
http://www.espn.com/blog/ombudsman/post/_/id/871/espn-awash-in-rising-political-tide-2
Fred Garvin
I service the entire Quad Cities Area
The point where I lost all respect for ESPN and decided to not watch their non-live sports content was the Adam James / Craig James / Mike Leach imbroglio. Allowing the hooker killer to use his position to lie and distort the truth, leading to Leach's dismissal was criminal. That said, I always hated Mike Leach. Therefore, what really pissed me off about that situation is that it made me sympathetic toward Leach.
I guess it all ended well with Adam James being labeled an entitled punk for life, the Hooker Killer getting fired, subsequently running for senate and getting humiliated, then being considered toxic by everyone such that he is unemployable; along with Leach getting fired and not paid severance, failing as a broadcast analyst and having to coach off in the middle of nowhere at Washington State; Tech regents fighting amongst each other, huge legal bills all around and a legal decision that hosed everyone except the State of Texas.
So there's that.
I guess it all ended well with Adam James being labeled an entitled punk for life, the Hooker Killer getting fired, subsequently running for senate and getting humiliated, then being considered toxic by everyone such that he is unemployable; along with Leach getting fired and not paid severance, failing as a broadcast analyst and having to coach off in the middle of nowhere at Washington State; Tech regents fighting amongst each other, huge legal bills all around and a legal decision that hosed everyone except the State of Texas.
So there's that.
W
Way of the Frog
Guest
Creating their own award show how a certain amount of hubris to it, but when they were first giving the Arthur Ashe Award to people who truly made a difference in their worlds it was somewhat cool.
Then ESPN went and crapped all over that and Arthur's name with Bruce Jenner.
Then ESPN went and crapped all over that and Arthur's name with Bruce Jenner.
Fred Garvin
I service the entire Quad Cities Area
Bruce never won that award. It was only won by the courageous and beautiful Caitlyn. (barf)
Last edited:
FBallFan123
Active Member
http://variety.com/2017/digital/news/pay-tv-losses-cord-cutting-rbc-survey-1202565269/
Pay-TV Losses Could Accelerate to More Than 5 Million U.S. Households per Year, Survey Indicates
-In 2016, the industry dropped about a net 2 million subscribers — and an acceleration of pay-TV losses to more than 5 million annually “does not seem impossible,” RBC Capital Markets analyst Steven Cahall wrote in a report Thursday.
-That estimate is based on a results of an RBC survey of 1,200 U.S. consumers, which found that around 55% of total respondents indicated they will continue to subscribe to traditional pay TV. That suggests 68 million U.S. homes “as the floor that ultimately keep the linear bundle,” according to Cahall, given that there are currently about 124 million households in the country. Currently, there are 86 million U.S. pay-TV households, per SNL Kagan.
-The RBC study comes after research firm eMarketer this month significantly upped its estimates for cord-cutting in 2017, projecting a 33% increase in U.S. adults cancelling traditional pay TV to reach a total of 22.2 million by the end of the year. (Note that eMarketer’s figures represent individuals, not households.)
-Other findings from RBC’s survey:
Pay-TV Losses Could Accelerate to More Than 5 Million U.S. Households per Year, Survey Indicates
-In 2016, the industry dropped about a net 2 million subscribers — and an acceleration of pay-TV losses to more than 5 million annually “does not seem impossible,” RBC Capital Markets analyst Steven Cahall wrote in a report Thursday.
-That estimate is based on a results of an RBC survey of 1,200 U.S. consumers, which found that around 55% of total respondents indicated they will continue to subscribe to traditional pay TV. That suggests 68 million U.S. homes “as the floor that ultimately keep the linear bundle,” according to Cahall, given that there are currently about 124 million households in the country. Currently, there are 86 million U.S. pay-TV households, per SNL Kagan.
-The RBC study comes after research firm eMarketer this month significantly upped its estimates for cord-cutting in 2017, projecting a 33% increase in U.S. adults cancelling traditional pay TV to reach a total of 22.2 million by the end of the year. (Note that eMarketer’s figures represent individuals, not households.)
-Other findings from RBC’s survey:
- Sports: 48% of respondents said access to sports wasn’t important. The 52% who said sports was “very important” or “somewhat important” was titled toward men (59%) versus women (46%).
FBallFan123
Active Member
https://www.axios.com/sports-are-becoming-too-expensive-for-tv-networks-2487213761.html
Sports are becoming expensive for TV networks
The cost of distribution rights for every major televised sport in the United States is more than the ad revenue TV channels get from airing those sports, according to Magna's latest Media Sports Report.
Why it matters: We are quickly approaching a tipping point in which traditional TV providers will no longer be able to justify the cost of carrying sports.
Sports are becoming expensive for TV networks
The cost of distribution rights for every major televised sport in the United States is more than the ad revenue TV channels get from airing those sports, according to Magna's latest Media Sports Report.
Why it matters: We are quickly approaching a tipping point in which traditional TV providers will no longer be able to justify the cost of carrying sports.
Frog-in-law1995
Active Member
tcudoc
Full Member
BrewingFrog
Was I supposed to type something here?
It simply the way the shot is framed. To fit the three guys in, not cut off any body parts in the shot, you're left with Galloway's sloppy appearance.
As the lovely Mrs. Brewingfrog noted, "If he wanted to wear his shirt untucked, he should have shown up in a Guyabera..."
As the lovely Mrs. Brewingfrog noted, "If he wanted to wear his shirt untucked, he should have shown up in a Guyabera..."
FROG PARENTS 1961
Active Member
Everybody has the right to post. With the fake media espn included Trump has always been smart enough to get his message out. And I'm pretty sure he is doing his job. Espn is not just sports anymore. Sadly it has taken a side politically, and stupidly I may add.
P
purplePPO
Guest
I agree. Ultimately it's on Joey Galloway to be professional at all times. Poor decision to rely on someone else to cover for you.
HeidelFrog
Active Member
The fact that we are even talking about ESPN and politics together is a huge ESPN fail. I don't know anyone that wants politics in their sports. Unfortunately these idiots at the network and on air think we actually care about what they say outside of sports.
Moose Stuff
Active Member
I don't think that's what he's worried about here.
