Link: ESPN pinky swears to stop political commentary

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
45,585
47,149
187
Really?

Only saw one side, on this post (with all the usual characters applauding), yet no one said "Uh, yeah..............this will get it kicked to NS, so you might want to tone it down."



Seriously, you were there, when some of this took place. You knew athletes who might have known it was going on. And if they did, they kept it to themselves.

But someone from API knows the answer. We know why he "knows". So, spare me the "both sides" argument.

So, since we know why he knows, yet remained silent, and did not call out our visitor, is that also a "political" response?

Was it apathy, or just "whatever, dude................"? Or just being nice hosts?


(I guess even being non-political can be spun as being political, if you really want it to be.)

Time for pre-dinner nap.
Wait, what are we talking about here?
 

BamaInMo1

All-American
Oct 27, 2006
2,012
481
102
53
Cumming, GA
You can definitely talk about sports without bringing up politics. They did it for years before ESPN thought it would be a good idea to follow the likes of CNN, Fox News and MSNBC.
If I want to hear about an athlete's political opinion I will watch the actual news.
If I want to hear about sports I don't want to hear about a bunch of politics and social issues. There are platforms in which to discuss those issues.
If you're a sports station/outlet then stick to sports.
If you're an athlete and want to give a political opinon then contact CNN, Fox or MSNBC, etc.
I don't watch ESPN much except if a good sporting event is on because I don't want to hear the hot air from "sports talking heads" too lazy to actually report and give facts and such.
 

NationalTitles18

TideFans Legend
May 25, 2003
29,848
35,153
362
Mountainous Northern California
If the rule we are talking about is player compensation (and probably drug issues as well) then I think its almost impossible to not touch on topics many would consider political while having a fair discussion. If its a penalty during a game then I agree, no reason to bring politics into it.

Idk I don't completely disagree, in fact I think I probably mostly agree with you, i just also don't think the line is always that clear.
As I said previously, social overlaps with political. There is a way to broach the topic without being overtly political, especially breaking things down to liberal/conservative or the like.

In my view calling a policy/rule (NCAA rules) unfair and disadvantageous is more a social commentary (even saying it may put minorities and poor people at more disadvantage) while saying that the librarian party is better than the cafeteria party on these issues is more political in nature.

Do people sometimes read into something more than is there? Yes.

Do people sometimes try to get too preachy for a sports network or forum? Yes.

You basically have to ask yourself whether that commentary is more social or more political, understanding the two overlap and that some people are more averse while others are looking for a fight and still others think their way is the only way.
 

4Q Basket Case

FB|BB Moderator
Staff member
Nov 8, 2004
9,612
12,988
237
Tuscaloosa
It took a minute, but it finally showed on the bottom line. It was argued here that the falling subscriptions were from people simply cutting the cord all together, but there was enough of a migration away due to politics that the message was received at the top.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Millennials and younger are the drivers behind cord-cutting. Not the only ones, but the drivers because of their generally tighter embrace of alternative technology. Members of the OFC used to be the drivers of ESPN viewership.

So management decisions based on the idea that declining viewership was a function of cord-cutting were at best wishful thinking, but really lacking a logical basis. In other words, downright stupid.

Denying facts in evidence because, see, I've got this other set of things that I really, really want to be true. So I'm going to make decisions that affect shareholders guided by what I wish were true...because, well, it's so much more the way things should be.

Disney shareholders should be in revolt.
 
Last edited:

DzynKingRTR

TideFans Legend
Dec 17, 2003
42,389
29,689
287
Vinings, ga., usa
The mods do a pretty decent job of keeping politics off the football page. It really isn't that hard. There is a reason this board has a nonsports board (and why it had to be split into 2 different boards). Some people cannot help themselves to bring politics into every conversation and that includes idiot talking heads on a supposed sports network.
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,344
31,546
187
South Alabama
Millennials and younger are the drivers behind cord-cutting. Not the only ones, but the drivers because of their generally tighter embrace of alternative technology. Members of the OFC used to be the drivers of ESPN viewership.

So management decisions based on the idea that declining viewership was a function of cord-cutting were at best wishful thinking, but really lacking a logical basis. In other words, downright stupid.

Denying facts in evidence because, see, I've got this other set of things that I really, really want to be true. So I'm going to make decisions that affect shareholders guided by what I wish were true...because, well, it's so much more the way things should be.

Disney shareholders should be in revolt.
A Disney shareholder still makes buckoos of money without ESPN and other cable entities. So no need for a revolt.



Another thing is the Mouse is already in the streaming game and making a lot of money doing so with a big chunk of Hulu. They also have plans to bringing their own services this year for other properties.

This whole issue of non politics is more about shows like “1st take” and the shows in the midday. They had problems with folks like Jamele Hill, Rob Parker, Stephen A, and Kellerman needlessly interjecting racial politics and Trump segments into their material. Like for instance, Kellerman before Super Bowl 51 went on weeks worth of tweeting and interjecting in the program about “we must demand Brady to reveal who he voted for in 2016”. It was stuff like that. Those shows were basically becoming the View, and People were getting turned off about them. Disney is trying to get folks back to watching them without filling the time slots with Sportscenter reruns. Keep in mind Stephen A is the highest paid sports commentator in the country, so it would be kinda stupid to pay him for nothing.
 

4Q Basket Case

FB|BB Moderator
Staff member
Nov 8, 2004
9,612
12,988
237
Tuscaloosa
A Disney shareholder still makes buckoos of money without ESPN and other cable entities. So no need for a revolt.



Another thing is the Mouse is already in the streaming game and making a lot of money doing so with a big chunk of Hulu. They also have plans to bringing their own services this year for other properties.

This whole issue of non politics is more about shows like “1st take” and the shows in the midday. They had problems with folks like Jamele Hill, Rob Parker, Stephen A, and Kellerman needlessly interjecting racial politics and Trump segments into their material. Like for instance, Kellerman before Super Bowl 51 went on weeks worth of tweeting and interjecting in the program about “we must demand Brady to reveal who he voted for in 2016”. It was stuff like that. Those shows were basically becoming the View, and People were getting turned off about them. Disney is trying to get folks back to watching them without filling the time slots with Sportscenter reruns. Keep in mind Stephen A is the highest paid sports commentator in the country, so it would be kinda stupid to pay him for nothing.
You make a legitimate point...I overstated the case.

The fact is that, over the previous 5 years, DIS trailed the S&P pretty consistently, mainly on concerns about what they paid for ESPN. I recent months, however, DIS spiked significantly, and that spike turned the 5-year trailing performance into leading performance, though I don't know what caused it to pop.

A revolt isn't called for. But some serious accountability is, and only time will tell whether this is a true change in management philosophy or just posturing.
 

Redwood Forrest

Hall of Fame
Sep 19, 2003
11,046
913
237
77
Boaz, AL USA
There is no such thing as a neutral stance. Not remarking on something or censoring opinions is in itself a political position. Often it favors conservatism in this country but it cuts both ways.
We will have to disagree on this point. I know a man who owned a country grocery store in the seventies and he had rule: Do not discuss religion, sports or politics while at the store. This did not make him anti-war or a hawk. It did not make him a Bama fan or a Tiger. It make him neither Catholic or Jewish or Protestant. Today he would not discuss Gay marriage I am certain because he would offend gay customers or straight customers.


Once I did not vote (abstained) from voting on a Pastor a church. I was accused of being AGAINST him. I was not against him nor was I for him. I did not vote because according to the church rule book I was not supposed to vote. I know there are certain subjects that a person must take sides on but not all subjects are like that.
 

AlexanderFan

Hall of Fame
Jul 23, 2004
11,194
7,696
187
Birmingham
Look, you can report sports and it not be political.

“The Cubs scored 4 runs in the eighth inning to defeat the Nationals at sunny Wrigley Field.”

“Tiger Woods was detained by police for questioning after Woods was found asleep in his car at a traffic signal.”

No politics, just straight facts. When you start asking for opinions or attempting to guess motivation is when the political overtures begin to creep in. ESPN became guilty of valuing and televising opinions and assumptions over actual fact and reporting.

Stephen A. will be kept around for two reasons: his sources and the not having to deal with the public and sports world backlash if they fired him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Redwood Forrest

Hall of Fame
Sep 19, 2003
11,046
913
237
77
Boaz, AL USA
We will have to disagree on this point. I know a man who owned a country grocery store in the seventies and he had rule: Do not discuss religion, sports or politics while at the store. This did not make him anti-war or a hawk. It did not make him a Bama fan or a Tiger. It make him neither Catholic or Jewish or Protestant. Today he would not discuss Gay marriage I am certain because he would offend gay customers or straight customers.


Once I did not vote (abstained) from voting on a Pastor a church. I was accused of being AGAINST him. I was not against him nor was I for him. I did not vote because according to the church rule book I was not supposed to vote. I know there are certain subjects that a person must take sides on but not all subjects are like that.
Quoting myself here because an edit didn't seem enough. I think I just made your point, or actually made both our points. In my example I was neutral, neither for nor against the new Pastor. I was neutral. BUT SOME PEOPLE would not let me be neutral. So I can see how a sportscaster could be neutral but BE ACCUSED of taking one side or the other. I often want to ask people who seem to KNOW what my motives are this question: Do you also know how many hairs are own m head?
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,344
31,546
187
South Alabama
Look, you can report sports and it not be political.

“The Cubs scored 4 runs in the eighth inning to defeat the Nationals at sunny Wrigley Field.”

“Tiger Woods was detained by police for questioning after Woods was found asleep in his car at a traffic signal.”

No politics, just straight facts. When you start asking for opinions or attempting to guess motivation is when the political overtures begin to creep in. ESPN became guilty of valuing and televising opinions and assumptions over actual fact and reporting.

Stephen A. will be kept around for two reasons: his sources and the not having to deal with the public and sports world backlash if they fired him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They will never fire Stephen A for 1 reason and one reason only:


https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.si...act-espn-highest-paid-on-air-talent-pay-raise

I don’t think paying out over 30 million plus to send a guy packing is a smart business move.
 

Latest threads

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.