ESPN Really Wants To Go Out Of Business

[Tugg Speedman]

The reason we like sports is to get away from politics.  ESPN wants to make everything they do more political.  See below.

Every previous effort by ESPN to get political, whether Limbaugh on the right (2003) or Olbermann on the left (2014) results in poor ratings.

Having sports reporters/commentators preach to everyone on politics is just a bad move.


New ESPN guidelines recognize connection between sports, politics
Jim Brady, ESPN Public Editor
April 4, 2017, 2:17 AM CT

http://www.espn.com/blog/ombudsman/post/_/id/816/new-espn-guidelines-recognize-connection-between-sports-politics

[Badgerhater]

MU plays on FS1 so who cares what ESPN does

[Mutaman]

ESPN wants to make everything they do more political. 

Wrong. ESPN wants to make everything they do about making $. I not sure that its that much different than anybody else but its more in your face.

[HouWarrior]

The reason we like sports is to get away from politics.  ESPN wants to make everything they do more political.  See below.

Every previous effort by ESPN to get political, whether Limbaugh on the right (2003) or Olbermann on the left (2014) results in poor ratings.

Having sports reporters/commentators preach to everyone on politics is just a bad move.


New ESPN guidelines recognize connection between sports, politics
Jim Brady, ESPN Public Editor
April 4, 2017, 2:17 AM CT

http://www.espn.com/blog/ombudsman/post/_/id/816/new-espn-guidelines-recognize-connection-between-sports-politics

I read your linked article. Your reading of it differs significantly from mine. ESPN is specifically discouraging the political preaching you fear. My brother worked in network and local news for 40 years and these guidelines are quite typical of the guidelines issued to employees in the media

[Pakuni]

Did you read the link or just post it?
If anything, it dissuades political discussion on the network or by network personalities except when it directly relates to sports.
Some excerpts from the policy:

“At ESPN, our reputation and credibility with viewers, readers and listeners are paramount. Related to political and social issues, our audiences should be confident our original reporting of news is not influenced by political pressures or personal agendas.”

“Original news reports should not include statements of support, opposition or partisanship related to any social issue, political position, candidate or office holder.”

“Writers, reporters, producers and editors directly involved in ‘hard’ news reporting, investigative or enterprise assignments and related coverage should refrain in any public-facing forum from taking positions on political or social issues, candidates or office holders.”

“The topic should be related to a current issue impacting sports. This condition may vary for content appearing on platforms with broader editorial missions -- such as The Undefeated, FiveThirtyEight and espnW. Other exceptions must be approved in advance by senior editorial management.”

This in no way encourages ESPN to "make everything political." You invented that.
If your contention is that ESPN should simply ignore the many times politics and sports intersect ... well, that's nuts. Should the sports media also have ignored Ali refusing military service? Pat Tillman's death? PED hearings on Capitol Hill? Antitrust issues?

[Jockey]

The reason we like sports is to get away from politics.  ESPN wants to make everything they do more political.  See below.

Every previous effort by ESPN to get political, whether Limbaugh on the right (2003) or Olbermann on the left (2014) results in poor ratings.

Having sports reporters/commentators preach to everyone on politics is just a bad move.


New ESPN guidelines recognize connection between sports, politics
Jim Brady, ESPN Public Editor
April 4, 2017, 2:17 AM CT

http://www.espn.com/blog/ombudsman/post/_/id/816/new-espn-guidelines-recognize-connection-between-sports-politics

This is way too stupid - even for you.

ESPN obviously does not want to go out of business. So it make you both a liar and an idiot.

Desperation for attention is not a good human trait.

[wadesworld]

Lol.

CLICK BAIT!

[MU82]

That's our Smuggles!

Either he didn't read it, posted the link anyway and guessed what it might have said ... or he did read it and lied about what it said ... or he did read it and was too dense to understand it.

So which is it, Mr. S? Did you guess, did you lie or did you not understand it?

Oh ... and BTW ... AAPL has set new all-time highs in 3 of the last 5 sessions.

[Skitch]

If people really watch sports expressly to get away from politics then why do you and others feel the need to make political posts so often on a sports message board?

[Tugg Speedman]

You do realize that this was written as part of a complaint that ESPN is too liberal and turning off viewers.

http://www.espn.com/blog/ombudsman/post/_/id/767/inside-and-out-espn-dealing-with-changing-political-dynamics

And it is being argued their ratings are suffering, in part, because they are preaching too much left-leaning politics.

https://heatst.com/culture-wars/is-espns-liberal-political-agenda-contributing-to-its-serious-viewer-slump/
http://www.dailywire.com/news/10904/espn-admits-they-mistreat-conservatives-and-its-ben-shapiro#exit-modal
http://www.breitbart.com/sports/2017/04/04/survey-fans-view-espn-as-too-left-leaning-dont-like-their-shows-either/

What they really did was institutionalize ESPN as MSNBC with sports talk sprinkled in.

We wanted to err on the side of transparency and trust with our reporting,” Stiegman said, “but also give our columnists and commentators the freedom to discuss topics relevant to those sports fans who visit our platforms, even if the issues are political or social in nature.

So you only have half the story, they are taking politics out of the "hard news" (whatever that is these days) but encouraging left-leaning mentally unstable columnist and commentators to preach about left-leaning issues.

So expect lectures on transgender athletes, guns, race, immigration, praise for now permanently unemployed Kaepernick, and a host of other things you want ESPN to lecture you about. (not!)

And if you don't think it's all about left-leaning politics, see how they cringe over Ditka's views while they give Olbermann, Lebtard et. al an entire show to do exactly the same thing on the other end of the political spectrum.

And, as this shows, they don't even understand the meaning of words at ESPN.

http://nypost.com/2017/02/14/espn-fired-me-for-guerrilla-comment-on-venus-williams-suit/

[jesmu84]

You do realize that this was written as part of a complaint that ESPN is too liberal and turning off viewers.

http://www.espn.com/blog/ombudsman/post/_/id/767/inside-and-out-espn-dealing-with-changing-political-dynamics

And it is being argued their ratings are suffering, in part, because they are preaching too much left-leaning politics.

https://heatst.com/culture-wars/is-espns-liberal-political-agenda-contributing-to-its-serious-viewer-slump/
http://www.dailywire.com/news/10904/espn-admits-they-mistreat-conservatives-and-its-ben-shapiro#exit-modal
http://www.breitbart.com/sports/2017/04/04/survey-fans-view-espn-as-too-left-leaning-dont-like-their-shows-either/

What they really did was institutionalize ESPN as MSNBC with sports talk sprinkled in.

We wanted to err on the side of transparency and trust with our reporting,” Stiegman said, “but also give our columnists and commentators the freedom to discuss topics relevant to those sports fans who visit our platforms, even if the issues are political or social in nature.

So you only have half the story, they are taking politics out of the "hard news" (whatever that is these days) but encouraging left-leaning mentally unstable columnist and commentators to preach about left-leaning issues.

So expect lectures on transgender athletes, guns, race, immigration, praise for now permanently unemployed Kaepernick, and a host of other things you want ESPN to lecture you about. (not!)

And if you don't think it's all about left-leaning politics, see how they cringe over Ditka's views while they give Olbermann, Lebtard et. al an entire show to do exactly the same thing on the other end of the political spectrum.

And, as this shows, they don't even understand the meaning of words at ESPN.

http://nypost.com/2017/02/14/espn-fired-me-for-guerrilla-comment-on-venus-williams-suit/

Uh... Politics?

Your original post was still a total (or intentional) misunderstanding

[brewcity77]

So basically, a thread to allow Heisy to talk politics without being about politics? Par for the course.

[MU82]

Thanks for this thread, Smuggles.

It reminds me that DIS is another one that is way up since you said not to buy it.

You da man!

[Tugg Speedman]

Thanks for this thread, Smuggles.

It reminds me that DIS is another one that is way up since you said not to buy it.

You da man!

Sold Diney at 122 in the middle of 2015. That is my offset to Apple

#alternativefacts

[MU82]

Sold Diney at 122 in the middle of 2015. That is my offset to Apple

#alternativefacts

Congrats.

But you DID also say not to buy it when it was in the upper-$80s or low-$90s.

#actualfacts

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I missed Heisys post complaining about the Trump interview airing in the middle of Super Bowl coverage. Weird.

[GWSwarrior]

You do realize that this was written as part of a complaint that ESPN is too liberal and turning off viewers.

http://www.espn.com/blog/ombudsman/post/_/id/767/inside-and-out-espn-dealing-with-changing-political-dynamics

And it is being argued their ratings are suffering, in part, because they are preaching too much left-leaning politics.

https://heatst.com/culture-wars/is-espns-liberal-political-agenda-contributing-to-its-serious-viewer-slump/
http://www.dailywire.com/news/10904/espn-admits-they-mistreat-conservatives-and-its-ben-shapiro#exit-modal
http://www.breitbart.com/sports/2017/04/04/survey-fans-view-espn-as-too-left-leaning-dont-like-their-shows-either/

What they really did was institutionalize ESPN as MSNBC with sports talk sprinkled in.

We wanted to err on the side of transparency and trust with our reporting,” Stiegman said, “but also give our columnists and commentators the freedom to discuss topics relevant to those sports fans who visit our platforms, even if the issues are political or social in nature.

So you only have half the story, they are taking politics out of the "hard news" (whatever that is these days) but encouraging left-leaning mentally unstable columnist and commentators to preach about left-leaning issues.

So expect lectures on transgender athletes, guns, race, immigration, praise for now permanently unemployed Kaepernick, and a host of other things you want ESPN to lecture you about. (not!)

And if you don't think it's all about left-leaning politics, see how they cringe over Ditka's views while they give Olbermann, Lebtard et. al an entire show to do exactly the same thing on the other end of the political spectrum.

And, as this shows, they don't even understand the meaning of words at ESPN.

http://nypost.com/2017/02/14/espn-fired-me-for-guerrilla-comment-on-venus-williams-suit/

Using breitbart as a source causes you to lose all credibility, not that you had much to begin with

[MU82]

Using breitbart as a source causes you to lose all credibility, not that you had much to begin with

You don't like using anti-Semitic, fear-mongering, alt-right douchebags as sources? What's wrong with you? And you call yourself an American!

[jsglow]

In before the LOCK.   

[Tugg Speedman]

Using breitbart as a source causes you to lose all credibility, not that you had much to begin with

Glad to hear from the left-wing fever swamp. 

And since you slammed all of brietbart, question for you.

Do you have "Bama" blocked?  Becuase "bama" (John Prudner) is a beloved poster here held in high regard.  He's also a sportswriter for Brietbart.

Since my mere posting of a Brietbart link causes me to lose all credibility, I can only imagine what you think of someone that collects a paycheck from Brietbart.

You don't like using anti-Semitic, fear-mongering, alt-right douchebags as sources? What's wrong with you? And you call yourself an American!

Same goes for you too 82.  Why don't your comments apply to Bama?

[MU82]

I don't know Bama and I'm not sure I've ever conversed with him. So I don't "beloved" him. I don't "behated" him, either.

I would say I wonder why anybody would want to work for an anti-Semitic organization, but we all need paychecks.

[Mutaman]

I would say I wonder why anybody would want to work for an anti-Semitic organization, but we all need paychecks.

I'm a mark for Phil Mushnick even though he writes for the Post. Whenever Phil goes on one of his morality raps someone always brings up who Phil is working for and that's usually the end of the argument.

[Tugg Speedman]

I don't know Bama and I'm not sure I've ever conversed with him. So I don't "beloved" him. I don't "behated" him, either.

I would say I wonder why anybody would want to work for an anti-Semitic organization, but we all need paychecks.

Ok, he changed his handle to AuburnMarquette about a year ago, forgot about that.  You converse with him a lot.  He does the value add on Cracked sidewalks.

But all that is pout the window because you are so full of hate you will judge him on your fever swamp views of his employer. 

[MU82]

Ok, he changed his handle to AuburnMarquette about a year ago, forgot about that.  You converse with him a lot.  He does the value add on Cracked sidewalks.

But all that is pout the window because you are so full of hate you will judge him on your fever swamp views of his employer.

Not sure I've conversed with him, but I would. That wouldn't stop me from wondering why he'd work for an employer that sells hate.

I have friends who voted for Trump. I can't believe they were conned by a two-bit huckster, but I'm still friends with them.

I'll chitchat with anybody. I mean, I chitchat with you, don't I? Hell, I even chitchatted with chicos until he went so far off the deep end he needed a wetsuit, oxygen tank and regulator.

[B. McBannerson]

Shut this down. Some of you are insufferable and continue this crap.

[MU82]

Keep changing that name, kid. You'll always be Smuggles to me!

[wadesworld]

Keep changing that name, kid. You'll always be Smuggles to me!

Bingo.

[jesmu84]

This whole thread appears to be started in an effort to make a political point

[Tugg Speedman]

Keep changing that name, kid. You'll always be Smuggles to me!

I'm counting on it as you're my official name historian.

[B. McBannerson]

This whole thread appears to be started in an effort to make a political point

Ya think?

There are a few of these guys that do it, and they keep on doing it.

[MU82]

I'm counting on it as you're my official name historian.

Nope. I remember Heisy but not any other name you've used. Hell, I can't even remember the name you're currently using if I don't look at it.

So it's darn good that we've both settled on Smuggles. Useful, easy to remember, cute and accurate!

[brewcity77]

Nope. I remember Heisy but not any other name you've used. Hell, I can't even remember the name you're currently using if I don't look at it.

So it's darn good that we've both settled on Smuggles. Useful, easy to remember, cute and accurate!

If I remember right, he started as AnotherMU84. Regardless, posting a political article from Breitbart, which is nothing less than a neo Nazi front, causes one to lose all credibility. Let's not pretend an article about perceptions of ESPN's politics is anything other than a political article and a political troll job by the poster that referenced the mouthpiece of the Nazi party in America.

[Tugg Speedman]

If I remember right, he started as AnotherMU84. Regardless, posting a political article from Breitbart, which is nothing less than a neo Nazi front, causes one to lose all credibility. Let's not pretend an article about perceptions of ESPN's politics is anything other than a political article and a political troll job by the poster that referenced the mouthpiece of the Nazi party in America.

Godwin ... you lose!

[brewcity77]

Godwin ... you lose!

Not true. You posted a Breitbart article, which means you introduced Nazis into the conversation. That's what Breitbart is. The media arm of the American Nazi party. It's not hyperbole, it's fascism.

[Tugg Speedman]

Not true. You posted a Breitbart article, which means you introduced Nazis into the conversation. That's what Breitbart is. The media arm of the American Nazi party. It's not hyperbole, it's fascism.

So your so far into the fear swamp that you think

Breitbart = Nazi

Seek help immediately

[MU82]

I wouldn't call Breitbart "Nazi."

Neo-Nazi, probably. Favored site of white supremacists, anti-Semites and other assorted racists, sure.

Like I'm guessing the NC state rep who just compared Lincoln to Hitler is a big Breitbart fan. Spicer quite likely is a fan, too, though he might not be a Bannon fan these days.

[Tugg Speedman]

I wouldn't call Breitbart "Nazi."

Neo-Nazi, probably. Favored site of white supremacists, anti-Semites and other assorted racists, sure.

Like I'm guessing the NC state rep who just compared Lincoln to Hitler is a big Breitbart fan. Spicer quite likely is a fan, too, though he might not be a Bannon fan these days.

Not surprising from you.  You're the mayor of the conspiracy theory whacked out fever swamp.

[Jockey]

Not surprising from you.  You're the mayor of the conspiracy theory whacked out fever swamp.

Try and tell us where any of 82's facts are incorrect.

[Tugg Speedman]

his facts are not wrong, and my comments were not about facts.  They were about his deranged opinions which make him the mayor of the fever swamp.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

his facts are not wrong, and my comments were not about facts.  They were about his deranged opinions which make him the mayor of the fever swamp.

So his fact that breitbart is the preferred news source of white supremacists is correct but his opinion that being the preferred news source of white supremacists is is a bad thing is incorrect? Bro....

[Tugg Speedman]

So his fact that breitbart is the preferred news source of white supremacists is correct but his opinion that being the preferred news source of white supremacists is is a bad thing is incorrect? Bro....

you confused the opinion of an unstable person as a fact.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

you confused the opinion of an unstable person as a fact.

Oh my mistake. What is the preferred news source of white supremacists if its not Breitbart?

[GWSwarrior]

Not surprising from you.  You're the mayor of the conspiracy theory whacked out fever swamp.

The truth hurts doesn't it Heisy

[GWSwarrior]

you confused the opinion of an unstable person as a fact.

The only unstable person here is the one defending Breitbart

[brewcity77]

Breitbart = Nazi

That's all you needed to post to make your post accurate.

[MU82]

I've been a newspaper sports columnist, a basketball referee and a baseball umpire, so I've been called many, many names - including some not fit even for Scoop.

But "deranged" and "unstable" ... those are new ones.

See, what happens is that Smuggles believes he is always correct. So when somebody challenges him, he reacts by lashing out. Eventually, he resorts to name-calling and wild, unprovable claims. (Which sounds like a certain president he worships.)

I am open to any proof showing that I am either unstable or deranged. I will accept that proof as constructive criticism and try to change.

Of course, one might argue that my mere willingness to engage in discourse with Smuggles is a sign that I am deranged and unstable, and it would be difficult for me to prove otherwise!

[Pakuni]

Of course, one might argue that my mere willingness to engage in discourse with Smuggles is a sign that I am deranged and unstable, and it would be difficult for me to prove otherwise!