Championship Drive Show

[Doppelganger]

I am sorry but because one tweet posted a picture of an overweight person and one did not has nothing to do with the hypocrisy of it. They both voiced a political opinion, one was in line with ESPN's political views and one was not.

Again, you're just wrong.

You're not even remotely educated on this topic.

Jamele Hill posted an opinion. A well-articulated one at that. No caricatures. No disgusting stereotypes.

Curt Schilling didn't do any of that. He wasn't articulate and he didn't support his opinion.

 

[Genghis Cane]

The fact that some people are not watching ESPN anymore because of the promulgation and interjection of politics into sports is foreign to him.

Again, you can't even get simple things right.

ESPN's ratings are not down. Their subscribers are down.

That's because of cord-cutting.

If even 10% of it was due to angry white men cancelling their cable subscription it would be shocking.

But I bet it isn't even that much.

You keep bringing up the "angry white men" point, but it's not just them: I know people, who come from all types of backgrounds, that get sick of politics and watch sports to escape it. Liberal or conservative, it doesn't matter. They all would rather just watch sports.

 

[Doppelganger]

I couldn't help but notice how you skimmed right over the Linda Cohn example. Was her tweet accompanied by an offensive picture of an overweight person or did you choose to ignore that point because it didn't fit your agenda? That seems somewhat hypocritical as well.

You'd have seen my response if you were able to comprehend the written word.

You seem to be having trouble with simple concepts.

Linda Cohn is not an opinion person. She's an anchor. Therefore she doesn't threaten any of these insecure men nor does she stain their male sports viewing experience.

 

[Doppelganger]

Of course cord cutting has had an impact on ESPN cable viewership, but to deny the possibility that ESPN’s strongly perceived increased political slant has something to do with lost viewership, especially when it comes to its non-sports programming shows, is just not realistic.

Again, important point.

ESPN hasn't lost viewership per se.

They've lost subscribers. Just like every other carriage network.

I don't deny any possibility.

I just know that there's as much a political movement against ESPN as there is the existence of one on their network.

If it was even 10% of the subscriber loss I'd b shocked.

Well, yes, they actually have lost viewership. Please read. Lost viewership.

Jemele Hill Controversy Magnifies Troubles at ESPN – Variety

Because ESPN is in 10 million less homes than, say, 4 years ago.

Because of......wait for it......cord-cutting.

 

[Hurricanemike32]

What are your thoughts on Disney employing the Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson? Should they be concerned that on "Ballers" he is constantly sleeping around with random woman, popping pain pills, and dropping the f-bomb in every other scene? How do you think that the people that you claim Disney doesn't want to alienate feel about that?

So now art is being compared to Curt Schilling's political beliefs.

Comical.

And desperate.

You're lost. Just as I concluded after reading your first post.

So....now you are admitting that Schilling was terminated for his political beliefs and not a picture of an overweight man dressed like a woman? You are all over the place and I am the one who is lost and desperate??? You are right...that is comical.

Also, LOL at your claim that "Ballers" is art but an image of a man dressed as a woman is vile. You so clueless I don't know if you can be helped. All I can say is that I hope for your sake you do something to try to improve yourself so that you can be a productive member of society someday. I get a sneaky feeling that feel that you are entitled to an awful lot in life. Not a good roadmap for success.

 

[QuattroCane]

I am sorry but because one tweet posted a picture of an overweight person and one did not has nothing to do with the hypocrisy of it. They both voiced a political opinion, one was in line with ESPN's political views and one was not.

Again, you're just wrong.

You're not even remotely educated on this topic.

Jamele Hill posted an opinion. A well-articulated one at that. No caricatures. No disgusting stereotypes.

Curt Schilling didn't do any of that. He wasn't articulate and he didn't support his opinion.

So in your opinion her statement about the President was accurate and factual, but not wanting men in the ladies room is not?

 

[Doppelganger]

Are you somehow insinuating that both Disney and ESPN should be ok with alienating people with conservative viewpoints?

No, again. You don't even have a surface understanding of this issue.

It isn't a conservative vs. liberal thing.

It's an opinion vs. a vile opinion thing.

Curt Schilling didn't get fired for posting a conservative opinion.

Once you finally come to grips with that then you'll understand the issue. Until then you'll keep getting it wrong.

So, do you consider calling the sitting President of the United States a white supremacist to be an opinion or vile opinion? Just curious to hear the logic behind how you characterize a view.

Calling the sitting president of the US a white supremacist is a fact that can be fully supported with evidence.

The definition of a white supremacist is the following:

a person who believes that the white race is inherently superior to other races and that white people should have control over people of other races.

Tell me what evidence you have that substantiates this definition.

By the way, I'm not even a Trump supporter — ****, I didn't vote for the guy, but the over the top rhetoric is insane.

A black athlete kneels in a silent protest and the President sends out 18 tweets about it in a fit of rage calling it a disgrace.

When white supremacists rally in Charlottesville he calls them fine people.

I'll say this though.

Jamele Hill has a lot more evidence for her claim than the people on this thread have about ESPN.

And she could articulate hers better than them too.

 

[Genghis Cane]

Of course cord cutting has had an impact on ESPN cable viewership, but to deny the possibility that ESPN’s strongly perceived increased political slant has something to do with lost viewership, especially when it comes to its non-sports programming shows, is just not realistic.

Again, important point.

ESPN hasn't lost viewership per se.

They've lost subscribers. Just like every other carriage network.

I don't deny any possibility.

I just know that there's as much a political movement against ESPN as there is the existence of one on their network.

If it was even 10% of the subscriber loss I'd b shocked.

Well, yes, they actually have lost viewership. Please read. Lost viewership.

Jemele Hill Controversy Magnifies Troubles at ESPN – Variety

Because ESPN is in 10 million less homes than, say, 4 years ago.

Because of......wait for it......cord-cutting.

I guess what it comes down to is this: you believe there is one — and only one — factor contributing to ESPN's loss in popularity. Other people think it's more than one. Unless you can supply an academic study, with empirical data, this entire argument will remain opinion-driven and based on anecdotes. Good day, sir.

 

[Dan E. Dangerously]

Forgive me for my ignorance, but what does "cutting the cord" mean? I have not heard that expression.

Term used to describe the trend of people dropping their cable/landline bundles in favor of internet only plans, and relying on streaming services for sports and tv shows.

 

[Doppelganger]

You keep bringing up the "angry white men" point, but it's not just them: I know people, who come from all types of backgrounds, that get sick of politics and watch sports to escape it.

But those are not related.

Are those people claiming that they cancelled their cable subscription because ESPN has a supposed liberal bias?

The only people tweeting, whining and fretting about that are old white men.

I'd actually love to get a demographic count of this thread too. That would be interesting.

 

[OriginalCanesCanesCanes]

So are you objecting to the fact that the person on the picture was a "disgusting fat man" or that it said "this shouldn't be allowed"?

I'm saying that your claim that ESPN was hypocritical is not true.

And your understanding of this issue is very remedial.

And that companies like ESPN err on the side of inclusion because they want to draw wide audiences.

And "conservative" opinions are generally more vile and exclusive by nature.

And with this comment you lost whatever moral high ground you think you may have had.

When you dehumanize and marginalize those that disagree with you by generalizing them with terms like “vile” and “exclusive”, you have taken the discussion from a place of honest idea exchange, to a: “I’m right and I’m morally superior to you, therefore your opinion has no value” place.

You need to do better.

 

[Hurricanemike32]

I couldn't help but notice how you skimmed right over the Linda Cohn example. Was her tweet accompanied by an offensive picture of an overweight person or did you choose to ignore that point because it didn't fit your agenda? That seems somewhat hypocritical as well.

You'd have seen my response if you were able to comprehend the written word.

You seem to be having trouble with simple concepts.

Linda Cohn is not an opinion person. She's an anchor. Therefore she doesn't threaten any of these insecure men nor does she stain their male sports viewing experience.

So Jemele Hill isn't an anchor on Sportscenter? That would be news to her and her employers. You can tell when someone's argument is falling apart when they resort to name calling. It would be a lot better look for you just stopped.

 

[Doppelganger]

So....now you are admitting that Schilling was terminated for his political beliefs and not a picture of an overweight man dressed like a woman? You are all over the place and I am the one who is lost and desperate??? You are right...that is comical.

No, again, I'm debating this on your terms because I'm not threatened at all by it.

You can't get this silliness out of your head despite the fact that I've articulated the very real distinction between the two cases.

 

[OriginalCanesCanesCanes]

Of course cord cutting has had an impact on ESPN cable viewership, but to deny the possibility that ESPN’s strongly perceived increased political slant has something to do with lost viewership, especially when it comes to its non-sports programming shows, is just not realistic.

Again, important point.

ESPN hasn't lost viewership per se.

They've lost subscribers. Just like every other carriage network.

I don't deny any possibility.

I just know that there's as much a political movement against ESPN as there is the existence of one on their network.

If it was even 10% of the subscriber loss I'd b shocked.

Well, yes, they actually have lost viewership. Please read. Lost viewership.

Jemele Hill Controversy Magnifies Troubles at ESPN – Variety

Because ESPN is in 10 million less homes than, say, 4 years ago.

Because of......wait for it......cord-cutting.

You didn’t read the article, did you?

Their ratings are down. That’s lost viewership. Ratings.

Take a knee. You lost this one.

 

[Doppelganger]

Also, LOL at your claim that "Ballers" is art but an image of a man dressed as a woman is vile. You so clueless I don't know if you can be helped.

Ballers is art. It's a television show.

Are you really this stupid?

 

[Doppelganger]

Depends on what you would classify as a "conservative" view or policy.

Less immigrants. Exclusive.

You can't use that restroom! Exclusive.

No, we can't subsidize some healthcare polices! Exclusive.

These are not even points that conservatives will argue. They agree.

 

[Doppelganger]

So in your opinion her statement about the President was accurate and factual, but not wanting men in the ladies room is not?

I think it's a bridge too far but she could argue it very strongly.

Much stronger than the "ESPN has a liberal bias" people could argue that.

 

[Doppelganger]

I guess what it comes down to is this: you believe there is one — and only one — factor contributing to ESPN's loss in popularity. Other people think it's more than one.

No.

I think there is one major overriding factor.

And a bunch of hot air coming from Fox Sports and their agenda pushers.

 

[Genghis Cane]

No, again. You don't even have a surface understanding of this issue.

It isn't a conservative vs. liberal thing.

It's an opinion vs. a vile opinion thing.

Curt Schilling didn't get fired for posting a conservative opinion.

Once you finally come to grips with that then you'll understand the issue. Until then you'll keep getting it wrong.

So, do you consider calling the sitting President of the United States a white supremacist to be an opinion or vile opinion? Just curious to hear the logic behind how you characterize a view.

Calling the sitting president of the US a white supremacist is a fact that can be fully supported with evidence.

The definition of a white supremacist is the following:

a person who believes that the white race is inherently superior to other races and that white people should have control over people of other races.

Tell me what evidence you have that substantiates this definition.

By the way, I'm not even a Trump supporter — ****, I didn't vote for the guy, but the over the top rhetoric is insane.

A black athlete kneels in a silent protest and the President sends out 18 tweets about it in a fit of rage calling it a disgrace.

When white supremacists rally in Charlottesville he calls them fine people.

I'll say this though.

Jamele Hill has a lot more evidence for her claim than the people on this thread have about ESPN.

And she could articulate hers better than them too.

The NFL protests were not seen by everyone as a protest against police brutality, though. By all accounts, Trump viewed the issue through a different lens — one that was critical of athletes choosing that venue/time to engage in protest. Many black members of the armed forces, who fought and died for our country, disagreed with the protests as well, so does that make them white supremacists, too, because they were frustrated? I don't agree with Trump's opinion on the matter, but to use that example as a crux of your argument is not very convincing. His comments at Charlottesville, while not appropriate and stupid, also do not support the narrative that Trump believes white people are "inherently superior to blacks and should have control over them." The term white supremacist or **** is thrown around way too loosely in this day in age. This is what should be debated.

 

[Arehel]

Don't watch ESECPN much other than the games, but this show is entertaining, what with Heather Dimnitch making sure her plastic surgery-enhanced face and long black boots are right across from Swasey's "Pocket Hercules."

Not sure he is that desperate...

She paid for that face? I'd hate to see what is what before she got work done. I ain't ever touching that.