forums
OT: Why do people hate ESPN?
- Thread starter jkh305
- Start date
Advertisement
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2014
- Messages
- 13,725
Yeah gotta agree with you on this one. She was raised in a military background though so her overreaction to someone acting politically incorrect by peacefully protesting the national anthem isn't much of a surprise. Its funny how they want you to do the politically correct thing, and the moment you stop being politically correct they get all angry and try to tell you what you can and cant do. Then after you respond to them all they do is about political correctness and how you're a SJW, as if it's a bad thing to want social justice and equality.
Btw ESPN could push a political agenda MUCH harder if they wanted to, but they've chosen to keep it mostly out of the discussion.
Also, since we're on the subject, its complete BS Kaep doesn't have a team. Kaep is very clearly one of the 50 best QBs in the NFL. Last year, he played way better than Cam Newton did. He's not a locker room problem, and even Jim Harbaugh still vouches for him and how he's a great person. The work he does for charity is simply amazing - he just donated like a million dollars to help feed the starving. He's not demanding too much money - He's the one who declined his option to make $16.9M this season; and Spotrac even calculates his market value at $14.2M. All of that, yet he remains unsigned as even a backup. I'd expect ESPN to do a lot more reporting on this situation if he is still unsigned within a few weeks after the Draft.
Caneadian
Sophomore
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2011
- Messages
- 2,742
Simple. They are literally taking a radio show and putting it on tv and calling it tv. Same thing here in Canada, Im pretty sure ESPN just bought TSN. They follow the exact same format. Something I can listen to on the radio they put on TV and then charge me ridiculous cable fees.
Advertisement
supersaiyanshel
Senior
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2013
- Messages
- 9,231
Sage Steele lives in the sunken place.
Genghis Cane
Chicken Wing Connoisseur
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2014
- Messages
- 9,209
So you believe it is okay to fire someone for their political beliefs. She has the right to her opinion, but according to you, the only opinions that matter in this world are SJW, progressive B.S.
Genghis Cane
Chicken Wing Connoisseur
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2014
- Messages
- 9,209
They could push much harder? Are you kidding me? ESPN is practically the MSNBC of sports.
Genghis Cane
Chicken Wing Connoisseur
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2014
- Messages
- 9,209
This. Preach!
Advertisement
jkh305
Sophomore
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2017
- Messages
- 693
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2014
- Messages
- 13,725
She wasn't fired, she is still on like 3 ESPN programs. Thats fake news
She obviously has a right to her opinion, but she works for ESPN. ESPN has the right to censor what she says while on their programming broadcast to millions of people. For example, IF I were a member of the wetboro baptist church, it would be my opinion that g.ay people are possessed by the devil or whatever retarded **** they believe. But that doesn't mean ESPN doesn't have the right to remove me from their programming if I start B*tching about homosexuals live on air.
As far as whose opinions matter in the world, if you use religion as justification for anything political, I believe your opinion doesn't matter as much as the next person. If you don't believe in equality between all people, men, women, black, white, , straight, christian, and muslim, Then yeah, your opinion doesn't mean much. When it comes down to it, conservatism is about religious and racial bigotry.
And while I'm at it Trickle Down Economics is ******* stupid. So when your favorite president is the person responsible for class warfare even when your voting base is poorer and less educated than your opponents, yeah, sorry, but your opinion doesn't mean as much.
PopeJackson
Redshirt Freshman
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2012
- Messages
- 322
ESPN pushes a leftist agenda and identity politics. It's become a total joke.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2014
- Messages
- 5,397
Like most of sports, life, and the world in general
I envy you older cats being born in 87 I missed the 80s and most of the 90s when there was a real "buzz" to life that you could feel.
The early early 2000s had a touch of it, but it wained quickly
Advertisement
mirednmediocrity2
Senior
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
- Messages
- 5,296
Isn't the Mouse trying to dump them? Don't pay attention to much of their BS but thought they were losing a lot of money. Wonder why? LMAO!
jkh305
Sophomore
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2017
- Messages
- 693
Don't know why, but this is a great post! Born around the same time, know what you mean.
PortvilleCane
Redshirt Freshman
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2011
- Messages
- 218
New ESPN guidelines recognize connection between sports, politics - Public Editor- ESPN
New ESPN guidelines recognize connection between sports, politics
Apr 4, 2017
Jim Brady, ESPN Public Editor
ESPN has issued new political and election guidelines for its employees that, while allowing for political discussion on the network’s platforms, recommend connecting those comments to sports whenever possible. The new policies also provide separate guidelines for ESPN staffers working on news and those engaging in commentary.
The timing of the release of the election guidelines is a bit unusual -- such guidelines are rarely released right after a presidential election; they’re usually updated near the beginning of a presidential campaign. But we are living in unique political times, which ESPN apparently recognized, which explains the revised guidelines for discussion of political and social issues.
“Given the intense interest in the most recent presidential election and the fact subsequent political and social discussions often intersected with the sports world, we found it to be an appropriate time to review our guidelines,” said Patrick Stiegman, ESPN’s vice president of global digital content and the chairman of the company’s internal Editorial Board, which drafted the new guidelines.
Stiegman said no single issue or incident led to the change, but Craig Bengtson, ESPN’s vice president and managing editor of newsgathering and reporting, said the nation’s tense political climate did play a role.
“We have the convergence of a politically charged environment and all these new technologies coming together at once,” he said. “Based on that, we wanted the policy to reflect the reality of the world today. There are people talking about politics in ways we have not seen before, and we’re not immune from that.”
Stiegman said the new election guidelines are no longer just targeted at presidential elections. “We simply extended our approach to covering presidential elections every four years to major elections, in general, believing all the same principles should apply,” Stiegman said.
So what’s different in the new policies? Let’s start with the Political and Social Issues guidelines. Its first line lays out ESPN’s challenge quite accurately:
“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.”
As I wrote in November, not all ESPN consumers -- or employees, for that matter -- feel the company has lived up to this ideal. Stiegman said that the buzz around the topic of ESPN and politics -- also written about by The New York Times, Awful Announcing, the Orlando Sentinel and many conservative sites criticizing ESPN’s perceived leftward tilt -- didn’t play a significant role in the revision of the guidelines.
The two most notable changes from the Political Advocacy policy are the delineation of guidelines between news and commentary, and allowing for increased political discussion on ESPN platforms, as warranted and connected to sports. This isn’t a surprising development, it’s just new.
“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.”
Here are other notable points in the Political and Social Issues policy, with my thoughts:
“Original news reports should not include statements of support, opposition or partisanship related to any social issue, political position, candidate or office holder.”
This one seems straightforward and achievable, at least within ESPN’s platforms. The one place on ESPN in which you don’t see straight opinion is on the hard news side of the operation.
“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 three key words here are “public-facing forum.” That expands this policy beyond ESPN’s borders and brings the Wild West of social media into play. In fact, later in the memo, it is said directly that the policy applies to “ESPN, Twitter, Facebook and other media.”
This is where the potential for problems exists. ESPN news reporters tweeting political opinions from their own social accounts would technically violate this policy. Again, hard news reporters are less likely to use social media for this purpose than commentators, but how effective this policy is will depend on how hard executives choose to look at social media. Let’s be honest: It’s not too hard to find ESPN employees tweeting political opinions. Yes, much of that activity does fall within the new guidelines, which also note that those who do publicly express political views could be reassigned when covering stories. But the propriety of other posts is a tad murkier.
“Outside of ‘hard’ news reporting, commentary related to political or social issues, candidates or office holders is appropriate on ESPN platforms consistent with these guidelines.”
This is meaningful because, unlike the company’s previous policy, it states that commentary on political and social issues is OK. The previous policy not only didn’t say that but also conveyed a tone that suggested that dipping into political waters carried more danger than reward. Put another way, the new policy has gone from “It’s dangerous out there, so probably best to stay home” to “It’s dangerous out there, so here are some tools to best keep you safe.”
“It’s a more positive, proactive stance,” Bengtson said. “If there’s a good reason to be discussing [politics], here’s how we can best help you do that to best help our audience.”
“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.”
The statement that topics should relate to sports is also new, though Stiegman left some wiggle room on that point. “We want to emphasize a direct connection to sports, understanding that’s the lens through which most fans view ESPN,” he said. “We also understand there may occasionally be exceptions that reference important, broader political topics. We just want to ensure those are thoughtful discussions, and meet the other criteria in the guidelines.”
Said Bengtson: “I don’t think people are turning us on to hear us talk about social and political issues. When we can make a connection with sports, we should do so and do it smartly.”
“The presentation should be thoughtful and respectful. We should offer balance or recognize opposing views, as warranted. We should avoid personal attacks and inflammatory rhetoric.”
What is a “personal attack” and what’s considered “inflammatory”? As with many journalistic policy questions, those are subjective. And in policies like these, that can lead to caution.
“There is always a layer of subjectivity in such areas,” Stiegman said. “Editors and producers will work with those offering opinions on these topics to ensure the dialogue and debate is thoughtful, respectful and as fair as possible.”
The changes to the Elections guidelines are far less significant (see previous policy here), but there were a few changes of note.
“All interviews, features, enterprise efforts or produced pieces involving candidates must first be approved by senior management. This is to ensure a coordinated and fair effort, and includes considerations as to location, interviewer, timing and format.”
The interesting note here is what was removed from the previous version of the policy, which said, “All interviews, features, enterprise efforts or produced pieces with a sports angle, including attempts at humor (emphasis mine) involving candidates must first be approved by senior management team.”
While this may seem to be in conflict with the guideline in the Political and Social Issues policy, I suspect the real reason it was deleted was to make sure employees understand that it applies to all political topics, not just those relating to sports.
It’ll be interesting to see whether this new policy has an impact. These changes appear to be designed to remind employees of ESPN’s invaluable and lucrative connection to sports while also acknowledging -- rightfully, in my opinion -- that sports, culture and politics overlap in ways that cannot be ignored. But, in the end, the effectiveness of policies is usually related to the intensity of the enforcement.
Advertisement
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2014
- Messages
- 13,725
TL;DR.
![crossover22[]_[]](https://data.canesinsight.com/avatars/m/2/2075.jpg?1518149361){kind=avatar}
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2012
- Messages
- 19,988
Because they are liberal *** hats. Its a sports channel not a political one.
mirednmediocrity2
Senior
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
- Messages
- 5,296
crossover22[]_[];2879185 said:
Are there still liberals left in this country? I thought they were an extinct species, much like Rockefeller Republicans.
Advertisement