We're not the only ones to have caught on to ESPN's act - New England Patriots Forums

BPF · 07-09-2008, 09:31 AM

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/stor...st=SecMostRead

I love the title: ESPN: The sports leader in embarrassment

Quote:

Once, ESPN's hallmarks were Chris Berman's inventive sports-star nicknames and the witty byplay between Keith Olbermann and Dan Patrick on SportsCenter. Now, when you turn on ESPN, you're likely to see people shouting mindlessly at one another on one program or another.

ESPN -- which officially stands for the Entertainment and Sports Programming Network -- may someday decide to change that handle to say: The SPORTS and Entertainment Programming Network, just to get its priorities in order (though that stiff new acronym would need a little work, I admit).

ESPN's staff shouldn't try so hard to be controversial. The network would have fewer embarrassments. "We'd rather the scoreboard says none," Walsh said. "But if the scoreboard says three (examples), we endure." He called them "three separate instances" and added: "Trying to group them together, I think, would not be a wise thing for you."

Then call me unwise, Mr. Walsh. I'm not buying your argument.

In the news business, journalists will chalk up something out of the ordinary as an aberration. But when it happens twice, we wonder if it is a pattern. By the third time, it can reasonably be called a trend.

ESPN rejects the idea that there is a pattern of recklessness in its ranks, but I'm not so sure.

signbabybrady · 07-09-2008, 09:51 AM

Not a bad read...Glad to see someone call them out. But 3 incidents...is that really all they could come up with?

Char2na · 07-09-2008, 10:07 AM

While he is completely right, the examples he gives are pretty lame and not very supportive of his argument.

signbabybrady · 07-09-2008, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Char2na

While he is completely right, the examples he gives are pretty lame and not very supportive of his argument.

exactly I think there were plenty more and better examples.

hambone1818 · 07-09-2008, 10:24 AM

He was pointing out three recent examples where ESPN went from in-your-face, obnoxious sports coverage into blantant political slander of sorts. While their coverage often toes that line (from their involvement in spygate/Specter's investigation, to Congressional hearings on steroids in baseball, to Vick's trial and the Duke lacrosse team and Imus/Rutgers basketball team), they really don't tend to make huge political statements like the three he mentioned.

I really don't think he needed to point out that First Take and Around the Horn are an absolute waste of time, that most of their 'experts' are anything but and that their coverage of games can be borderline unwatchable...people know these things.

PonyExpress · 07-09-2008, 10:44 AM

I see nothing innacurate or controversial about Bonnie Bernstein's comments regarding Palestinian suicide bombers. The idea ESPN forced her to apologize is despicable, and falls right in line with the rest of their nonsense.

Pujo · 07-09-2008, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PonyExpress

I see nothing innacurate or controversial about Bonnie Bernstein's comments regarding Palestinian suicide bombers. The idea ESPN forced her to apologize is despicable, and falls right in line with the rest of their nonsense.

C'monn, just because you agree with what she said doesn't make it any less controvertial, or any more appropriate, for a sports show. Making blanket statements about a nation's people is not ESPN's job.

hambone1818 · 07-09-2008, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PonyExpress

I see nothing innacurate or controversial about Bonnie Bernstein's comments regarding Palestinian suicide bombers. The idea ESPN forced her to apologize is despicable, and falls right in line with the rest of their nonsense.

Slightly OT, but I definitely agree...they made her apologize because she made the mistake of lumping all Palestinians in the same boat: "I was reading an article in the New York Times about Palestinian suicide bombers and I just remember being struck by the notion that from the point of birth, people in Palestine are taught to think that dying in the name of God is a good thing. They grow up wanting to be suicide bombers."

Sure, it's true to a point and I think alot of people would agree that Palestine is a radical country full of political extremists, many of whom have died as suicide bombers. Her mistake was lumping everyone in the country together, which is nothing but semantics and another reason to hate the media: almost everything said gets taken far too literally, and people are far too sensitive and unrealistic in their views to understand that her comments aren't the issue, it's the friggin suicide bombers.

PonyExpress · 07-09-2008, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pujo

C'monn, just because you agree with what she said doesn't make it any less controvertial, or any more appropriate, for a sports show. Making blanket statements about a nation's people is not ESPN's job.

I see. So an accurate statement, offered without obscenity, should be censored if it offends. Welcome to totalitarianism.

BionicPatriot · 07-09-2008, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PonyExpress

I see. So an accurate statement, offered without obscenity, should be censored if it offends. Welcome to totalitarianism.

This is America. We have to *****. We have to read every single word between the lines and pick at them and pay our lawyers thousands of dollars to make them say sorry.