ESPN needs to be held accountable for things

[CP1708]

We've all complained at one point or another about ESPN picking and choosing certain stories to focus on, and certain stories to bury.

Currently we have the minute by minute updates on Favre, tapes from PacMac from like 3 years ago, and Vick.

What we don't have is the story on Big Ben, which as JD, and RyGuy have pointed out in other threads is due to their own agenda.


So how do we as sports fans get them to be held accountable for all this? It's not as simple as just stop watching, or turn the channel, because ESPN haslike 6 channels, a magazine, a .com, a twitter, a mobile web, they are a huge corporation. Not watching sportscenter won't do anything, so what can we doto force them to report ALL news, and ONLY news, instead of Brett's bathrooms breaks or PacMan jaywalked today?

 

[651akathepaul]

Nothing we can do unfortunately.

Unless there is a millionaire on NT that can create their own sporting network franchise that competes with ESPN.

 

[emmanuel goldstein]

ummm we cant do anything ... the only possible way to do something would be to start our own network and/or website (easier) with dedicated sports people whoreport ALL news ... its the same with abc and cnn and fox with the political $*%% ...

so about that website idea, anyone?

 

[SneakerProSr.]

Turn the channel.

 

[RyGuy45]

I really think, and this has been said many times before, that the only thing that is going to help things is a viable competitor. But that hasn'thappened. ESPN can continue to do what they like because they now own the TV/radio rights to dang near every college and pro league, and they are the onlyplayer in the country for Sports nationally. Fox obviously has their regional stuff but they are not close.

Many people ignore this but ESPN has also helped to kill off the newspaper industry as well. Granted they (newspapers) have themselves to blame for a lot oftheir problems....but ESPN has spent the last 5+ years buying out top print journalists, beat writers, etc and bringing them to ESPN. We are well on our way tothis company litterally having a monopoly on everything and there being NO other options outside of blogs.

So with that said, until a major player comes in and has national sports and broadcast rights and steals some of their talent and becomes respectful......weonly are going to see ESPN get worse, not better. It's not about journalism or the viewer. It's about "what can we do to make more money now anddown the road?" Everything else be damned. And there's nothing we can do about it outside of not watching.

 

[jetpacunlimited]

All goes back to Race...

 

[q46tothee]

CNNSI used to have a channel about 5-10 years ago....

ESPN has a lock on things for better/worse....

they will keep creating satellite networks (ESPNews, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPN Deportes, etc etc...) because they know there is no other competition....and I'msure there is WAY more to come.

 

[Retroballer]

ok that does it. we gotta pool our money together and start the NikeTalk Sports Network.

 

[CP1708]

Ry, that's right, I forgot to mention the million times that their "experts" report things that are wrong, like Mortenson, or one of my leastfavs, Ric Bucher.

Those guys come on all the ESPN shows over and over and over with "my sources tell me" and then they can say whatever they want, and who checks themwhen they're wrong?

Ed Werder would be another one of those.


At some point, somebody has to call these people out. We need like an Erin Brockovich type big ****** chick to bring down this global monster.

 

[durden7]

Its not like their experts are making things up. Theyre simply reporting what theyre being told be their sources, and its impossible to check their facts.

I think people get too bent out of shape about ESPN. It's not that serious.

 

[shuges]

Originally Posted by RetroBaller

ok that does it. we gotta pool our money together and start the NikeTalk Sports Network.

That would really be the only way.

A group of investors have to decide that they want to pool money together to start up a rival network. Or at the very least, a rival hour long program. And inthis day and age, I don't see any group thinking that would be profitable.

BSPN would eventually just buy them up anyway.

It's sickening how much they are so much like the Jordan Brand. Shove crap down your throats and the public still eats it up.

 

[tylerdub]

They are just like any other news source on TV. They report what they think will most interest the most people. We the consumer have to realize they have abias and rely on our intuition and other resources to help us figure out the truth.

 

[Retroballer]

The only thing though is every person thinks this claim of sexual assualt is all bull. I see no point of hyping up this if it has no body. Now if he wasarrested, charged with a criminal charge then ESPN would most likely eat it up.

 

[CP1708]

Originally Posted by tylerdub

They are just like any other news source on TV. They report what they think will most interest the most people. We the consumer have to realize they have a bias and rely on our intuition and other resources to help us figure out the truth.

Wrong, because I am more interested in Ben's rape accusations, then what PacMan did 3 years ago.

And they won't even mention Big Ben. Why?

 

[RyGuy45]

And oldie but always a doozie....

Chris Mortensen......NFL expert

"The Houston Texans will select USC running back Reggie Bush with the No. 1pick in this April's NFL draft, team and league sources told Chris Mortensen," ESPN.com declared in January 2006. The next day,Mortensen added on air that "no matter what anyone says," Houston was"certain" to draft Bush. On Friday night before the noon Saturday start of the draft, theTexans used their first choice on Mario Williams. At 10 a.m. Saturday as ESPN draft coverage began, host Suzy Kolber asked an ESPN panel who of them wassurprised by the Texans taking Williams instead of Bush. All the panelists said they were surprised -- except for Mortensen, who declared that he had neverexpected Bush to be chosen first.

"While Norv Turner remains the leading candidate to be the next head coach of the Dallas Cowboys,"ESPN's Chris Mortensen reported Wednesday that another candidate has emerged: Bears defensive coordinator Ron Rivera." So readESPN.com on Feb. 1, 2007. A few days later, after Wade Phillips got the Boys post, Mort said on the air that he had always known the job would go toPhillips.

During the Michael Vick saga Mort said on air that "Michael Vick is unlikely to get indicted in the dogfightingfederal invesitgation." We all know how that turned out.

Mortensen said on air that Eli Manning would "officially" miss amonth to start the 2007 season. Eli played every game.

Then it was Jon Gruden putting Mort on blast for reporting QB Jeff Garcia had a hairline fracturein his back, before Gruden or his staff had even seen the XRays. Turns out it was simply a bruised back.

Mort gave viewers the Bill Parcells to Atlantaguarantee after Parcells left Dallas and was fielding other offers. Parcells ended up taking the Miami Dolphins job only days later.

Mort stated on Sportscenter his "lock that Brett Favre is not going to come back thisseason. (200" Favre was officially back less than a week later.

Finally, Mort spent about 48 hours this past winter declaringthe recently fired Mike Shanahan was on the verge of being named the new coach of the KCChiefs. (And it was blasted all over ESPN's bottom line as breaking news). Adam Schefter of NFL.com called out Mort on it and saidthe Chiefs have never made any contact with Shanahan and there is zero chance of him becoming the Chiefs next coach. The Chiefs eventually hired Todd Haley astheir Head Coach and later when contacted Shanahan stated he never once talked to KC and never was a candidate. Mort went on SC that evening and halfwayretracted and said the Chiefs had to have at least considered it, in his opinion.

 

[651akathepaul]

I've just about came to accept ESPN for what it is. To be honest, if I want my highlights then I'll check out Baseball Tonight and call it good withESPN. No Sportcenter is necessary because its all crap anyway.

I'm much more satisfied learning about games from the internet, because I can pick and choose what I want to know, watch, or read.

 

[maxelite]

Jay Glazer > all ESPN NFL "senior reporters"

 

[TheGift23]

Mortensen said on air that Eli Manning would "officially" miss a month to start the 2007 season. Eli played every game

This One I remember well...Ibelieved that report (Which happened around Week 3) and thought that whole week that Lorenzen was gonna play, so naturally I was happy thinking of a crush in afavor of the Skins...Sheli played, lead the Giants to a huge comeback win and went on to win the SB...

 

[p mac one]

^

can't really blame him on that Favre one.

 

[dyyhard]

Originally Posted by CP1708

tylerdub wrote:

---

They are just like any other news source on TV. They report what they think will most interest the most people. We the consumer have to realize they have a bias and rely on our intuition and other resources to help us figure out the truth.

Wrong, because I am more interested in Ben's rape accusations, then what PacMan did 3 years ago.

And they won't even mention Big Ben. Why?

if you are black and your name is Shannon Brown, people will be interested according to espn.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2009/news/story?id=4219580

Los Angeles Lakers point guard Shannon Brown has been notified of an intent to sue him in civil court for an alleged sex-related incident with a woman in Denver, Brown's agent, Mark Bartelstein confirmed to ESPN's Shelley Smith on Sunday.

 

[bijald0331]

these past two years have really turned me off on ESPN. of course, i have to watch sportscenter b/c it is the best nightly sports show and the games on thenetwork so the only thing I've really been able to do is go to their website much less. I go to SI.com now. only thing I read ESPN is simmons and NBAupdates. i dont know what else to do. I feel like media around the nation has been talking about this Big Ben not on ESPN situation so there is some fallout atleast.

 

[CP1708]

Originally Posted by dyyhard

Originally Posted by CP1708

tylerdub wrote:

---

They are just like any other news source on TV. They report what they think will most interest the most people. We the consumer have to realize they have a bias and rely on our intuition and other resources to help us figure out the truth.

Wrong, because I am more interested in Ben's rape accusations, then what PacMan did 3 years ago.

And they won't even mention Big Ben. Why?

if you are black and your name is Shannon Brown, people will be interested according to espn.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2009/news/story?id=4219580

Los Angeles Lakers point guard Shannon Brown has been notified of an intent to sue him in civil court for an alleged sex-related incident with a woman in Denver, Brown's agent, Mark Bartelstein confirmed to ESPN's Shelley Smith on Sunday.

Holy crap I forgot about that.

So Big Ben is non news, but Shannon freaking Brown is newsworthy? Both are civil suits only.

How do ESPN supporters defend that call?

 

[bijald0331]

^they can't. its all a game and they control the most pieces. the corporate athlete has turned into the corporate sports world

 

[pr0phecy718]

Originally Posted by RetroBaller

ok that does it. we gotta pool our money together and start the NikeTalk Sports Network.

i actually like the sound of that name

 

[trelvis tha thrilla]

Originally Posted by RyGuy45

I really think, and this has been said many times before, that the only thing that is going to help things is a viable competitor. But that hasn't happened. ESPN can continue to do what they like because they now own the TV/radio rights to dang near every college and pro league, and they are the only player in the country for Sports nationally.

There are competitors, it is just that they aren't very good. You have NBA TV, MLB TV, Fox Sports, CBS Sports, NFL Network, Versus. There areother options available.

Originally Posted by RyGuy45



Many people ignore this but ESPN has also helped to kill off the newspaper industry as well. Granted they (newspapers) have themselves to blame for a lot of their problems....but ESPN has spent the last 5+ years buying out top print journalists, beat writers, etc and bringing them to ESPN. We are well on our way to this company litterally having a monopoly on everything and there being NO other options outside of blogs.

It is ESPN's fault that they want to hire the best writers?