"Bloody" Day at ESPN today

[bbmike]

^Like Uncle Martin?  :D

[bayonetbrant]

The decline of ESPN continues

http://thefederalist.com/2017/09/12/jemele-hill-tweets-bad-espn-show-is-worse/

Interesting show of solidarity by a whole bunch of other sports reporters, but the best of the bunch was Jeff Pearlman

https://www.si.com/tech-media/2017/09/17/jemele-hill-donald-trump-twitter-tony-romo-jim-nantz-cbs-beth-mowins

Jeff Pearlman, writer, Bleacher Report:
Honestly, I was horrified by the way ESPN left one of its top employees (a genuinely good person who works her ass off) out to dry. Back when I was coming up at The Tennessean, my editors made clear that they might be angry with you, they might be frustrated with you—but they'd never not have your back in a public dispute or outcry. They would defend you, stand up for you, stand up for your name.

Here, ESPN clearly gathered its worst PR people in a huddle and said, "We need to handle this and separate ourselves from her." That REALLY pissed me off.

One more thing: It's easy for some to dismiss a movement when only one group participates. If the lone people standing up for LGBT rights are members of the LGBT community, critics can say, "It's just a bunch of whiners." Same here. I can picture people saying, "Enough with the whining from black journalists." Well, I'm not African-American. I'm a white Jewish guy—and I'm genuinely furious about this.

Oh, last point—and the most important point. I spent two years researching a USFL book. That means a lot of Trump. And, politics aside, Jemele is right: Trump is as vile and disgusting as she wrote. There was nothing in her Tweets that rang untrue.

[mirth]

She violated ESPN's policy against making political statements. They had no reason to defend or support her. And she wasn't just calling Trump a white supremacist, she extended it to anyone who voted for him. So I can't say I blame ESPN for distancing themselves from her statements.

[bayonetbrant]

She violated ESPN's policy against making political statements. They had no reason to defend or support her. And she wasn't just calling Trump a white supremacist, she extended it to anyone who voted for him. So I can't say I blame ESPN for distancing themselves from her statements.

a more extended look into the situation, from ESPN's ombudsman
http://www.espn.com/blog/ombudsman/post/_/id/871/espn-awash-in-rising-political-tide-2

Some feedback / alternate POVs (PsOV?)

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2017/09/18/Media/ESPN.aspx

[mirth]

a more extended look into the situation, from ESPN's ombudsman
http://www.espn.com/blog/ombudsman/post/_/id/871/espn-awash-in-rising-political-tide-2

That is a remarkably candid analysis.

[OJsDad]

I think EPSN would do well just to stick to sports and leave the political commentary to other Disney/ABC entities.  I understand that there will be some reporting of political activities as related to sports, ie kneeling at national anthem, and that activities that sports personalities are undertaking, like fund raising for disasters, working with kids, ect, will, and should, get reported on.

But when I turn on a sports show, I want the politics left behind.  I don't need someone making six figures to tell me that my view on life if wrong.  I'm tuning in to forget about all of the other crap for a few hours. 

If ESPN feels that they need to engage more in politics, then they should dedicate a show to it. 

[airboy]

a more extended look into the situation, from ESPN's ombudsman
http://www.espn.com/blog/ombudsman/post/_/id/871/espn-awash-in-rising-political-tide-2

That is a remarkably candid analysis.

I agree.  My take was an admission that esp is leftist, Hill violated policy, and she was not fried for a clear violation of policy.

[OJsDad]

a more extended look into the situation, from ESPN's ombudsman
http://www.espn.com/blog/ombudsman/post/_/id/871/espn-awash-in-rising-political-tide-2

That is a remarkably candid analysis.

I agree.  My take was an admission that esp is leftist, Hill violated policy, and she was not fried for a clear violation of policy.

There were no repercussions for Hill.  No suspension, no verbal swat on the hands, nothing.

[mirth]

a more extended look into the situation, from ESPN's ombudsman
http://www.espn.com/blog/ombudsman/post/_/id/871/espn-awash-in-rising-political-tide-2

That is a remarkably candid analysis.

I agree.  My take was an admission that esp is leftist, Hill violated policy, and she was not fried for a clear violation of policy.

There were no repercussions for Hill.  No suspension, no verbal swat on the hands, nothing.

And yet there are plenty of people who have said ESPN left her out to dry  ::)

[mirth]

https://twitter.com/jemelehill/status/912433009441300480

[bayonetbrant]

https://www.theringer.com/bill-simmons/2017/10/13/16469520/espn-jemele-hill-suspension-week-6-nfl-picks

[airboy]

https://www.theringer.com/bill-simmons/2017/10/13/16469520/espn-jemele-hill-suspension-week-6-nfl-picks

That was an interesting read.  It seems that the lefties at ESPN really, really want to skewer Trump on sports news.  They are angry that there is pushback from viewers.  And the idiot thinks that Trump & ESPN are "silencing" people and violating freedom of expression and the first amendment.  His stating that a late night comedian is the "voice of the nation" is a really telling comment on his opinions.

It is real simple.  SportsCenter is a program about sports news.  ESPN decided that on-air talent's social media posts were part of their job.  Jenelle Hill really hates Trump, and goes on social media to whine about him.  Then the lefties get angry when ESPN gives her a two week paid vacation.  Simmons is correct that the talent on Sports Center is totally mismatched for the program.

I disagree with ESPN whacking Bill Simmons about opinions of NFL Operations.  If this is an opinion show and he is voicing sports opinions that are not divorced from reality - then he is doing his job.  But if you take the ESPN coin, then your controversial opinions should be related to the sports world and not US politics.

If ESPN wants Hill to spout off about politics, give her a Sports/Politics show and let her have at it.  If they don't want her to spout off about politics, tell her to shut up about it or be fired.  But if ESPN wants to allow their people to spout off about lefty politics and can people who spout off about righty politics, then they can kiss 50% of their audience goodbye. 

[mirth]

If ESPN wants Hill to spout off about politics, give her a Sports/Politics show and let her have at it.

That's pretty much what SC6 is. It wasn't conceived as a 'just the facts' Sports Center program. Hill and Michael Smith were brought in because they're opinionated.

[acctingman]

They didn't fire her because she's black. ESPN firing her would open up a can of worms they don't want to deal with. Just my ignorant opinion.

This wasn't meant to offend or anything like that.

I just can't see ESPN firing a person of color with all this stuff going on. That was my ONLY point  :)

[bayonetbrant]

It is real simple.  SportsCenter is a program about sports news. 

You don't remember the vitriol that Stuart Scott got when get first went on the air, do you?  He did nothing but sports.  That was it - just highlights, nothing else.  He was calling a late-night SportsCenter with Rich Eisen, and all they did was highlights - no commentary, no analysis, no nothing.  But because Stuart would punctuate great plays with "boo-yah" he got accused of being a ghetto thug hood who was ruining ESPN.

To a non-trivial percentage of the audience, SportsCenter stopped being about sports news as soon as an articulate, interesting black guy showed up using vocabulary they didn't approve of.  And it's been downhill ever since.

But if ESPN wants to allow their people to spout off about lefty politics and can people who spout off about righty politics, then they can kiss 50% of their audience goodbye. 

Curt Shilling was fired because he was told to stop, and then didn't stop. 
Jemelle Hill has very publicly been given 2 strikes - though most people think the second was more business-related than politics-related - but hasn't yet hit the Curt-Shilling-threshold.  We'll see what happens when she does.

If ESPN wants Hill to spout off about politics, give her a Sports/Politics show and let her have at it.

That's pretty much what SC6 is. It wasn't conceived as a 'just the facts' Sports Center program. Hill and Michael Smith were brought in because they're opinionated.

Not only that, but a "just the facts" SportsCenter at 6pm didn't have any viewers of any kind anyway.  It's not like they lost viewers b/c of Smith & Hill.  They never had the viewers in the first place.  So they decided to try something different.

They didn't fire her because she's black. ESPN firing her would open up a can of worms they don't want to deal with. Just my ignorant opinion.

Or maybe they didn't fire her because she didn't say anything she could legitimately get fired for.  Unless you subscribe to the "Donald Trump must approve of all broadcasters" theory of media.