What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Sports Media Companies and Personalities and "Sticking To Sports" (1 Viewer)

Do you think Sports Media Companies and Personalities Should "Stick to Sports" or are you ok with th

  • Strongly Agree they should "Stick to Sports"

    Votes: 44 46.8%
  • Mostly Agree they should "Stick to Sports"

    Votes: 19 20.2%
  • On The Fence

    Votes: 10 10.6%
  • Mostly Disagree they should "Stick to Sports"

    Votes: 9 9.6%
  • Strongly Disagree they should "Stick to Sports"

    Votes: 12 12.8%

  • Total voters
    94

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
Interesting situation at ESPN with host Dan Le Batard reportedly taking today off as he ponders ESPN's "No Politics" policy.

What do you think about a sports media company requiring it's personalities to "stick to sports" or do you think sports media companies should allow their personalities to talk Politics?

 
Interesting situation at ESPN with host Dan Le Batard reportedly taking today off as he ponders ESPN's "No Politics" policy.

What do you think about a sports media company requiring it's personalities to "stick to sports" or do you think sports media companies should allow their personalities to talk Politics?
Consumers can get politics on every cable, many radio and local news station 24-7.  Most people choose to watch and listen to Sports stations..well for sport talk and highlights. I watch the Food Network for cooking tips and food talk not for Bobby Flays opinion on political issues. I watch the weather channel to hear about the weather.

I listen to 97.1 The Ticket in Detroit when driving and can`t remember ever hearing any type of political talk. Must be a station rule to stick to sports.

There is a reason that you started the PSF.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think it's a case-by-case basis where the story kind of drives whether or not it needs to be covered politically. I voted "on the fence," because there are certain times that ignoring the political aspect of a story is to ignore the story itself. What becomes tedious to people, I think, is the interjection of politics into things that while not decidedly apolitical, aren't inherently so. There's a line to be drawn regarding what is a story's essence and what is ephemera. 

 
On their own time, they can do what they want.

On the time where ESPN is paying them and giving them a platform to talk sports with specific instructions not to discuss politics, they should talk sports and not politics. It's pretty simple but these guys are "media personalities" because of the platform they are given by the media company that employs them. That company has the right to protect it's bottom line and set policy.

 
Sometimes sports and politics cross paths. Like how all these National Championship teams refuse to go to the White House or when Lebron James runs his mouth about whatever injustice. Radio personalities are paid to entertain more than anything, so I think they should have some judgement as to whether to delve into it. I really disagree with the blanket rule. If one of them takes it too far or won't shut up about it, address it then.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I understand the reasoning behind having someone on your primary "sports scores" show (SportsCenter) talk about politics.  That is not the purpose of that show.

But the majority of ESPN's programming is opinion based.  Politics shapes and clouds our opinions about most everything, up to and including sports.  It definitely has a place in that type of programming.

 
Stick to sports. And the flip side, keep the politics out of sports. I don't want to see the White House tweeting/commenting on what the leagues need to do or how athletes need to act. Just put a wall up between the two.

 
Stick to sports. And the flip side, keep the politics out of sports. I don't want to see the White House tweeting/commenting on what the leagues need to do or how athletes need to act. Just put a wall up between the two.
And we will make Mexico pay for that wall.  In exchange they get the next NFL franchise.

 
Stick to sports.  I think ESPN figured out recently that talking about politics so much turned off a lot of viewers, hence the new policy by the new guy in charge. 

 
I would love to see some actual indepth reporting on how politics effects sports.  Specifically things like how cities are basically conned by teams into building them new stadiums at taxpayers expense, how large global competitions like the Olympics decimate economies, and the cost of sports VS academics at universities.

On the other hand, the last thing we need is another talking head giving a half baked opinion, we get that on msnbc and fox already.

 
Sports represent a good opportunity to escape from politics for a while, and I deeply resent it when folks insist on dragging politics into the sporting world.  I'm not talking about Colin Kaepernick here -- he can kneel, stand, sit, or do whatever and I won't care.  I'm talking about the Peter Kings of the world who seem to think that I need to know their opinions on the issues of the day.  Trust me, I don't.  

 
It's funny how Daryl the pest control guy and Karen the receptionist are always posting crap about their politics, but think celebrities should "stay in their lane". Oh, the irony.

 
It's funny how Daryl the pest control guy and Karen the receptionist are always posting crap about their politics, but think celebrities should "stay in their lane". Oh, the irony.
I think that's a function of distribution and how wide the casted net is

 
Stick to sports.  I think ESPN figured out recently that talking about politics so much turned off a lot of viewers, hence the new policy by the new guy in charge. 
Obviously they want a change of direction. When ratings drop expect changes.

 
I've said it 1000 times.

This attempt by professional sports, ESPECIALLY the NFL, to turn their product into Kardashian style reality TV will be what finally pushes me away for good.  

If ESPN has somehow managed to go away from that, good for them.

 
I've said it 1000 times.

This attempt by professional sports, ESPECIALLY the NFL, to turn their product into Kardashian style reality TV will be what finally pushes me away for good.  

If ESPN has somehow managed to go away from that, good for them.
I get exactly what you're saying about the soap opera/reality-style coverage, but isn't politicization a separate issue?  

 
I get exactly what you're saying about the soap opera/reality-style coverage, but isn't politicization a separate issue?  
It is all part of the same game.

Get forums like ours to have 1000+ page threads debating some dude kneeling BEFORE a game.

Or whatever the latest accusation is that we can all jump to conclusions and speculate on for 100's of pages.

Or front line stories about gay athletes, because they are gay, not because of their athletic accomplishments.

The list is endless.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It is all part of the same game.

Get forums like ours to have 1000+ page threads debating some dude kneeling BEFORE a game.

Or whatever the latest accusation is that we can all jump to conclusions and speculate on for 100's of pages.

Or front line stories about gay athletes, because they are gay, not because of their athletic accomplishments.

The list is endless.
Anything cynically driven for eyeballs, then, I guess. I'm holding out hope that somewhere along the way we can draw a line or two and not have everything fit in neat or absolutist boxes, but that may be a hope I will be disabused of within the next decade or so.  

 
Well you’re never gonna make everyone happy, but for the most part I’ve found that people say “stick to sports” when the political party/figure they support has been portrayed in a negative light 

 
Well you’re never gonna make everyone happy, but for the most part I’ve found that people say “stick to sports” when the political party/figure they support has been portrayed in a negative light 
That would be natural, but I don't remember feeling that way about where politics and sports have intersected the past few years.  

 
Dr. Octopus said:
On their own time, they can do what they want.

On the time where ESPN is paying them and giving them a platform to talk sports with specific instructions not to discuss politics, they should talk sports and not politics. It's pretty simple but these guys are "media personalities" because of the platform they are given by the media company that employs them. That company has the right to protect it's bottom line and set policy.
Yep, easy line to draw.  If they want to tweet out opinions about current events or politics, they should be allowed.  Nobody is tuning into a sports platform to hear it there.

 
It is all part of the same game.

Get forums like ours to have 1000+ page threads debating some dude kneeling BEFORE a game.

Or whatever the latest accusation is that we can all jump to conclusions and speculate on for 100's of pages.

Or front line stories about gay athletes, because they are gay, not because of their athletic accomplishments.

The list is endless.
So in other words, this stuff is all part of the entertainment. As much as we complain, we have to admit we like it a little. We dont have to talk about it after all.

 
So in other words, this stuff is all part of the entertainment. As much as we complain, we have to admit we like it a little. We dont have to talk about it after all.
I don't like it.  Which is why I mentioned ultimately I will stop being a fan/customer.

I want to watch athletes play sports, that entertains me. 

I don't want to watch/read/hear about athletes' scandalous flavor of the week... politics, baby mama accusations, their instagram posts. That isn't ever entertaining to me, and if it was, i'd go watch hot chicks on TV yell at each other about who has the better boob job.  No need to watch a bunch of dudes doing this crap.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't like it.  Which is why I mentioned ultimately I will stop being a fan/customer.

I want to watch athletes play sports, that entertains me. 

I don't want to watch/read/hear about athletes' scandalous flavor of the week... politics, baby mama accusations, their instagram posts. That isn't ever entertaining to me, and if it was, i'd go watch hot chicks on TV yell at each other about who has the better boob job.  No need to watch a bunch of dudes doing this crap.
Yeah, I agree with you. My point though, many people do enjoy gabbing about it. Kaepernick has been a topic of conversation for how long? Even in this fantasy football forum his thread is constantly at the top, or it was for a while. People love standing on their soapbox. 

ESPN's decision to take politics out of the discussion, it's not in their best interest. Just my opinion. The controversy, drama - its entertainment. A lot of folks get mad about it but they're still watching and arguing. Deep down they like it.

 
Yeah, I agree with you. My point though, many people do enjoy gabbing about it. Kaepernick has been a topic of conversation for how long? Even in this fantasy football forum his thread is constantly at the top, or it was for a while. People love standing on their soapbox. 

ESPN's decision to take politics out of the discussion, it's not in their best interest. Just my opinion. The controversy, drama - its entertainment. A lot of folks get mad about it but they're still watching and arguing. Deep down they like it.
that's what the Kardashians are for. not ESPN. 

Their ratings have been tanking before this policy. So I disagree that this is not in their best interest. time will only tell. 

 
that's what the Kardashians are for. not ESPN. 

Their ratings have been tanking before this policy. So I disagree that this is not in their best interest. time will only tell. 
ESPN can enforce this policy but athletes won't have to abide by it. When players will bring up politics, what should sports media do? Just not cover it I guess? I'm all for that, honestly. I would have preferred not to constantly hear about Kaepernick and whoever else taking a knee during the National Anthem.

On the other hand, they're going to cover it when players bring up something. Like when the women's soccer team brings up equal pay after they win the WC. Media will cover it. ESPN just thinks their commentators shouldn't provide any context.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Interesting situation at ESPN with host Dan Le Batard reportedly taking today off as he ponders ESPN's "No Politics" policy.

What do you think about a sports media company requiring it's personalities to "stick to sports" or do you think sports media companies should allow their personalities to talk Politics?
The real issue is the compromising of the fifth estate and a system that responded by the 'powers that want to be'.  

'Lame-stream' media popularity has plummeted.  It had gone from trusted independent hard journalism to whorish pandering for clicks. 

We know we are and have been lied to by what isn't said.  The media refuses to take on the 'powers that want to be' because even if they can get a story out they will be persecuted and the legal system won't take action.

Unfortunately we see people who are not journalists spouting political takes.  They die on hills without really addressing the main issue of the failure of a true compromised fifth estate and a system that will take action against the highest powers.

If we had an honest and strong independent fifth estate and a system that would take action against corruption then we would not see unqualified ham-fisted political hack takes that have become tedious at best and embarrassing or backfire at worst.

 
Here's my problem - some political issues are sports related.  Kap taking a knee, teams refusing to go to the white house, Rapinoe getting tweet fought by the president - these things are both sports and politics related and deserve to be reported on.

What doesn't need to happen is tabloid style reporting about who said what or why this group did that. That kind of "Kardashian" style bull#### isn't, and will never be, news worthy.

 
I voted they should stick to sports. I don't listen/watch any sports news. The limited time 
I get exposed to sports talk/news, I realize companies are aiming for the lowest common
denominator for entertainment. If that includes some politics it's going to be covered.

 
ridicule said:
All these 'personalities' can take their own condescending judgements and stick them up their ###, whether they be Jamele or Curt.  I Just wanted to know what the score was...
Exactly this.

There are plenty of other avenues to express your opinions. They are sports journalists last I checked. Why would I want them to drag all this political garbage into this sector? Part of my love for sports is that it's a refugee from the constant debate, conflict, and divide that is politics. Stay on point, if not, go away. 

 
I am fine with them using their platform to express some opinions but there is a limit ofcourse. If the opinion is extreme or they are bringing something up regularly, it can become ridiculous. In today's age, it is so easy to just "change the channel" and find something else to watch, stream, etc. If I am bored or annoyed with a sports show/column, I will just move on to something else. 

 
ridicule said:
All these 'personalities' can take their own condescending judgements and stick them up their ###, whether they be Jamele or Curt.  I Just wanted to know what the score was...
If all you want to know is what the scores were, why tune into TV or radio shows in the 1st place?

The scores of the games are readily available on hundreds of websites or apps without having to listen to anyone speak at all.

 
I have as much interest in athletes views on politics, as I have in watching politicians play sports. 
I get that but many of the biggest moments in sports history are political: Jackie Robinson, Ali, the Miracle on Ice, the 72 Olympics, Louis vs Schmelling. I think there are clearly times where politics plays a role and sports broadcasters who are in ways both the narrators and historians of sports are needed weigh in on the events. 

 
If all you want to know is what the scores were, why tune into TV or radio shows in the 1st place?

The scores of the games are readily available on hundreds of websites or apps without having to listen to anyone speak at all.
...and hear some analysis.  Wasn't meant to be taken so literally. 

 
A small bit of non-sports sprinkled in, especially momentous stuff, is ok. But I don't want any rants or hard hitting political analysis when I turn the channel/podcast to sports. 

I don't even like when the shows are littered with non-sports nonsense. I used to listen to every Fantasy Focus when it was Matthew Berry and Nate Ravitz. Nate kept MB in check and the podcast was like 90-95% football analysis and 5-10% nonsense. Now, MB just steamrolls everyone and it goes off the rails every 5 seconds and every take is vanilla. The informative aspect of the show is lost. 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top