ESPN Profit Plummets As Network Turns Left

#351
#351
chatt-townVOL said:
I think it's pretty obvious I wasn't aware that's why she shaved her hair.
Click to expand...

It's a message board, so it's not like it's a big deal. People have said worse.

But this is the kind of thing you should look up before commenting on it. Women, particularly those that appear on television, don't typically shave their heads for the heck of it.
 
#352
#352
Jxn Vol said:
On the other hand we could delight in capitalism working. A bad product is not being consumed and they are being forced to change. And they may reorganize, change, and improve.
Click to expand...

Please don't confuse confirming capitalism works with taking joy in the resulting personal collateral damage.
 
Last edited:
#353
#353
RDU VOL#14 said:
The same with Bomani, and I had a very good working relationship with him about 10 years ago.
Click to expand...

Please elaborate, if you care to.

He's a strange bird. I don't agree with his political leanings and I think he is purposely obtuse in an attempt to make himself seem interesting or mysterious, but he clearly is a very smart guy (but maybe not as smart as he thinks he is).
 
#354
#354
chatt-townVOL said:
Who is the overweight, short, older lady?
Click to expand...


bamawriter said:
It's a message board, so it's not like it's a big deal. People have said worse.

But this is the kind of thing you should look up before commenting on it. Women, particularly those that appear on television, don't typically shave their heads for the heck of it.
Click to expand...



Well..... if I had known her name.....
 
#355
#355
chatt-townVOL said:
Well..... if I had known her name.....
Click to expand...

I get your point. But googling "ESPN reporter shaves head" brings up some stories about her.

Though the first one that popped up was about a reporter, Josina Anderson, that shaved her head after losing a bet.
So I suppose there are a few other reasons why it might happen.
 
#356
#356
Lawrence Wright said:
Please don't confuse confirming capitalism works with taking joy in the resulting personal collateral damage.
Click to expand...

Please don't confuse a post stating pleasure in capitalism working with taking joy in collateral damage. See it works both ways. You can do 1 and not the other.
 
#357
#357
Jxn Vol said:
Please don't confuse a post stating pleasure in capitalism working with taking joy in collateral damage. See it works both ways. You can do 1 and not the other.
Click to expand...

I missed where I said you specifically did both.

You took pleasure in capitalism working, as I do every day with a smile on my face.

Others in this thread took pleasure in people losing their jobs.
 
#358
#358
Lawrence Wright said:
I missed where I said you specifically did both.

You took pleasure in capitalism working, as I do every day with a smile on my face.

Others in this thread took pleasure in people losing their jobs.
Click to expand...

That's why I said "we" (meaning all of us) could celebrate capitalism working. Basically taking a glass half full stance. I don't care about everyone else. Just offering a different perspective without being critical of other folks words or actions.
 
#359
#359
Jxn Vol said:
That's why I said "we" (meaning all of us) could celebrate capitalism working. Basically taking a glass half full stance. I don't care about everyone else. Just offering a different perspective without being critical of other folks words or actions.
Click to expand...

You say you don't care about everyone else, but you used the term "we" in describing a hypothetical stance on celebrating capitalism in a thread where no one took that hypothetical stance.

Got it. :eek:lol:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#360
#360
Lawrence Wright said:
You say you don't care about everyone else, but you used the term "we" in describing a hypothetical stance on celebrating capitalism in a thread where no one took that hypothetical stance.

Got it. :eek:lol:
Click to expand...

I'm offering a viewpoint that you agree with. I'm not brow beating anyone that doesn't agree with me (or you). Just saying folks can look at the same situation at a different angle and derive a different explanation of outcomes.

Maybe this wasn't too difficult to understand.
 
#361
#361
Jxn Vol said:
I'm offering a viewpoint that you agree with. I'm not brow beating anyone that doesn't agree with me (or you). Just saying folks can look at the same situation at a different angle and derive a different explanation of outcomes.

Maybe this wasn't too difficult to understand.
Click to expand...

Or maybe it was communicated poorly. :)

In any event, we agree more than we disagree.

Capitalism works, but it sucks when markets correct themselves and people lose their livelihood.
 
#362
#362
05_never_again said:
Please elaborate, if you care to.

He's a strange bird. I don't agree with his political leanings and I think he is purposely obtuse in an attempt to make himself seem interesting or mysterious, but he clearly is a very smart guy (but maybe not as smart as he thinks he is).
Click to expand...

I worked at our local sports talk radio station (on the ad sales side) when he was getting started. We always got along pretty well talking sports in the break room, he was kind of socially awkward and a little more humble than he is now .At the same time he let everyone know how accomplished he was academically and that he was a professor at UNC. I can't remember what he taught, but I'm hoping for something in the AFAM department. There was always a hint of this chip on his shoulder and he always had a subtle racial remark for certain things. Not racist remarks, but just commenting on it. Now that he's on ESPN he has the platform to put his political ideals out there and the backing of the execs because ESPN is left. I don't really care for his politics. I mean at all. I think it's kind of funny when Clay Travis destroys him on twitter.
 
#363
#363
RDU VOL#14 said:
I worked at our local sports talk radio station (on the ad sales side) when he was getting started. We always got along pretty well talking sports in the break room, he was kind of socially awkward and a little more humble than he is now .At the same time he let everyone know how accomplished he was academically and that he was a professor at UNC. I can't remember what he taught, but I'm hoping for something in the AFAM department. There was always a hint of this chip on his shoulder and he always had a subtle racial remark for certain things. Not racist remarks, but just commenting on it. Now that he's on ESPN he has the platform to put his political ideals out there and the backing of the execs because ESPN is left. I don't really care for his politics. I mean at all. I think it's kind of funny when Clay Travis destroys him on twitter.
Click to expand...

He has a doctorate in Economics from UNC. Pretty damn impressive.

That's interesting, thanks for sharing. I don't have a Twitter account but I do go to people's pages that I find interesting, and his is one of them. Even though I disagree with him, I like to know what angle he is playing on a given issue.

I'm always curious to see if a person's online or TV persona is anything like what they are in real life, and it sounds like Bomani's is like a juiced-up, exaggerated version of his real personality.

On TV and social media, he has such a condescending, holier-than-thou, "I'm better/smarter than you," "I'm going to intentionally phrase my thoughts in a way that makes it difficult to understand what I mean" manner of communicating. So does Clay Travis, but Travis is able to do it in a way that is funny and entertaining; perhaps because he doesn't take himself so seriously. Jones thinks he is being cute and sarcastic, and that certainly plays to a certain audience, but it's just annoying.

What's funny is that when the guy has a take that is purely sports-related (which isn't all that often), I tend to agree with him.
 
#366
#366
KBVol said:
From longtime Sportscenter anchor Linda Cohn....

http://www.sportingnews.com/other-s...e-and-sid-show-wabc/xti6exskx6wp19v8pegqu7quz
Click to expand...

I admire her for saying that, because it isn't a popular opinion and she might indeed get backlash for it. But I don't think she's right.

ESPN has undoubtedly gone left. That frankly, isn't even plausibly debatable. The question is why. Are they doing it in response to cord cutting, or is the cord cutting occurring because they've gone left. I believe it is the former.

Look, I'm conservative/libertarian myself and naturally inclined to be sympathetic to the "ESPN is losing popularity because they are libtards!" argument. But think about it - has anybody eliminated their entire cable package because they didn't like that ESPN went left-wing? You cannot eliminate just ESPN from your cable or satellite. It makes no sense.

The stupid hot takes and political activism is an attempt (which will fail) to make their non-live sports programming relevant in an age of the internet, smartphones, and social media.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#367
#367
Anyone see First Take this morning??? They basically pitted 2 black guys (Stephen A. and Donovan McNabb) against some white dude regarding Trobinski and Watson. Of course SAS and McNabb were all over Watson's jock because of how many games he won and his stats etc. I wish the white guy would have just said, well if this were the case then Geno Toretta and Ken Dorsey should have both been #1 picks. Also I wish he would said to McNabb about if the Eagles had listened to outsiders he would have never been drafted by Philly. They were irate when McNabb was drafted.
 
#368
#368
That sucks about Mark May. He seemed very rational and knowledgeable. I guess they got rid of him because he isn't a hollow sensationalist.
 
#369
#369
05_never_again said:
I admire her for saying that, because it isn't a popular opinion and she might indeed get backlash for it. But I don't think she's right.

ESPN has undoubtedly gone left. That frankly, isn't even plausibly debatable. The question is why. Are they doing it in response to cord cutting, or is the cord cutting occurring because they've gone left. I believe it is the former.

Look, I'm conservative/libertarian myself and naturally inclined to be sympathetic to the "ESPN is losing popularity because they are libtards!" argument. But think about it - has anybody eliminated their entire cable package because they didn't like that ESPN went left-wing? You cannot eliminate just ESPN from your cable or satellite. It makes no sense.

The stupid hot takes and political activism is an attempt (which will fail) to make their non-live sports programming relevant in an age of the internet, smartphones, and social media.
Click to expand...


I think it's more just folks like me. ESPN is the last reason I have a cable package. I'd have cut it out two years ago probably but for their much increased college baseball coverage through the SEC network.

I'm going to sit down at the end of this college baseball season and see whether there's a better way for me to package my entertainment options. I may still pay ESPN in some form or fashion, whether it's sling or whatever, and I don't know whether they'll make more or less money that way, but I can tell you this...absent the SEC network, I'd have cut it two years ago.

Someone earlier stated that they don't believe that people just quit watching sports b/c of the leftward turn. That's kind of backward. ESPN stopped showing sports b/c of their leftward turn.

I don't have any interest in the politics when I turn to that channel. So increasingly I'm turning to the channel much, much less frequently.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#370
#370
Diamond Dore said:
I think it's more just folks like me. ESPN is the last reason I have a cable package. I'd have cut it out two years ago probably but for their much increased college baseball coverage through the SEC network.

I'm going to sit down at the end of this college baseball season and see whether there's a better way for me to package my entertainment options. I may still pay ESPN in some form or fashion, whether it's sling or whatever, and I don't know whether they'll make more or less money that way, but I can tell you this...absent the SEC network, I'd have cut it two years ago.

Someone earlier stated that they don't believe that people just quit watching sports b/c of the leftward turn. That's kind of backward. ESPN stopped showing sports b/c of their leftward turn.

I don't have any interest in the politics when I turn to that channel. So increasingly I'm turning to the channel much, much less frequently.
Click to expand...

I'm retired. My wife still works. I used to leave it on for background noise. Now I just go to Pandora for that.

and spend way too much time on VN forums :(
 
#375
#375
The better question is what should ESPN air? Sportscenter on six channels 14 hours a day isn't the answer, left wing politics isn't it, poker isn't it. What is it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top