Questions of me
Some of the folks commenting want to know why I discuss ESPN as much as I do on this blog.
One reason, they provide the most content on sports on the Internet that they have produced. You can argue that Google News and Yahoo! Sports provide content but much of that is available anywhere and is produced by the Associated Press.
Same goes with TV: I will discuss the broadcasts of TNT and Speed and Fox Sports and Golf Channel and NFL Network, but at the end of the day, ESPN is the top provider of content.
As for news: the New York Times and Washington Post are the present kings online.
So plan on seeing more discussions of shows on ESPN.
And some more …
SportsTime Ohio is barely relevant beside its Tribe broadcasts and FSN is in the same boat beside Cavs games. I would love to see some network take a swing at ESPN on the national level. Comcast and its Versus channel gave it a shot, but the network couldn't secure NFL or MLB rights. It only got the NHL and is doing a great job, but few are watching. FSN has its Best Damn Sports Show and its half hour highlights show but nothing really relevant.
Speed Channel is a godsend for auto racing fans. I would go as far to say that Speed and Fox Sports have made NASCAR a mainstream sport with its excellent coverage and reports. ESPN will have it tough in the second half of this season to measure up to Fox Sports' coverage of NASCAR.
Also with some of this, I defer to George Thomas who provides media coverage for the local radio and TV on Ohio.com and the Beacon Journal.
May 16th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
Odd how you used, "but at the end of the day," one of Screamin' A. Smith's favorite pet phrases, to describe your avowed mission to continue to beat readers over the head with a daily dose of Disneyfest.
To paraphrase our military geniuses, stay the course. Stay the course.
May 16th, 2007 at 6:48 pm
I think you're splitting hairs. I watch ESPN, and know how to access its website, and everything that it produces is just as ubiquitous, just as quickly, as AP copy.
But I can see ESPN as an interesting topic. It pretty much defines the way we think of sports these days, at least in some ways. But I don't really see it discussed as a topic in that sense (excepting of course the recent link to ESPN's side of the argument, written by a pr flak who's supposed to be more believable because she's called an "ombudsman"). ESPN is most often simply cited or otherwise used to substantiate a viewpoint.
I've noticed that sort of thing a lot lately, not just on this blog, and it's not a big deal, but I enjoy getting a dig in about it.
May 16th, 2007 at 7:09 pm
I literally just finished writing a little something about that ridiculous self-serving "ombudsman" title in the comments section of the prior ESPN post, and now I'm reading this. Pretty funny. I was never a Star Trek guy, but there's a little something to be said for Vulcan mindmelds.
And to take Larry's comment several steps further, I believe it's only a matter of time before ESPN (Disney/ABC, whatever) enters into a deal with a major player to begin their own AP-like service. Those pod people have been attempting to infiltrate everything else, why not that?
Ron, you're not a pod people, are you? Nah, on second thought, don't answer that question. Yes or no, it's a moot point.
February 17th, 2008 at 10:51 pm
Comcast Provides Great Options For Television, Telephone, and Internet…
If you are in the market for a new service provider for your television, telephone, or Internet services or you want to add a service onto your existing ones, Comcast is a great company to turn to….