More Cuts at ESPN

I think the Jenner thing was absolutely political on some level. It was trying to make a statement about transgenderism at a time when the issue was on national airwaves.

Is it liberal vs. conservative? I think it is, and it manifests itself on Twitter, the liberal cool kids club, especially among some ESPN personalities who appear to have little to no idea how they come off on that platform. (Or, like, Deitsch, know and are proud of it.) But I also know my thinking is simultaneously offensive to some on the board.

 

I think it's trying to do things cool people will find cool. Sometimes that overlaps with being liberal. But Who's Next, or whatever that was called, and attempts to re-invent SportsCenter and morning shows have similar motivation behind them, I think.

 

I thought giving her the award was part of the deal for 20/20 getting the exclusive interview? Remember how a commercial for her reality show aired RIGHT after she accepted the award and they went to break?

 

Deitsch isn’t nearly as well-liked as we’d be led to think. Odd hire for The Athletic IMO but that’s for another thread obviously

 

Michelle Beadle doesn't watch football. Bully for her, but not a good look for September through January on the job she gets millions to opine on.

VIDEO: Michelle Beadle Has Stopped Watching Football

 

I know I live in a culturally liberal cocoon for a variety of reasons. But why is transgenderism a liberal political value? I have not heard of any conservative politician denouncing adults transgendering.

I think that may be what happened to ESPN. They gave the award to Jenner to get the 20/20 interview and for the ratings and hype (do you know who won the Award for Courage the year before or year after). They had no idea that they were violating some political orthodoxy.

 

At the time Jenner got the award, the "bathroom bill" was starting to become a big issue.

Look. I'm not trying to start a political debate here that, given the board's political leanings, is just not a fruitful thing to pursue. What I am saying is that...it made people think ESPN was kinda liberal. You, as someone who lives in a culturally liberal cocoon, may see it as obviously a human rights matters. Others do not. And ESPN choosing a celebrity (who'd spent many, many years on TV as a man) and then tying that to an exclusive interview with Diane Sawyer on ABC, it just didn't go over well.

I still think the Missouri thing was worse. The university on the whole suffered significantly and not much came from it other than a few moments of fascism from a professor on camera.

 

The stock answer among conservatives is something to the effect of, "I don't care about what sex they are, or are switching to, I just don't want it thrown in my face." I actually don't think its an unreasonable thought.

 

There have been three or so women who have come in this summer and provided more energy and spark. Regardless of her salary, she isn't long for that show.

 

It may be her way of getting off the show. The show may not be long for this world anyhow.