wisportswriter
Member
hate-d-mah-old-prepjob said:What's the issue? Looks like ESPN wanted to tell an unflinching story & when the league wanted different, the network walked.
How about that who gives a rip what the league wants?
Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
hate-d-mah-old-prepjob said:What's the issue? Looks like ESPN wanted to tell an unflinching story & when the league wanted different, the network walked.
"Sensational?" "Over the top"? Skipper knows he's working at ESPN right?LongTimeListener said:Lipsyte with a pretty good ombud column. Doesn't draw a lot of conclusions, though.
http://espn.go.com/blog/ombudsman/post/_/id/96/was-espn-sloppy-naive-or-compromised
The problem started when ESPN producers were talking up their journalistic chops at a media event to promote the thing. The producer said "the NFL is just going to have to understand" how ESPN's news team works. Uh huh, yeah.
And:
Upon screening it, Skipper said he found the trailer to be "sensational." He particularly objected to the tagline -- "Get ready to change the way you see the game" -- and to the final sound bite in the piece, from neuropathologist Ann McKee. Referring to brain injuries, she says, "I'm really wondering if every single football player doesn't have this."
Skipper said he found that comment to be "over the top."
Yeah because, I mean, what the fork would one of the world's leading neurologists know about it compared with what John Skipper thinks is right?
LongTimeListener said:That piece from The Nation isn't really very good. I challenge you to post one of the "strong" quotes that offers something more than garden-variety analysis. Everyone is anonymous -- and this is one case where I'd think you would want to stand up and be heard and that it wouldn't cost you your job, particularly if you're under contract. Some of those quotes would sound better with a name attached if these were the prominent people we're told they are, but without the names they sound like something cribbed off this thread.
And turning to Will Leitch to tell us what's wrong with ESPN is lazy and irrelevant.
LongTimeListener said:The quotes don't mean anything without names attached
LongTimeListener said:If that is the strongest quote, you're proving my point. Pick out one thing in there that isn't widely known. That could have been an appraisal of ESPN's strategy from an insider, from someone on SportsJournalists.com, from Will Leitch, or from some professor dangling a pipe at Columbia University. There isn't anything there that's new.
I also don't know who the employee is. Is it someone I respect? Is it a clown show like Bayless or Stephen A? Is it an assistant producer? That quote really does not carry any new insight, nor does it carry the weight of the speaker.
Thanks for doing my legwork and proving my point.