Songbird
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2005
- Messages
- 54,988
This is a forward-looking question, so if your answer includes the word "print" you shouldn't be on this thread.
If that's your response then you shouldn't be in journalism.
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!
This is a forward-looking question, so if your answer includes the word "print" you shouldn't be on this thread.
On womens sports, there seems to be this notion on social that the lack of interest is the media's fault. If the meteo paper and national outlets covered the semi-pro leagues, fans would take them seriously. The paper counters with we can't devote resources to something no readers care about.
What's the truth in this chicken and egg scenario?
For the networks, it's all a matter of how much the rights cost (or don't cost). Sports programming is cheap programming to produce, so they love it, and if you can get the rights without having to pay much, it's a great way to fill air time.