Would you say that this is part of the reason ESPN is dying?

Would you say that this is part of the reason ESPN is dying?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/O_H-2gPuAnw?t=2m02s
deadspin.com/no-espn-isn-t-losing-money-because-it-s-liberal-you-clu-1794713741
nber.org/papers/w20847
politifact.com/virginia/statements/2015/mar/02/dave-brat/brat-us-school-spending-375-percent-over-30-years-/
washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2015/03/12/in-23-states-richer-school-districts-get-more-local-funding-than-poorer-districts/?wprss=rss_education
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

That's why TV and film, alike, are dying. Nobody wants to hear that shit.

>wypipo don't want to hear about their privileges

We know you don't, but you're going to

Nah, that's what the mute button and dvr are for.

Nope. ESPN is losing money because the cable bubble popped. No one cares that ESPN started talking about politics or whatever besides alt right retards on the internet. If anything, they became more political as a response to the fact that no one was watching the shows that they used too put out.

Privileges are earned much like respect. That's why no one gives Asians and Indians a hard time here. All they do is work hard in America and earn a good living. Blacks want it all but don't want to do a thing to earn it.

>shitskin living in white lands instead of their own shitskin lands
>not privileged

Choose one, Jamal / Paco / Pajeet / Achmed.

Oh, and you're welcome.

ESPN is dying because of cordcutters. Any other explanation is pure fanfiction.

this

Pretty much sums it up, but people will continue to peddle false narratives.

I specifically cut the cable cord 7 years ago because I didn't want to pay $5 per month for ESPN (automatic in the total bill - no choice - this is true for everyone in US who pays for cable).

Has nothing to do with politics as I'm a progressive communist (not an amoral retard) but their garbage content. Once started to track how many minutes of ads they show during an hour but stopped when I realized with all their on-screen ads, synergy (Here's a 10 minute piece on Disney's latest movie that has some connection to sports), and shit like sponsored highlights, the total would have been more than 60 minutes of ads per hour.

You morons pay for that. I'm out.

>middle america wants to .... listen to sports talk

does anyone actually want to listen to sports talk on tv anymore? It is barely passable in radio form in the car when you're bored of music.

>sports talk

Pure cancer.

Especially when they're talking about shit like college sports. "Grown" men ranting and raving about children playing games is insufferable.

>I'm a progressive communist

t. disneysports damage control, ESPN played the political game and lost, they decline while other networks are gaining traction. Stay assblasted.

Who gives a fuck about ESPN? They show sports that I watch sometimes. I really don't get how you can care if you don't work there. It's 2017 and you can get sports news from anywhere: twitter, Sup Forums, google

a very small one.

It's more confirmation bias then explanatory.

Are you saying black people should work for a living? How dare you sir! Their ancestors, whom their decades dead great grand parents were the last to know personally, was a slave! How dare you suggest they shouldn't be given free 5000 sq/ft houses on 5 acre properties, porches, and food for life.

Who wrote this?

>happy

Even if things are/were as they say, happy is not the word for it.

But ESPN is too big to fail anyway.

Part of the reason, but not the reason. ESPN latching onto this is simply a consequence of cord cutters. Problem with this strategy is the middle America boomers who just want sports talk are the ones likely keeping cable, while the cable ditchers are the ones more likely to care about SJW causes. ESPN is chasing after an exponentially decreasing audience in cord cutters while alienating their traditionally loyal viewers.

Except CBS Sports, NBC Sports and Fox Sports are gaining viewership.

ESPN is losing money because they went the MTV route. They got away from reporting on sports to trying to dabble in entertainment and politics, people didn't like it, then they doubled down. It also didn't help they went all in on NFL and NBA and vastly ignored every other sport.

You really trying to give him an English lesson, boy?

Sure it's an uphill batlle but plenty of stations have increased their viewership. Live sports is the most important commodity in cable right now(because it's fairly DVR-proof) and they are suppose to be the premier channel for it yet they are hemorrhaging viewers at a far greater rate than average.

As someone else said this is pure damage control to blame it on this.

Viewership =/= revenue. At this point, every cable package has ESPN. They lose revenue because of and

>At this point, every cable package has ESPN.

Wrong

> Progressive communist

Anyone who thinks people have stopped watching ESPN because of politics is a mouthbreathing mongoloid.

The only people this would apply to is people who specifically cancelled their entire cable package specifically because ESPN turned bad, meaning they only paid for cable to watch ESPN

That isn't what happened. Cord-cutting is extremely widespread now, and it just so happens that ESPN is the most affected by it because they are the ONly CABLE CHANNEL NEEDING TO PAY ASTRONOMICAL fees for sports TV deals

If you looked at any other channel in ESPN's usual cable block (food network, fx, tnt, etc), you would see the same drops in viewership, just no one reports them because no one cares about those channels. When you cord cut, you don't just call your cable company and say YES I WOULD LIKE TO CANCEL ESPN THANK YOU

d-d-d-damage control

Just face it sweetie, nobody wants to watch ESPN because it's a shit product with political garbage injected and panders to people who don't give an actual fuck about sports.

i just want to know what the hell made them think it was a good business decision. espn used to be my favorite channel and it's really sad to see what they've become. everything that i used to love is turning into meaningless garbage.

Look at cable news. Look at reality TV shows like the kardashians. this is why ESPN made the decision to do what they do now

When they can't expect regular high viewership from sportscenter like they used to (because of the internet), and look at these reality tv show and political bullshit getting so much attention on TV and online, they figured the only way to succeed is to fill the airtime with bayless, smith, etc

except that's exactly what I did

Wtf happened there

Keep your hands in your own pocket commie scum

>american flyover thread

>guy off-screen tosses pylons onto cart parked in endzone after hs game
>one falls and hits the gas pedal
>cart moves perpendiclular to end zone, hits a helmet in the endzone, and then travels in an arc towards midfield
>none of the guys got too hurt, worst was a torn meniscus

Cordcutting is the main reason, but their preachy left-wing editorilizing made their losses even greater.

Spoiler alert: it is possible for there to be more than one reason for an event to be happening.

They just had Peyton Manning host the Espys, who spoke at the Republican national convention. People are sick of paying for cable.

Also, ESPN's non sports shows are shitty even when they aren't talking about social shit. It's low quality even when they do talk about sports. How many times do I have to listen to a conversation about a great player on a team that hasn't won a championship and whether he is clutch or not? How about the 4 straight summers featuring 24/7 coverage of will Favre retire or not? Also if you like anything other than football or basketball then ESPN is of no use to you.

I think viewership is down but people still pay for it. That's what all of my college-aged to out of college friends do. None of them watch ESPN unless a game is on.

>>tumblr

where else can I find quality WNBA coverage?

Or the month long retrospectives each time Michael Jordan retired.

Or doing a feature on Michael Strahan literally every Sunday morning during his entire career because New York athletes don't get enough press.

Or openly lying about Tom Brady because a former Jets official now at NFL offices told you to and then pretending that didn't happen.

I literally haven't watched for many years. Not sure how brain-dead someone has to be to do so these days.

The average black in America has 5 cents of wealth to the average white's dollar. Capitalism can only ever make this disparage worse. Doesn't matter if blacks were a literal super race full of super geniuses - nothing in Capitalism would ever allow this gap to lessen.

Being a communist is the very first thing one must do if you want to be progressive.

Whatever fucking BBC (owned by British government) or PBS (owned by US government) documentary you've been watching on Stalin you've been brainwashed my little friend.

The only correct answer to "Do you know how many people Stalin killed" is "Not nearly enough."

You're an idiot...Asians in the U.S started out with a fraction of the average white person's wealth and have now surpassed whites earnings on average. Brainwashed about Stalin?? Stalin was a mass murderer you fucking cuck, so was Lenin and Mao. Read Solzhenitsyn you uneducated edgelord.

this, I stopped paying for ESPN when The Decision became a thing. I just want a channel where I can watch games, catch up on games I missed via highlight, and maybe some behind the scenes action of teams/events.

ESPN is trying to reel customers away from YouTube by taking a page out of their book; I'm honestly surprised they haven't tried to have e-celebs host shows.

>Stalin was a mass

Yes, he murdered the Eurpean Nazis who invaded his country. The U.S. and UK didn't beat Hitler, Communist Russia did.

>Asians in the U.S started out with a fraction of the average white person's wealth

This comment is too dumb to need an reply.

Back to Stalin...Did you know that John F. Kennedy is responsible for the deaths of 10 million people in South East Asia? By the UN Charter, which the US held draft based on their Nuremberg Principles, an aggressor nation is not only responsible for the deaths caused by their military violence but they are responsible for all evils that come after as a result. Everyone Pol Pot killed? By international law - again written by the US - JFK and the US is responsible.

Sorry, I was gonna go on but then I realized where I was. Like teaching French to a mosquito. You're just a disgusting human being with no intellectual self defense who has made the bet that there is no higher power watching over us and you will never have to answer for what you do here with your life.

Lots of luck with that, Jackson. youtu.be/O_H-2gPuAnw?t=2m02s

>Yes, he murdered the Eurpean Nazis who invaded his country. The U.S. and UK didn't beat Hitler, Communist Russia did.

Lmao, millions of people pre and post world war 2 were killed and tortured by the Soviets, this is recognized FACT.

>This comment is too dumb to need an reply

No, it's not, you said that a group with an enormous income advantage could never be surpassed under capitalism, but just that has happened in the U.S.

> By the UN Charter, which the US held draft based on their Nuremberg Principles, an aggressor nation is not only responsible for the deaths caused by their military violence but they are responsible for all evils that come after as a result. Everyone Pol Pot killed? By international law - again written by the US - JFK and the US is responsible

Don't care enough to fact check whether or not that is true, taking it as true...This is just a technicality, the murder of innocents by Pol Pot is SOLEY attributable to JFK in your opinion?? The communists of Cambodia killed more than a million people, you're using some bs technicality to excuse yet another mass genocide under communist rule.

>You're just a disgusting human being with no intellectual self defense who has made the bet that there is no higher power watching over us and you will never have to answer for what you do here with your life.

Coming from a communist???? Do you even understand your own ideology?

No. The internet and 10000 better and cheaper sources for sports news is the main reason

deadspin.com/no-espn-isn-t-losing-money-because-it-s-liberal-you-clu-1794713741

*tips fedora*

>ESPN goes from solid majority Republican viewership to Democrat majority viewership, despite majority of sports fans leaning right politically
>politics had nothing to do with it!
Sure thing, Drew.

None of those channels are included in the basic package my cable company offers. Not that i have cable. I stream shows i like and big games are watched at a bar with pals

Please show me one that doesnt
>anyone who disagrees with me is somehow defending espn even if they dont like or watch it
Sure. BecUse theres no way a special snowflake like you could ever be wrong

One day you will grow out of your le communizm phase. It's easy to tell you are so young. I hope one day you realize how foolish you were.

I'm a Christian Capitalist.

I'm almost 50. Now instead of trying to think of an insult about me you might want to consider you just made a public (albeit anonymous) display of your inability to make sound judgements and stop talking.

ESPN just wants the BET viewers and cucks they are too stupid to stop watching.

Im not a commie but i do recognize the current system In america limits economic mobility. Did you know an 18 yo kid cant get Fafsa or government subsidized loans if one of their parents doesnt pay their taxes? You cant claim independent unless your married or 24. Thats the kind of law that specifically targets the working class. Did you know not all government funded schools are equally funded? Im no commie but i dont think a kid should have to pay the price of shitty education just for drawing the short stick in life. Capitalism is great but it needs laws to keep the gap in check

You would think so but people continue to pay for their shit. We're not buying it but the normies are.

I hate this "underfunded" meme as if that's the reason inner-city schools are shitholes. There are hellholes in Eastern Europe and Asia with 1/5th of the funding American schools get that produce better test scores.

>there is no correlation between a schools funding and the quality of students it produces
Nigger you have got to be kidding me

>mock someone for being a progressive communist

>spew bigotry to make your point

Sup Forums logic

Obviously, there is a correlation, but the violent culture of inner-city schools is more to blame for their failure than lack of funding. You can only do so much with that funding. Look at U.S test scores over time compared with increased Department of Education funding, it's laughable.

>calling something you don't like bigotry invalidates it
leddit logic

What is it like stocking shelves at the home Depot?

> everything I know, I learned on Sup Forums.

nber.org/papers/w20847
Less poor people is better for everyone not just those specific people. Less crime and a stronger economy would literally benefit everyone. I would vote to repeal NCLB and double the federal education budget. We have the wealthiest nation in history and we do horrible compared to other countries

Education funding has decreased since the 70s so i dont know what your talking about. Sure the inner cities are always gonna be a problem but if you gave those kids more extracurriculars to keep them off the streets more would lead productive lives

You guys are half right. Yes the biggest reason for ESPN's collapse is the death of cable television, of which they were essentially tied to the hip with.

But the reaction to this reality, namely to push into political programming cost them even more viewers. Yes, they had to try something to save their network, but they definitely, and without a doubt, cost themselves significant viewership (and more importantly online revenue) by moving to the left. More than 50% of NFL fans vote and think conservatively. The NFL runs US sports, it has for decades and it will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Even the black population tends to skew socially conservative in thought, moreso than average white viewers in fact, even if they vote democrat. ESPN's ship was sinking due to the death of cable and they decided to shoot holes in their sails by alienating a significant portion of their viewers through political pandering to their opposites.

>Education funding has decreased since the 70s so i dont know what your talking about
No, you don't know what you're talking about.

Thats the total cost not the federal governments contribution. Also that graph ends in 2010 when the stimulus dumped about $30 billion extra dollars. Its back down to about 40 billion now

Obviously, they alienated their original audience and opted for something that's easy to market but really hard to sell.

They get what? Sunday and Monday night football? Not to mention sunday night is infested with Cowboys games and they aren't exciting enough for the rest of the country.

But hey, I guess original productions are cheaper than paying for broadcasting rights.

Does federal money spend differently than local & state money? Regardless, federal money is up 117% per student per politifact, even after accounting for the post-2010 dropoff. So you're still completely fucking wrong:
politifact.com/virginia/statements/2015/mar/02/dave-brat/brat-us-school-spending-375-percent-over-30-years-/

Yes it does spend differently that was my entire point. Wealthier districts spend way more and skew charts like this and they produce better students. Look at a chart of a wealthy school versus a poor one and tell me the test scores are the same

So you admit that you lied when you claimed spending has decreased since the 70s?

>oy vey middle america is so backwards why don't they like whats hip in the current year
I live on the West Coast and this is just pathetic projection. I wonder (((who))) is behind this?

America (and "western economies") is not capitalist, re: "an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.".

Name one DOW company that hasn't been the benefactor of investment from the "state".

Corporate welfare =/= capitalism and you're absolutely clueless if you think that we don't currently live in a worldwide socialist (re: communist) system already.

Wealthier school districts also have more white and asian(higher iq) students than black and hispanic(lower iq). I would bet poor, majority white school districts perform better than majority black districts wit h equal funding.

4thpbp

You know (((federal))) money has nothing to do with the government, right? It just has "federal" in the name. It doesn't actually mean anything.

>Links (((politifact)))

Top fucking kek. Hit him with (((Snopes))) and (((wikipedia)))! Dominate him with (((facts)))!

Instead of dwelling on a statement, you may want to consider his point you dumbfuck

t. not OP

>Canada dropping redpills

Sup Forums really is like bizarro world

>I'm almost 50
>I still post on Sup Forums
KEK, commies are fucking failures inside and out. This isn't remotely surprising

Progressive communism.

Well I would honestly expect a Brit to be woke; our politics are too similar. Unfortunately Americans seem to think they are completely unique; it is the true bizarro country.

PS. My captcha was goldfish. A fitting analogy to the average American.

>"You're just a disgusting human being with no intellectual self defense"
>refuses to respond to parallel that BTFO's his original premise and priceeds to act like it never happened

You just made a complete fool out of yourself in public with your overt display of typical communist dissonance. Congrats, comrade.
Now back to /leftypol/ with you.

Also; I, as well, can't believe he admitted that... Surely it can't be real? Probably still living at the parent's house.

>watching espn if a game isnt on

Why would you ever do this?

You missed "You're just a disgusting human being with no intellectual self defense who has made the bet that there is no higher power watching over us and you will never have to answer for what you do here with your life."

That's like, the executive summary of the Communist Manifesto right there.

The difference in spending per pupil between the poorest and richest districts is ~15%, whereas the change in spending since the 70s is, by any metric, more than doubled. Spending on education has increased across the entire country, rich and poor district alike, without bringing much in the way of results regardless of income level.

He started his argument by making a blatant fucking lie, made some handwaving assertions about rich vs poor schools that imply a much bigger disparity in spending than actually exists. He doesn't in good faith or have any foundation to stand on.

Here's a point you might consider instead, taken from elsewhere:
>So, imagine you’re a poor person. White, minority, whatever. Which would you prefer? Sending your child to a 2016 school? Or sending your child to a 1975 school, and getting a check for $5,000 every year?

>I’m proposing that choice because as far as I can tell that is the stakes here. 2016 schools have whatever tiny test score advantage they have over 1975 schools, and cost $5000/year more, inflation adjusted. That $5000 comes out of the pocket of somebody – either taxpayers, or other people who could be helped by government programs.

Tell me, why should we continue to increase spending on education when it's been increasing for 4 decades with no improvements in results?

Why are communism and nazism such honeypot ideologies for children?

ISIS drone

Ya thats why so many doctors are coming out of appalachia kentucky and virginia

For some reason in the obama era, literally every single form of media decided it was cool to turn themselves into a Yale sociology lecture.
And even when the ratings would fall or the money would run dry they would just double down on forcing their political agenda

People dont watch sports to be yelled at for how evil they are for being white or male..

Sports is the original bread and circus's

People watch sports to forget about politics. Its prole feed. I think companies forget this concept. They alienated a vast swaft of white male and male audience to go after an audience that doesnt even fucking watch cable or sports.

Personally i came to a theory that the mass politicization of media in the obama years activated a lot of white men who wouldn't normally be political, no longer having any distraction or prole feed. They rallied for trump or welcomed into the alt right.

What im saying, is the media should just go back to never talking about politics or catering to sjw's again, and let the nerd men have their video games and sports

>by any metric
Nah dude. Id be interested to see how much of that %117 actually goes to teachers or textbooks. Education is just more expensive today than 40 years ago. Increased utilities and added security not to mention the advent of computers. You can keep cherry picking graphs and shouting into the sand all day but everyone knows wealthy schools produce better students
>obligitory edgy Sup Forums race comment
The blacks in those wealthy schools are outperforming their white and poor counterparts

And there's more coming out of the hood? At least the inner-city is near urban centers where there is actual economic opportunity besides farming.

No its not a lie. I was referring to the percentage of federal contribution not the overall dollar amount

Communism appeases a fantastical childish and naive perception of how one thinks the world SHOULD be instead of how humans actually live and the nazis have rad ass fucking uniforms.

>And there's more coming out of the hood?
I feel like youre being intentionally obtuse. My whole point is theyre coming out of rich suburban schools

Part of the reason, not the sole reason.
>Cable subscriptions plummeting
>Increased competition
>Over reliance on personalities instead of just showing sports

Actually, I was mistaken. The 15% difference excluded federal funding. The difference between per pupil spending in wealthy and poor school districts is only 1.7%. Obviously, eliminating that 1.7% discrepancy will make all the difference!

washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2015/03/12/in-23-states-richer-school-districts-get-more-local-funding-than-poorer-districts/?wprss=rss_education

The federal contribution per pupil has more than doubled. We've been over this, remember?