I consider myself to be a pretty above average sports fan.
I have passion, yeah, but I don’t go overboard. I’m very knowledgeable of sports rules and histories, and I know who’s talking when I flip on a game or a sports program — former journalist or former athlete, where they gained their reputation and how that affects their opinions, etc. I realize just because Dickie V thinks Illinois isn’t a top-15 team doesn’t mean he hates our school; it’s just an opinion (and one that’s hard to argue anymore).
So how does Skip Bayless get under my skin with the ease of a tick and infuriate me like a diagnosis of Lyme disease would?
The Problem
Debate culture rules ESPN, which rules sports. It’s slightly more complicated than that, but that’s the gist. ESPN found that getting in arguments about things on public television entrances viewers, confusing them and causing them to believe that something important is going on because of the raised tempers of the debaters involved.
We’ve seen this in the (real) news media. Debates are the most interesting parts of political campaigns because that’s what normal people do when they talk about politics. Discussion turns into debate. The two are very different.
CNN used to broadcast a program called “Crossfire,” in which it would take a left-wing political pundit and a right-wing political pundit and encourage them to get angry at each other. Sensitivity was destroyed, sensibility obliterated. The show averaged 615,000 viewers a night, making it fairly popular. It raked in its audience from its controversial moments and helped political dummies figure out what they should think about certain issues.
The same effect is what captivates sports fans who spend their mornings watching “First Take,” the program Bayless — along with Stephen A. Smith — turned into a phenomenon.
The issues discussed in “Crossfire” and “First Take” are all two-sided. You’re on one side of the fence or the other. You get so heated about the ongoing exchange that you fail to realize they are simply splitting hairs — the debates don’t matter. If you don’t engage in them, nothing bad will happen.
The Reason
Nothing important has ever been said on “First Take.”
It is like “Crossfire” in this regard, but correlation is not causation, and “First Take” wasn’t created to be like “Crossfire.” “First Take” is a simpler, longer, more potent version of “Around the Horn,” also on ESPN, where four nationally known columnists give opinions on several different issues in sports. “Around the Horn” is a derivative of “Pardon the Interruption,” a show where two columnists who hold generally different views discuss issues in sports. If you trace “First Take” back to its source, you can see the respectable beginnings from whence came such garbage.
Debate is naturally polarizing, and viewers align themselves with one pole or the other. As the discussion unfurls on television, viewers are partaking in the battle of who’s right — something that’s been going on in sports ever since some shmuck at a New York bar claimed Ted Williams had eclipsed Babe Ruth as the greatest hitter the world’s ever seen.
Imagine if ESPN’s programming was nothing but analysis and reporting — guys like Ron Jaworski dissecting Tampa 2’s and Buster Olney getting to the bottom of which prospects were included in the Yankees’ latest trade. It would be interesting and informative, but without passion (besides Jaws’ love for Peyton Manning’s field vision) and therefore, arguably, boring.
ESPN fills in the blanks with opinion-driven shows that cause viewers to think about sports and try to be right, turning it into a bookie with membership to ESPN’s credible fan club as currency. This is what CNN was doing, too, with “Crossfire.” And here’s the encouraging part: “Crossfire” is no longer on the air.
The Solution
How can we, the knowledgeable sports fans who won’t sink to low levels such as that of Tebowmania, ensure “First Take” (and Skip Bayless’ starlight) go the way of “Crossfire”? Well, we can’t, really. Not if we’re replicating the demise of “Crossfire.”
On Oct. 15, 2004, Jon Stewart of “The Daily Show” appeared on “Crossfire” to promote his new book. In reality, Stewart, funny guy/inside man that he is, used the appearance as a platform to condemn the nature and validity of the show. The host and two pundits on live television were defenseless. One pundit made a swipe at the casualness of Stewart’s recent interview with then-presidential candidate John Kerry, to which Stewart responded that he’s a comedian, not a journalist on a news network fueling and hurting the public discourse. As a result, “Crossfire” is long gone and “The Daily Show” is a mainstay.
In the world of sports, we have our “Crossfire” but no one to pull the trigger and take out “First Take.”
Perhaps it’s a sign of the producer executives as well. CNN CEO Jonathan Klein then wanted to “change the tone of the shows on the network” because he “sympathized with Jon Stewart’s criticisms” (yeah, I’m quoting Wikipedia, whatever). Meanwhile ESPN’s corporate gurus are holding up the Nielsen ratings and screaming “dolla dolla bill, ya’ll” (not a Wikipedia quote).
Comedy Central has tried a couple of sports shows, including ones by comedic entities such as The Onion and Norm Macdonald, but none of these efforts seemed to take. Hmm, if only there was a popular sports entity that covered sports media in a comedic way that could provide an outlet for fans who are tired of ESPN’s pageantry and the debate culture’s severe infliction on the public sports discourse.
The solution’s there, but it’s just online. Deadspin, get yourself a television show.
Eliot is a junior in Media. He can be reached at [email protected]. Follow him on Twitter @EliotTweet.
