4 ms·

espn's best performing shows (other than live broadcasts of actual sports events) are it's most politicized. 'First Take', 'Highly Questionable', 'Pardon the In

espn's best performing shows (other than live broadcasts of actual sports events) are it's most politicized. 'First Take', 'Highly Questionable', 'Pardon the Interruption', 'Around the Horn', etc the same is true for Fox Sports 1. it's simply not true that consumers are watching sports programming that isn't politicized more than that which is

zaroth 9y ago
My first thought is, what's the ratio of those shows live vs. on-demand viewers? If you're looking at mostly live viewers, the time-slot the show is given could be the driver of the volume of eyeballs as much as the content. In otherwords, perhaps their best watched shows are the ones in the worst decline / their best watched (i.e. tent pole shows) are bleeding the most viewers. I can't speak to the cause.
cardiffspaceman 9y ago
Is it possible that ESPN/sports channels are facing a demographic change and are guessing that mainstreaming their content, by appealing to non-sports fans by way of personality content that's just like an entertainment channel? This would be no different than the weather channel that changes from hardcore weather data to reality shows about bad weather.
- querulous 9y ago
  no. these shows have been popular for years. pardon the interruption first aired in 2001. around the horn in 2003. first take in 2007. espn isn't flailing around looking for a new business model, it's following the money espn's problems are overpaying for content (live sports), paying a huge number of employees who barely move the needle in the twitter age (all of their reporters, basically) and the rise of alternatives to cable like netflix, amazon prime, hulu and bamtech
  - ubernostrum 9y ago
    Also: the sports themselves starting to get savvy. MLB, NFL, NBA and NHL all have their own television networks, and MLB is setting a strong example of how to do a streaming sports service right. In fact, ESPN has announced they'll start airing one of the MLB network's daily shows and massively scaling back their own daily baseball show (which will now only air once a week). Add in rumors that the NFL influences its schedule to give ESPN less-desirable games for Monday Night Football, and the NBA strongly favoring TNT/TBS, and what's left? They can't run Sportscenter 24 hours a day.
  - Steko 9y ago
    Overpaying for content is such a huge part of the problem and I'm surprised there are so few comments here that even mention it. This 2 year old graphic[1] from the last set of layoffs is telling: http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/5627cd349dd7cc10008c39b6-960/01.png http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/5627cd349dd7cc10008... Basically ESPN's executives shit the bed over and over for a number of years and the rank and file workers are the ones that end up paying for their mistakes. [1] From http://www.businessinsider.com/espn-mistakes-led-to-layoffs-2015-10 http://www.businessinsider.com/espn-mistakes-led-to-layoffs-...

zaroth 9y ago

My first thought is, what's the ratio of those shows live vs. on-demand viewers? If you're looking at mostly live viewers, the time-slot the show is given could be the driver of the volume of eyeballs as much as the content. In otherwords, perhaps their best watched shows are the ones in the worst decline / their best watched (i.e. tent pole shows) are bleeding the most viewers. I can't speak to the cause.

cardiffspaceman 9y ago

Is it possible that ESPN/sports channels are facing a demographic change and are guessing that mainstreaming their content, by appealing to non-sports fans by way of personality content that's just like an entertainment channel? This would be no different than the weather channel that changes from hardcore weather data to reality shows about bad weather.

querulous 9y ago
no. these shows have been popular for years. pardon the interruption first aired in 2001. around the horn in 2003. first take in 2007. espn isn't flailing around looking for a new business model, it's following the money espn's problems are overpaying for content (live sports), paying a huge number of employees who barely move the needle in the twitter age (all of their reporters, basically) and the rise of alternatives to cable like netflix, amazon prime, hulu and bamtech
- ubernostrum 9y ago
  Also: the sports themselves starting to get savvy. MLB, NFL, NBA and NHL all have their own television networks, and MLB is setting a strong example of how to do a streaming sports service right. In fact, ESPN has announced they'll start airing one of the MLB network's daily shows and massively scaling back their own daily baseball show (which will now only air once a week). Add in rumors that the NFL influences its schedule to give ESPN less-desirable games for Monday Night Football, and the NBA strongly favoring TNT/TBS, and what's left? They can't run Sportscenter 24 hours a day.
- Steko 9y ago
  Overpaying for content is such a huge part of the problem and I'm surprised there are so few comments here that even mention it. This 2 year old graphic[1] from the last set of layoffs is telling: http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/5627cd349dd7cc10008c39b6-960/01.png http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/5627cd349dd7cc10008... Basically ESPN's executives shit the bed over and over for a number of years and the rank and file workers are the ones that end up paying for their mistakes. [1] From http://www.businessinsider.com/espn-mistakes-led-to-layoffs-2015-10 http://www.businessinsider.com/espn-mistakes-led-to-layoffs-...