So it seems that Bill Simmons wanted to do a podcast with Barack Obama. It also seems that Barack Obama wanted to do a podcast with Bill Simmons. Speaking as a new media professional, I can tell you that "major presidential candidate" is usually the kind of podcast guest that people like to have. I bet a Simmons-Obama podcast would have been widely listened to and gotten a lot of attention. Naturally, ESPN decided the right thing to do was kill the idea and cancel the podcast with the Daily News noting that "It's of interest that ESPN president George Bodenheimer has supported Republican Sen. John McCain's presidential bid with a donation of $1,000."
« The Senate Difference | Main | Surging to Success »
ESPN and Obama
16 Apr 2008 10:02 am
Comments (44)
MY:
Don't forget. ESPN is owned by Disney(which of course owns ABC, which put out that stupid movie blaming Clinton for 9/11). Disney is a right wing company so this isn't surprising at all.
I can't speak to why ESPN killed the program, but let's get over ourselves that the ESPN President made a $1000 contribution to John McCain. Big deal. For the head of a division of a major corp, $1000 is what you give when you feel obligated, but don't really like the guy. If he really liked McCain he would have given $2300 and so would his wife, and his kids, and his maid, etc.
More generally, I don't buy at all the idea that the media always tries to make that hard dollar contributions to a candidate's official campaign account some how constitutes something nefarious. I bet ESPN executives and talent have contributed to all kinds of candidates.
Large contributions to PACs or 527's or parties, is where the corruption lies. Some guy, any guy, writing $1000 to a candidate is the system working as designed.
I have an idea, why don't we make sure nobody on TV does anything that could piss anyone off ever? Better cancel boxing!
I could see why they would want to do a podcast together: both are huge basketball fans.
I'll go out on a limb and agree with Hank Porter that this decision was not a nefarious effort to help John McCain with BS Report listeners.
That said, the decision is five kinds of stupid and a slap in the face of Bill Simmons. Perhaps now would be a good time for Atlantic Media to start courting him in an effort to deepen Matt's basketball coverage.
Shouldn't a professional proof read a little more?
I think Obama did a lengthy sit-down piece with Bryant Gumbel on HBO focused on sports last night. Not that playing basketball is very American. We all know that bowling, invented in ancient Egypt, is the American sport, not basketball which which was invented in Springfield, Massachusetts.
For all of ESPN's many wonders for a sports fan it's a cesspool of a place to work filled with corporate a-holes in management. That's not my opinion, it's a Coors Light Cold Hard fact. Bodenheimer is a-hole #1.
Why would espn risk pissing off simmons? They just paid rick reilly three mill per year to come over and simmons is much more popular. One of the most regular guy things obama can do is talk about sports and simmons is a perfect conduit for it. Simmons combines the intelligence to ask him questions is an avowed democrat and talks about frat boy stuff.
Lmao, it's always fun to watch the free-market nutjobs in here start blathering about how there MUST have been a good business reason for this and that ths money means NOTHIBG.
There wasn't, this was done for entirely ideological reasons. Go back to McMegan land where you can piss and moan about all those damned uppity black folks, err poor losers , err. ELITES. yeah. thats it!
This is a total non-story.
Shouldn't a professional proof read a little more?
Yglesias's errors are proof that he remains authentic.
Well, the cancellation helps me avoid a little dilemma. I am an enthusiastic Obama supporter, but I cannot f'in stand Bill Simmons anymore, since around the time the Red Sox/Patriots/Celtics trifecta was ruling the sports world, and every mundane event in the world had some connection to the 2004 Sox, 1986 Celts or the general awesomeness of the Golden Boy. (Yes, I'm a "bitter" Chicago sports fan).
Wait, what self-respecting elitist snob likes sports? He can't bowl and thinks guns only appeal to fucked up xenophobes; how in the world will sports fans relate to him? He must secretly prefer soccer to basketball or something.
"We all know that bowling, invented in ancient Egypt, is the American sport, not basketball which which was invented in Springfield, Massachusetts."
By a Canadian!
He must secretly prefer soccer to basketball or something.
Preferring the NBA to the NCAA (if in fact he does) will suffice.
ESPN is many things, including anal. The guys over at Deadspin have been making fun of the network for a couple of years now, with just cause.
I don't care why they killed it. I'm just disappointed because I would have liked to have heard it. Hopefully ESPN will come to its senses after the convention.
By the way, expect McCain discussing sports to prove AWKWARD.
Can we amend the 1st Amendment, banning politicians from sports networks? I mean, shouldn't we able to wach or listen somwhere, safe in the knowledge that these bloviating know-it-alls won't show up?
As terrible as ESPN has become, this is stunning incompetence/pure evil, even for them. Yeah, let's not have a cultural phenom who's wildly popular in one of our prime demos be a guest for a *MOTHER FUCKING PODCAST*, because, uh, that would be beneith Bill Simmons dignity, what with Obama being a chicago guy and all that. Good thing they managed to get that guy on snl, you know, the one who's sorta funny, but not really.
It's too bad, because you know Simmons would have given Obama shit for his bowling game. Would have loved to hear that.
Shouldn't a professional proof read a little more?
Interesting question, coming from someone who neither capitalizes nor correctly spells "Alex."
Ok, soullite, let's be clear here. Nothing in my post had anything to do about the "free market.
ESPN's decision to pull a Obama podcast almost certainly had something to do with politics. My point was that a $1000 contribution is not the smoking gun that MY tries to make it. The media, in general, wastes its time trying to insinuate that hard dollar contributions to campaigns are a bad thing. That's the BEST aspect of our current campaign finance system.
I would assert again, soullite, that the problems in our campaign finance system lays with large five or six figure contributions to 527s, PACs, and political parties. That is where the quid pro quo exists.
Joejoejoe, what are the great things ESPN does for sports fans? Who's Now? Stuart Scott? The great insights of Chris Berman? Lee Corso?
My theory is that they cancelled the podcast as to not steal the thunder that will ring when they announce Obama is replacing Ron Jaworski on Monday Night Football, because Jaws has something intelligent to contribute to a football broadcast and THAT IS NOT ALLOWED!
Of course ESPN just killed what would have EASILY been the most popular sports podcast OF ALL TIME.
Crazy.
Simmons should do it anyway on his own time. He hardly needs ESPN to get it out there.
Seems like a smart thing for Obama to do as well. The Gumbel thing was pretty great stuff. Obama is pretty damn good at hoops - excellent passer - especially for an old guy!
(Yes, 46 is old to be playing pick up hoops - it ain't golf).
witless chum - If you want a specific example of where ESPN has been good for sport look at women's basketball. ESPN broadcasts regular season women's sports to a national audience when 20 years ago you would be lucky to see any games on local TV.
As much as I would absolutely love to hear a podcast between Bill Simmons and Barack Obama (I'm sure it'd be hilarious), I consider the decision in keeping with ESPN's general editorial concerns, rather than indicative of a political bias. I've noticed that ESPN's scribes tend to shy away from any kind of political discussion, whether in stories, chats, or podcasts. Serious political debate is the third rail of the sports media industry, and ESPN has always been especially cautious in this regard. Their writers get thousands of flames when they say things like, "Derek Jeter is an average to below average defensive shortstop." Can you imagine if Buster Olney or Rob Neyer revealed their views on abortion in a column about the Yankees?
ESPN tends to give Simmons more leeway, but even when he discusses politics, he keeps it trivial (note the "pros and cons" he gave when discussing Obama versus Clinton). The network likely would also have canceled the podcast if the guest-to-be were McCain or Clinton or even Romney (not that any of these people would ever actually agree to do the podcast).
That said, I do think it's lame that the WWL wouldn't trust Simmons to keep the discussion politically neutral. He and Obama would talk about the NBA, The Wire, the bowling thing, smoking, and other random stuff.
Women's basketball? Ugh, really?
That's about as good for sports as youth soccer leagues giving every kid an "MVP trophy even when they suck.
It's like the WNBA - the biggest money losing sport in the world - kept afloat by the good folks of the NBA out of some kind of charity.
It's a garbage product, and if left to it's own devices would disappear.
Peter Gammons wasn't exactly shy about his political preferences during the 2004 election.
I'm sure that ESPN got plenty of mail about it last time, and the short leash for Simmons may be a reaction to that.
Oh my God women's basketball is considered a contribution! That is so funny. Women's basketball is not a sport. Man that is funny. talk about blowing an argument. I would have at least said PTI.
Oh my God women's basketball is considered a contribution! That is so funny. Women's basketball is not a sport. Man that is funny. talk about blowing an argument. I would have at least said PTI.
I think Barack's people wised up. Simmons is your typical New England racist DBag. Its better than he didn't go on his "BS Report". Maybe he can have a repeat of Seth Meyers or have Cousin Sal and himself pick the odds of who was responsible for Barack being cancelled.
This strikes me as the perfect opportunity to plug Deadspin guy's "God Save the Fan", which takes a right blowtorch to ESPN.
My "come to Jesus" moment of ESPN's evil was the Malice in the Palace. Immediately after the event Legler and Anthony were like "if you throw a beer on me, if you come on the court, there are going to be consequences and reprecussions" or something of the ilk. 20 minutes later on sportscenter, looking chastened, they both mouthed platitudes about how this was the worst thing ever in the history of man kind, and Ron Artest should be at least deported, if not launched into outer space.
This strikes me as the perfect opportunity to plug Deadspin guy's "God Save the Fan", which takes a right blowtorch to ESPN.
My "come to Jesus" moment of ESPN's evil was the Malice in the Palace. Immediately after the event Legler and Anthony were like "if you throw a beer on me, if you come on the court, there are going to be consequences and reprecussions" or something of the ilk. 20 minutes later on sportscenter, looking chastened, they both mouthed platitudes about how this was the worst thing ever in the history of man kind, and Ron Artest should be at least deported, if not launched into outer space.
Maybe Obama should do a podcast with Bill Sammon instead. Bill Sammon loves presidential people.
That's funny, Pooh, I remember thinking the same thing about the brawl coverage. My initial reaction, upon hearing Legler and Anthony, was, "oh my god, I can't believe these asshole jocks are seriously defending the players here. Am I nuts? This is a huge deal, right? It's not like Artest got hit with batteries -- I've seen dozens of guys get hit with cups of beer without punching any fans." Anyway, maybe Legler and Anthony were actually embarassed by their initial reaction, rather than scolded by management. I doubt it, though.
I consider the decision in keeping with ESPN's general editorial concerns, rather than indicative of a political bias. I've noticed that ESPN's scribes tend to shy away from any kind of political discussion, whether in stories, chats, or podcasts. Serious political debate is the third rail of the sports media industry, and ESPN has always been especially cautious in this regard.
I think this is a good thing. I like political discussion as much as anybody, but it doesn't belong at ESPN. There are some places that need to be politics-free.
TMS,
My initial reaction to Legs and Anthony was "damn right." It may not be the right reaction, but in Basketball, where there is no barrier between the fans and the players it would almost certainly have been my reaction.
But the sickening part is how they were all company line all the time almost immediately afterwords. Why it's almost like Stern-bot interceded or something.
Peter,
You do realize we're talking about a podcast that you choose to listen to? It isn't like they were going to do 15 minutes on SportsCenter.
I played before a few hostile crowds, thought I can't remember anyone throwing anything. If they did, I don't think going into the stands to beat them up would have even crossed my mind. May I would have flipped them off or something, if they really got to me. Takes all kinds, I guess.
He must secretly prefer soccer to basketball or something.
I doubt he prefers soccer to basketball, be we do know that Obama is a West Ham United fan.
Good for ESPN! You know why?
Because they are a SPORTS news channel and have no business getting involved in the primaries.
I also know that PTI decided to turn down the idea of all three candidates appearing on their show.
In my opinion, they are staying consistent and focusing on what the real sport news:
NBA Playoffs
NFL Draft
and so on....
All you doughy ass punks who are hating on women's ball just note that Candace Parker can dunk and Bob Cousy could not and that Tennessee played to an average crowd of 15,796 at Thompson-Bolling Arena which is 50% more fans then the Celtics averaged in Boston Garden during the best attended year of the Russell championships. So, yes, ESPN is doing the country a favor by showing the popular, if underappreciated by old-school a-holes, sport of women's basketball.
BTW, while I agree that ESPN ought to stay focused on sports and should avoid non-sports stories as much as possible, folks must realize the Simmons just had entire podcasts devoted to The Real World Reunion Show, Saturday Night Live, and The Wire. So it's not like Simmons' podcasts never vary from discussing sports.
Eric K,
I was responding to somebody's point about ESPN eschewing political discussion, which in general, I think is a good thing,. But I don't have a problem with Bill Simmons interviewing Obama.
"Shouldn't a professional proof read a little more?"
It's "proofread"—one word. Way to go, Smartacus.
Comments closed April 30, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
He also gave money to Chris Dodd, and ESPN editor in chief John Papanek gave to Obama. This is a weird story, but I suspect not motivated out of any personal dislike of Obama by the ESPN president.
Posted by Wilson | April 16, 2008 10:11 AM