ESPN Claims That There’s No ‘Ban’
1-liner, ESPN, Media Gossip/Musings July 28th. 2009, 11:50amESPN’s ‘Ban’: An ESPN rep got back to us in regard to yesterday’s post about the nearly 100 people unofficially ‘banned’ from appearing on the WWL. “The notion of such a list is completely absurd and false. It doesn’t exist. Depending on the topic and the timing, if you are credible and entertaining to sports fans, we will consider you for our outlets.” The problem with monitoring the ‘ban’ is that there are too far many radio/TV outlets to keep track of. But do we believe that there are a handful of people that will, regardless of story, never appear on certain shows? Sure.
49 Responses to “ESPN Claims That There’s No ‘Ban’”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:00 PM
I thought they had made it pretty clear that Jimmy Kimmel was banned from the Monday Night Football booth at least.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:06 PM
just because you havent written out the list or typed it on a computer doesnt mean there isnt a list….i liked how he said it is ridiculous and then says but there are some people that we wouldnt allow on. oh really? tell us so we can make a list
July 28th, 2009 at 12:07 PM
who are the people that are going to be banned from TBL?
people were on here yesterday talking about Joe Posnanski. Doesn’t he write for SI? That’s why he’s never on there. You ever see Peter King (other than Cowherd) or Jon Heymann on ESPN? It’s not a banning per se, it’s a “why do I want to publicize an SI guy?”. Kinda like Olbermann being a nightly gnat to O’Reilly, and O’Reilly never mentions his name. Why give the guy with 1/3 the audience an acknowledgement to 3 times/people that would normally see him?
July 28th, 2009 at 12:07 PM
Didn’t Nixon publicists say this during his presidency?
July 28th, 2009 at 12:08 PM
Exactly, The doorman at a club doesn’t need it written out for him who is and is not supposd to get in, doesn’t mean some people damn sure aren’t getting in and some damn sure are.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:08 PM
Duffy referred to Norm McDonald being banned. This has gotta be true due to his epic ESPY host appearance when he told Rod Woodson that no one could ever take away his Heisman trophy……unless you murder your wife and a waiter. Or when he said the ESPY’s are 6 years old this year but Anthony Mason will claim they’re 18. Me and my buddy were talkin about this last night, fuckin hilarious. He was fearless and didn’t give a shit.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:10 PM
One of those blockquotes is from the ESPN statement and the other is TBL’s commentary. The 1 liner format can make it confusing.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:11 PM
And completely unfunny.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:11 PM
They don’t call him the Godfather for nothing.
Allow me to translate this typical East Coast arrogant douchebag response from ESPN (or just about any other East-Coast based media outlet, where somehow with “free” media almost all of them are!):
We’ll put that rumour to rest by just flatly denying it with the arrogant and aloof expectation that the masses will believe it like most else we broadcast for them to swallow, as we are of course the worldwide leader.
Now if what you publish or state is deemed worthy by our superior minds in New York City and in Bristol, if we can’t just steal it from you without credit, we will consider what you have to say on our terms for your privileged access to our propaganda machine that extends well beyond sports but into mass American social engineering.
We are after all the worldwide leader, so we must lead the world and especially all those mindless souls watching.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:12 PM
peter king, yes. on pti, though kornheiser has admitted (on his radio show) that king’s appearance ruffles the feathers of the suits in bristol.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:12 PM
Although it reeks of douchebaggery, ESPN has every right to control their programs and determine who can be on their outlets and who can’t. I fail to see how this is a big deal.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:12 PM
Posnanski only started with SI 3-6 months ago. He’s not on there because he doesn’t like to do television, thinks he’s terrible at television, and despises Around the Horn. Has a hilarious entry about it on his blog.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:15 PM
i knew Paolo would make an appearance for this one.. awesome.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:15 PM
why should he give a shit? it’s a worthless hunk of paperweight.
does this now mean TBL won’t be on ESPN’s Blog Buzz thingy?
July 28th, 2009 at 12:16 PM
Yeah, O’Reilly takes that seriously. http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200603030010
July 28th, 2009 at 12:17 PM
I pretty much agree with this.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:20 PM
I am actually thankful that CABLE news also is highly irrelevant anymore too. And the demographic for them, like on Faux News Channel and for CNN, is aging rapidly to that of the “60 Minutes” audience. For Faux News Channel the age of the AVERAGE viewer is a whopping 62 years old.
Cable news 2011-2013 will be the newspapers of 2008-2009.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:22 PM
Yea, I would really love to hear about the WWL’s Silent Majority to boot.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:24 PM
Taguchi: Nice to see where you get your unbiased media coverage. You must read this also, since you seem to love balanced reporting.
did you catch the guy on Countdown AND the Maddow shows last night, chasing all the Republicans down the hall and the street asking them about the Obama birth certificate question, doing the same thing they’ve eviscerated O’Reilly for doing for 3 years?
I’d link to it, but two links puts me in moderation. Go find it
July 28th, 2009 at 12:25 PM
And with John D. Rockefeller, the Rothschilds, Bill Gates, Big Oil, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, and numerous other ruthless monopolists or oligopolists of course?
You can’t agree with that Jay V and believe that we have a “free” media as well without just plain being brainwashed like too many.
You been hanging out with Mike NYC on the Street?
Yeah you went to LSU, but are you for real?
July 28th, 2009 at 12:27 PM
Paolo…sorry, but you’re wrong. CNN just enjoyed it’s highest rated quarter EVER. (April to June 2009). During that time period, CNN was bringing in 3.9M a nite, FNC was bringing in 2.9M, and MSNBC was bringing in 1.4M. 8.5M people a nite is far from dying, my friend.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:29 PM
+1 JPQ
Great job calling out Taguchi and his left-wing agenda, for which of course MSNBC is the core voice now. Olbermann was great for a few years when Bush was around, but now that their man is in the house it’s like O’Reilly 2002-2008.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:31 PM
Yep, hypocrisy knows no bounds.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:32 PM
Jay read more closely — I said 2011-2013 — and I should clarify of course excepting the over 60 crowd now, many of whom will never be on the internet.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:32 PM
wasn’t CNN getting blasted as of late by the other two as of late?
July 28th, 2009 at 12:32 PM
#1…I would never hang out with that right-wing ass.
#2…I sure as hell didn’t go to LSU, quit confusing me with he who has no V on the end of his name
#3…don’t try and make this about some larger media control issue, because it’s not. ESPN has EVERY right to keep its competitors off its airwaves.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:34 PM
woah poor sentence structure.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:36 PM
If you type “Oreilly mentions olbermann” into yahoo that’s the first story that comes up. Sorry.
Haven’t watched MSNBC or Fox since the election. Am not surprised.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:37 PM
i wanna bang the chick from sports nation
July 28th, 2009 at 12:38 PM
Yep, hypocrisy knows no bounds.
sponge- THAT is the point I was trying to make. Thanks for seeing it. People that blindly hate O’Reilly, Palin or Cheney are NO BETTER than those who blindly hate Obama, Pelosi or Olbermann, especially when you never even watch/read/see them. I happen to watch a little O’Reilly, and nothing else on Fox, and a little Countdown and Madden, and I have honestly found MSNBC to be WAY worse than O’Reilly in terms of always being negative and showing a conflicting viewpoint.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:38 PM
Paolo, you’re logic doesn’t flow…cable news isn’t peaking to new zeniths in 2009 only to drop off 2 years from now, regardless of the demographics (and I am skeptical that you cited accurate demos anyway).
@Sponge, re: CNN’s comeback…and you know why, don’t you? It’s because they’ve gone the celebrity news route, and that is indeed why cable news isn’t going anywhere anytime soon, it will continue to gravitate more and more toward that model. Now, that may mean that cable news as we know it, or should know it, may die…but the netwoks themselves are going to thrive.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:38 PM
Agreed on 1 and 2 — sorry I confused you with the other Jay, Jay V — on number 3 read the next post by TBL Godfather and see if you can put 2+2 together because I can’t disagree more.
ESPN does have every right to use unscrupulous tactics to keep competitors and dissenting viewers off of it. However, when it is the ONLY viable sports coverage in town on many a cable system on a basic subscription and in many a public venue like bars and the like, IT DOES NOT lest the basic or commercial subscription is opened up to far more outlets for sports. And that is where the problem lies.
It is a similar concept as having only CNN on TVs in airports. ESPN just has too much clout also due to regulatory and cable enabling and its contractual hegemony to limit competition.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:38 PM
i wanna bang the chick from sports nation
What is her name again?
July 28th, 2009 at 12:39 PM
This is true. Of course, like in most other facets of modern life
“competition” doesn’t really exist anymore for ESPN or whatever monolithic corporation happens to be running that particular neck of the woods.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:40 PM
Michelle beadle, and I agree
July 28th, 2009 at 12:41 PM
Mrs. Sponge-Worthy.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:41 PM
What is her name again?
I think Michelle Beedle? maybe
July 28th, 2009 at 12:43 PM
Agreed TST, but please read the rest of my comment before isolating the first part?
/Darn Twitter attention spans
July 28th, 2009 at 12:43 PM
anyone know where you can watch yesterday’s Sportsnation on TV? i only ask because a couple of emailers said TBL was mentioned in regard to plax.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:45 PM
Sorry TST, you were referring to Jay V’s #3, blog moving too fast damnit.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:48 PM
Michelle can get it
July 28th, 2009 at 12:49 PM
Haven’t watched MSNBC or Fox since the election
join the crowd with MSNBC, although O’Reilly is WAAYYY up (from Olbermann actually beating him once or twice, now OReilly regularly triples Olbermann in ALL demos
http://tvbythenumbers.com/2009/07/01/msnbcs-countdown-with-keith-olbermann-adults-25-54-audience-down-over-50-since-q4-2008/21842
July 28th, 2009 at 12:54 PM
no clue TBL
July 28th, 2009 at 12:54 PM
Are you Bill’s producer or something? Who cares who watches cable news shows? If Bill gets 10 million viewers, 94% of them would believe him if he said the sun is a light bulb and the same goes for Olbermann’s viewers.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:57 PM
i just think it’s hilarious that all these people who make veiled accusations our president was not a citizen run like hell when people present facts to them. g.gordon liddy was almost painful to watch on hardball.
July 28th, 2009 at 1:00 PM
http://tvbythenumbers.com/2009/07/01/msnbcs-countdown-with-keith-olbermann-adults-25-54-audience-down-over-50-since-q4-2008/21842
I would assume this is how it would/should work. Remember Fox got big under Clinton because it fed the vitriol towards him. MSNBC did the same building off the vitriol towards Bush. Once the liberals “won” there is less need for them to watch MSNBC and MORE need for conservatives to watch Fox, and when the next conservative President comes it should reverse again.
July 28th, 2009 at 1:01 PM
Yeah, I think the list stuff is a little overblown.
1. The competition makes sense from a business perspective. If an ESPN outlet needs a national MLB reporter, they are probably going to book Olney, Gammons or Stark before their competitors Rosenthal and Heyman. That’s not evil, it’s running a brand and a business.
2. Most of the individuals who were “banned” are probably not invited back because of specific incidents. Olbermann is not invited back because he pissed off a lot of people on his way out. That’s life.
3. If there was a “banned list” and TBL was on it, he would probably not be allowed to interview ESPN personalities.
July 28th, 2009 at 1:05 PM
The competition makes sense from a business perspective. If an ESPN outlet needs a national MLB reporter, they are probably going to book Olney, Gammons or Stark before their competitors Rosenthal and Heyman. That’s not evil, it’s running a brand and a business.
exactly. Reilly was on Patrick’s radio show and nothing else when he was at SI. Since the “switch”, Reilly is on more and more on all the platforms, and it’s like DP never existed at ESPN. Not to surprising.
July 28th, 2009 at 1:10 PM
Anyone know what he is making now? I thought I heard he got a big payday when he signed his radio deal after he left ESPN.