Fuck my life

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRyJVV9Q8LY

How can they keep this objective?

The Sports Business Daily has reported that ESPN has hired the Kraft Sports Group to sell local advertising for its new baby ESPNBoston.com. Now you may already have made the connection between the names Kraft and Boston: Bob Kraft is the owner of the New England Patriots. Now something seems odd here when a supposedly objective news site suddenly decides to hire as an ad agency people who own a team in the area. I wonder if Mr. Kraft has any incentive to paint his team in a good light, and to make sure ESPN does the same. Well, we don't have to wonder anymore because it seems apparent that the first of many shady deals may have already been struck.

As some may know, Tom Brady and Gisele are being sued by 2 photographers because security guards that Brady had hired for the wedding shot at the photographers taking pics from afar. Now I'm a Patriots fan and I'll defend Spygate till the end of time, but this seems like a pretty fucking serious offense. These guys could have been killed, when clearly they were just paparazzi trying to make a quick buck. Now I think invasion of privacy sucks and I can understand hiring security, but read this quote from the lawsuit:

The photographers, both residents of Costa Rica, tried to drive away when they spotted a drawn gun in the hands of one bodyguard, the lawsuit said.

At that moment, a bodyguard fired the gun, shattering the rear window of the sports utility vehicle with a bullet that then hit the front windshield and ricocheted off it into the driver's seat, the lawsuit said.

"The bullet narrowly missed striking the heads of Cortez and Aviles," the lawsuit said.

That seems pretty intense, and also seems like these guys have a valid case. However, this story was not covered on ESPN.com. Rather, it was relegated to ESPNBoston.com and thus saved Brady from more humiliating national exposure. Can ESPN seriously be doing this? This is the textbook definition of a conflict of interest. How can they get away with it? Reminds me of them trying to hide another big lawsuit this summer...

ESPN Tinkers With Realignment Plan, Part II

Just weeks after Buck Showalter's stupid and completely unprompted "plan" to revitalize Major League Baseball by randomly contracting 2 teams and creating 4 new divisions when his plan rendered divisions unnecessary, ESPN is at it again!  This week's sport?  Hockey!!

Shockingly, John Buccigross, who technically isn't even an analyst - he just reads off hockey highlights for a living - is the only "expert" of these 4 who seemed to put some thought into this. John at least gave reasons for his proposed realignment, something no one else bothered to do (despite the fact that their job title is "analyst").  Scott Burnside, Pierre LeBrun, and Barry Melrose followed Buck Showalter's methodology, a.k.a. write down the first thing that comes to your mind, regardless of whether or not your plan would make sense. Pierre and Barry don't even mention that the NHL would rather expand to Europe than anywhere else.  Scott Burnside's attempt at humor was pretty lame too.  That must be embarrassing for somebody who likes hockey - being called lame.  

I've wanted to like hockey since its return from the lockout because I can't think of a less exciting winter sport than the NBA.  Can't wait to hear ESPN's new plan to revitalize the "No Balls Association" (the acronym Bill Simmons will repeat ad nauseum this coming season) - it should be due out soon.  Here's betting this asinine subject is what Bill Simmons devotes his next column to.

In My Humble Opinion

I think the jury is still out on these "ESPN Local" sites.  ESPN has certainly been pleased with the success of ESPNChicago, which launched in the late spring. Over the summer, in the first few months after launch, the Chicago site averaged 555,000 unique viewers, more than the number of unique viewers to the Chicago Tribune or Chicago Sun-Times on-line sports pages (424,000 and 256,000, respectively).

In principle, I think ESPN has made a shrewd marketing decision here in attempting to fill the power vacuum currently being left by local newspapers and news stations.  Newspapers have been digging themselves into a hole for a decade now, and ESPN's quick rise in the local market, if isolated to one or two cities at this point, speaks to that decline.  To average just shy of half the market share in just three months is staggering - and the number of unique viewers continues to grow (700,000 to ESPNChicago in July). How much contempt for their own product do newspapers have?  At least the Sun-Times doesn't have that "rat" Jay Mariotti around anymore.  

The early success of ESPNChicago certainly speaks to ESPN as a brand, even if they are trying to cater to a local audience by luring local writers and reporters and securing local advertising to these sites.  By virtue of name recognition, ESPN can certainly draw viewers to these pages.

As the previous post noted, ESPNBoston is the latest in this venture, soon to be followed by Dallas, Los Angeles, and New York editions.  As someone who lives near the city, I will be following the success of ESPNNew York closely when it launches in a few months.  To me, the success of the New York site may dictate the ultimate direction of this project.  New York is the largest city of them all - it will be tougher to compete for market share there - with a total of nine local professional teams.  Moreover, New York already has well-established outlets for sports-related discussion: WFAN, the Post, the Daily News, etc.  ESPN Radio has never been able to compete with WFAN, and despite the FAN's downturn in the last two years, I would expect it to remain comparatively successful and the go-to station.  

Considering that local coverage is as poor as it is, I hope ESPN goes beyond just its brand name here.  I won't measure its success in page views, but rather whether it can replace suffering local institutions with substantive commentary.  If it can't, kudos to them on a wise business decision, but this venture should be about more than proving how many people can recognize the brand.

-RW

Do we really need this?

ESPN Boston.

ESPN already devotes so much of their time to Boston sports, do they really need a separate website? Not like I ever have to worry about a Red Sawk highlight being on Sportcenter within the first ten minutes every morning.

Be prepared to hear the endless "log on to www.espnboston.com for the latest news." Was ESPN Chicago just a stepping stone for this nonsense?

- Long live NESN!