Robert Lipsyte |
With so much passion and talent, those commentators have deeply rooted opinions and they're not afraid to share what they think.
In the case of ESPN ombudsman Robert Lipsyte, though, there has been unusual unanimity -- and almost a giddiness. It seems everyone with a blog or word processor wants someone to critique the work of ESPN. Or they at least want validation of their own critiques of the all-sports network.
They clearly think that's coming with the naming of Lipsyte, the accomplished author and journalist, formerly of The New York Times. A longtime critic of the "jock culture" of TV sports, Lipsyte will write his first column for ESPN later this month.
Still, at 75 and an admitted observer of many things other than ESPN, Lipsyte's 18-month tenure could be interesting -- both for what it produces that makes the cadre of critics happy and, perhaps, for what it does not produce or any results that the supporters find unsatisfying.
Sports Illustrated standout Richard Deitsch provided a quality question-and-answer session with Lipsyte as part of a recent column, and almost cheerleader-type support has come from folks such as Josh Koblin of Deadspin and Ed Sherman of the Sherman Report on recent weeks.
After the SI interview, Koblin and Sherman used the Q-and-A session as a source for additional insights about Lipsyte, and perhaps some slightly cautionary hints about what they expect and what Lipsyte might deliver.
Because of ESPN's impact and sheer size, an ombudsman that critiques the company's work fills a necessary role. After all, an organization can get too big and overstep its bounds. And, along with the broadcasts and on-air action, ESPN's many business relationships inevitably muddy the waters that shape what viewers watch.
In fact, that's one area that might eventually provide a point of conflict for commentators and Lipsyte.
In so many ways, sports business and sports media overlap and even rely on each other. Beyond observing and reporting about what happens on air, Lipsyte will need to bring an understanding of the business (as well as the many factors and people that influence it) in order to do his job to the satisfaction of other commentators.
At the same time, he told Deitsch he plans to derive a decent amount of his direction from the comments of ESPN viewers.
Well, what if it turns out those fellow commentators are worried about different things than ESPN's viewers? How will the former react when Lipsyte serves the latter first and foremost?
No doubt, it's a good move, a journalistic tradition, for ESPN to have an in-house advocate for viewers and a critic for itself, but the largely positive initial support for Lipsyte by other commentators seems to indicate ESPN has an abundance of reasons to apologize for its work. That's just not necessarily the case. And there's no reason other sports media outlets -- especially those quite similar to ESPN -- have not been scrutinized for their lack of an ombudsman or viewer advocate.
Along with the joy of ESPN adding Lipsyte, there should also be a clamor for Fox Sports 1, NBC Sports Network and even CBS Sports Network to find someone for a similar role. The opportunity for those outlets (which range from less-proven challengers to start ups when compared to ESPN) to bend journalistic rules or conduct themselves poorly exists just as much -- and maybe more -- than at the "worldwide leader."
Holding ESPN to a different standard because of its impact and size makes sense, but not holding its rivals (even if that's a charitable term in this case) to any standard makes no sense at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment