ufc 25 the combatant in chief
- Thread starter jason73
- Start date
non propaganda is rare nowadays
Our last president passed legislation to make it legal to use against the people
Murica
haha what the living fuck is going on. assuming ESPN put this out. do they have literally no legal restrictions (or moral restrictions, hello?) to follow? politicizing sports is so 1936.
have you never watched espn before? they have been political for the last few years.
right place right time
I think all of this 25 years stuff was made before the ESPN deal
He didn't ask for your sexual orientation.
The new president of ESPN said all the political stuff was a mistake. Journos and it doesn't matter if they write/talk about sports, politics, gay rights and lefts mostly tend to be liberals. People think because they are sports journo's they are different. They aren't. People tune into sports to get away from from politics and everything else. ESPN lost a huge percentage of their audience with all the lib politicking. The new guy put an end to it. We will see if their audience returns or not.
ESPN's losses have nothing to do with politics, but with cord cutting. Their losses correlate to declining cable subscriptions over the past 8 years.
They have without question lost viewers to a constant stream of liberal bullshit views thrust upon them when at least half their audience aren’t liberals. Cord cutting is also an issue across the board. The new president admitted they lost viewers over their politics. Why would he say that if it weren’t true?
First of all, he didn't say they lost viewers over politics. He said they should stay away from politics and just stick to sports in order to keep their customers happy. ESPN has suffered a precipitous decline over the past several years due to cord cutters, but due to cable bundling and other factors it would be very difficult to parse out a trend of political dissenters from the ongoing rate of decline from cord cutters.
In this article you see a sentiment analysis, for example. Sentiment analysis is a social media scraping technique where you take a large data set (usually tweets) and search for words that you've coded as negative and positive. When you're doing a sentiment analysis of a brand, you're basically looking to see what people are saying in association with the brand and whether the terms you've coded negative are more prevalent than terms you've coded positive. This process is notoriously fraught because of things like sarcasm and also because influence campaigns on social media can make sentiment appear to move in one direction or another. That is, if there are deliberate campaigns to protest or boost a brand on social media that goes viral, there is going to be a skew in the data. For example, if the President if the United States advances the opinion to his massive following that "failing ESPN" is losing subscribers due to being political, millions will retweet or complain at his behest because many of his followers simply parrot what he says, just like any major social media influencer.
There is no way to reliably correlate sentiment to the subscriber decline because that trend has been steady over the past several years. Brands have a stake in managing sentiment, of course, mostly because of advertising. If they develop a bad rap, they can lose advertising partners, but they're unlikely to lose customers, particularly on a media network that usually isn't sold a la carte, but as part of larger cable bundles. Because of bundling, there are too many variables. Someone could be cord cutting because of Nickelodeon as much as they could be because of ESPN, or, more likely, they're doing so because they're using a Fire stick or PlayStation.
Here you can see an article on the trend of cord cutting and how it's affected all networks, including ESPN. The declines are more or less the same and have stayed the same over time.
https://deadspin.com/there-is-no-evidence-whatsoever-that-espn-is-losing-sub-1826305140
All of that said, there is literally no reason for this to have been part of the 25th anniversary, except as deliberate electioneering. The UFC has 6.4 million subscribers and they basically just got the same kind of message you'd get from Nicolas Maduro.
If you don't believe their politics drove people away than you aren't living in the real world. Why the fuck would he say they should stay out of politics? You OVER ANALYZE every fucking thing but can't put two and two together?
lol @ someone with limited capacity for critical thought, accusing someone of over-analysing things
I have a limited capacity for bullshit.
I study media, media effects, and media institutions for a living. Sometimes what seems obvious because someone said it is not reality. You generally are skeptical of official accounts when they come from the powerful and it seems like from other posts you know the difference between public relations and actual reality. I ask that you apply that skepticism uniformly. Read my post again. I just showed you the context of the quote, the data on ESPN's losses, and explained the purpose of analyzing sentiment (for PR).
It's generally a truism in media industries that politics rarely accounts for anything in terms of subscriptions when it comes to entertainment media. Protests are usually offset by enthusiasts and people who are apathetic, especially when a network holds a monopoly on coverage of the underlying product, which ESPN does in many cases, e.g. the NBA.
The reason we analyze things is because what seems to be the "common sense" answer is often manufactured. Putting "two and two together" is usually something someone wants you to do and bears only a passing relationship to actual facts. You seem to believe this about other things. Understand it here.
I just Googled ESPN+Politics and every single one of them said they lost viewers due to the on air talent referencing politics. You are the only one who denies this. I have made use of this term before and I will do so again here. Despite your word salad and media study one doesn't have to be a plumber to know shit smells.
ESPN is about making money. If injecting liberal politics made them money they would stick with it. It cost them money plain and simple. Are you going to also claim the NFL didn't lose viewers due to the kneeling?
Can you post what you googled.
Just put in "ESPN Politics" that's all I did. There was an interesting one from a black publication something 21 that was of interest.
I would like to know what specific articles you read. Google sends you a lot of opinion pieces. Above I posted an article that clearly spells out the trend line for ESPN declines over time. Someone's politically motivated conjecture or PR is less useful than that raw data. Also acceptable would be interview, survey, or focus group data of people who specifically unsubscribed from ESPN (not just cut the cord) overwhelmingly saying the reason they did it was politics.
Either way, this is mostly beside the point that we don't know whether ESPN produced these videos. Is there any indication whether they predate the ESPN deal? They seem ESPN quality, but the UFC was doing decent video production on Fightpass for awhile. Regardless of who produced this one on Trump or why, it's pretty surreal.
I am happy to provide you with this quote. You can read it, dissect it, break it down in any fashion you need to. I know what this tells me.
ESPN President Jimmy Pitaro says the network's viewers do not want it getting overtly political.
"Without question our data tells us our fans do not want us to cover politics,” Pitaro said in a Los Angeles Times article published Monday. “My job is to provide clarity. I really believe that some of our talent was confused on what was expected of them. If you fast-forward to today, I don’t believe they are confused.”
lol your posting on an mma forum. that's like saying you don't like water and then going to the swimming pool.