ufc 25 the combatant in chief

[Never_Rolled]

lol your posting on an mma forum. that's like saying you don't like water and then going to the swimming pool.

Our friend would write 20 paragraphs on how the pool doesn't actually contain water. You guys keep me on me feet and I thank you for that.

 

[kneeblock]

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.”

That's the quote that I addressed earlier and that's referenced in the link @jason73 pointed to. What Pitaro said was exactly that they were getting bad feedback on politics entering programming. At no point does he say it led to a decline in subscribers because he couldn't (and definitely wouldn't) make that claim. Sentiment analysis data, which is how most major corporations do PR research (along with surveys and focus groups) allows you to craft PR messaging and decide about programming, but most importantly it has to do with advertising and risk management over whether you could lose ad placement.

It's an incredible leap to say the longtime downward trend of subscriptions to ESPN was caused by political protest. Proving that something caused something requires being able to show this changed during this time primarily because of this reason. Proving that something correlates to something, or is associated with something, is easier because the relationship between the two things needs to be significant.

This has neither. There isn't any proof of causality and there isn't even any proof of correlation. Instead there's a longtime trend that provides a much more plausible explanation. The only other evidence presented is executive management saying "our fans" (i.e. people who still use the product) don't like politics. There has been no accompanying spike in subscriptions since this statement, so that shows that it doesnt matter all that much to what has actually been pushing subscriptions down.

This is why I'm especially curious about this video. It's very interestingly timed and very bizarrely out of place with the rest of the series as well as with any type of programming ESPN would offer at present. This is why I believe the UFC may have independently produced it.

 

[Rambo John J]

lol your posting on an mma forum. that's like saying you don't like water and then going to the swimming pool.

 

[jason73]

UFC officials recently announced that the promotion’s Emmy-nominated short film series, “UFC 25 Years in Short,” is no longer exclusive to UFC Fight Pass.

Originally released in 2018, the compilation of 25 short films was produced to celebrate the UFC’s 25th anniversary. In April, the docuseries received a Sports Emmy Award nomination in the “Outstanding Edited Sports Special or Series” category.

“‘UFC 25 Years in Short’ premiered on UFC Fight Pass in fall of 2018, so the time is right to showcase it to a new audience,” UFC senior vice president of production and programming Chris Kartzmark stated.




sounds like espn had nothing to do with it