Eleven Warriors

now mr. razrback, i think (hope) you are exagerrating. while espn does have a financial interest in the SEC being successful (at the moment i believe they are the only major conference without their own network, correct me if im wrong), and their broadcast rights are almost entirely through espn. much like espn has a financial stake in texas' success due to their holdings within the longhorn network. espn isn't anti osu, pro sec, or any of those things. They are pro-money, and doing a damn fine job of it. 

ESPN is practically a case study in conflict of interest and straight up biased reporting. they don't do this because they "hate us." They do it because it drives ratings, and lines everybody's pockets. Any of us would do the same (with hopefully some tweaks)

@ PCON & Cincy

You guys are welcome to put your heads in the sand as long as you like. The end result is the end result, no matter what the motive. The fact is negative Ohio State news and references are far more popular on that network than positive OSU news or even negative news at other schools and this is due to ESPiN's agenda. Barely hear about the violations @ LSU last year because it was kept quiet by ESPiN until after the NCAA had even ruled on it. You don't see wall-to-wall coverage of Miami's scandal, or South Carolina, or Oregon, etc. etc. etc. It is what it is, and that is the fact that ESPiN is not interested in reporting unbiased news. They're interested in hating on schools like Ohio State that are not on the positive side of their national agenda, which is pro-SEC, and making the SEC look nice and clean while smearing schools that are not part of that agenda. I don't recall ESPiN printing a retraction when the Ohio BMV proved that Pryor had not been given cars and other benefits that Ohio State had been accused of not monitoring. And when that network sends reporters to Columbus after the scandal has been investigated thoroughly by the NCAA just to do more digging where we have not seen that in the past at other schools, I'm not sure how you can continue to deny the blatantly obvious.

The guys over at ESPN have it made in the shade. They don't even have to be good at their jobs and they are probably (just guessing) the highest paid in the industry. Shady just rattled off a list of vomit inducing names and if you follow any of them on twitter or can stomach more than 5 minutes of their rambling, you can see a name and immediately attribute a stupid comment (s) to them. ESPN is so big and so wide that there is 0 accountability in their work. When you are the biggest (and virtually only) game in town, why try harder to put out a good product? They manufactured Tebowmania, Linsanity, the Heat Index, and so on down the road. Tebow and Lin, specifically, are players that should have never gotten to the level that they did but thanks to the media glutton that is ESPN, both became household names and in the case of Tebow-American Icons (say that outloud and try not to puke). ESPN caters to the sports stupid. Anything they cover, over cover, or chose not to cover shouldn't register on our collective radars.

CincyOSU: first, eSECpn cannot hate anyone or anything - it's a corporate entity, not an individual person with individual feelings. Who is saying that ESPN INC. "hates" Ohio State? Are they also saying that Apple, Inc. loves pancakes? 

You do admit that eSECpn's coverage of Ohio State exhibits an overall negative bias. Okay, then, please note the (sub)definition of bias (as pertains to sports reporting): "A preference or an inclination, especially one that inhibits impartial judgment." Thus, inasmuch as eSECpn's biased reporting is motivated by financial and/or other reasons not stemming from individual members of the espn family "hating Ohio State," their reporting is inhibited all the same.

Everyone agrees that Mark May sucks right? 

Razor -  I mean, I don't even know where to start with you.

1) Of course the Dorhman article was BS, and that is part of my point. An SI.com employee "dug up the dirt"...just like with the Dispatch and the BMV issue. ESPN reported on both stories extensively but they did NOT do the investigating. You are shooting the messenger when you blame them for things other outlets uncover. Maybe its because ESPN is "it" when it comes to sports news(live news coverage) that they bear the brunt of the hate because it APPEARS that they are the ones digging up the dirt, and that is sinply not the case(in MOST instances). And of course the Dispatch is going to TRY to be unbiased...its the frickin hometown paper, But how you give them a pass for the BMV story is beyond me.

2) Maybe I wasn't clear with my point about the issues at other schools. First off, I agree, what happened here was pretty lame in comparison to other school's transgressions. I actually agree that the Oregon case SHOULD be considered bigger than OSU(again I could have been more clear) but it's not just ESPN that has essentially ignored this. I used the work boring simply because it was one instance with one guy and one recruit. With our issues, there were constantly new "scandals" being uncovered which kept the OSU case at the forefront and made it stick in the national headlines longer than it should have. In regards to Miami...dude that story was HUGE for about two weeks and then it died. Two reason...ppl expect this from Miami(past scandals) and all their "dirt" came out all at once(unlike OSU). Once this case gets closer to resolution it will most definetely be back in the headlines. There just isnt anything new to report.

3) How is saying ESPN has a southern bias agreeing that they "hate", or "have it out" for OSU? ESPN has had a bias since there last television deal with the SEC, but that has nothing to do with OSU. I will admit that ESPN tends to disort their headlines at times(see the APR article...which is written by the AP) but most of this has to do simply with bringing in page hits, not to cripple the program. Like it or not, we are a very hated program and negative headlines cater to those viewers as well as our own fanbase. It may seem like this happens to us more, but there is simply more ammo in regards to everything that has transpired in the last 18 months. Its funny that some of you think ESPN hates us. My UC friends are convinced they love us, and that this is the only reason we play in good bowls or have highly rated recruiting classes(silly I know). 

No way Poison, Mark May is the best! 

@ Poison

Absolutely. :) Fortunately for me I haven't watched ESPiN with the exception of actual games in at least two years so I rarely see Mark May make his asinine comments. But you'll still see things during halftime and commercials, cut-ins, etc. It's not possible to avoid it no matter how hard you try.

@ BTalbert

Auburn is a whole other monster. ESPiN and other outlets couldn't prove $hit with the Pryor car and $ accusations with Talbott, but that didn't stop them from reporting it. Did you ever see them get up and do the right thing to correct the misinformation they were reporting? Heck no you didn't. But if you watched the National Title game between Auburn / Oregon, Herbstreit and Musburger got up there before the 3rd quarter kicked off and made sure to do a quick little 1-2 minute segment to tell the audience that nothing could ever be proved, and the kid was innocent, Auburn is innocent blah blah blah. Agenda point #1 - PROTECT THE SEC.

@ Cincy

How about we just agree that we have differing opinions on this? I've spent enough time covering my viewpoints, and I think you've spent enough time covering yours. No hard feelings, but we just aren't going to find common ground. Go Bucks. Feel free to have the last word if you so desire.

Razor - Agreed, no hard feelings. I just can't wait til August when we can talk about things that matter...what happens on the field.

Yes, fellas, the good news is that we only have 74 days till OSU kicks off September 1st.

Albert: you're really going to great lengths to explain why espn might cover certain stories one way and other stories another way, yet you dismiss a relatively straightforward factor - bias - which makes your speculations that much more difficult.

In reality, we are all biased to some degree or another, or in one "direction" or another. There is not avoiding it. The question is how hard we strive to work past our preconceptions, biases, etc.

Let's start from the assumption that reporters, editors, and business management at eSECpn would have biases and ask how they're working through them? I say that their reporting is generally garbage. See how much easier that is than all the contortions you have to make?

Bama had an issue with players getting free suits (which I deem on par with players trading stuff for tattoos). The issue went virtually uncovered by the press (Yahoo, SI, ESPN... maybe AP did an article). And then it was successfully covered-up. (IMO the shop owner was groomed to say the right things to avoid an NCAA investigation so that it became a non-story.)

So whoever said TAT-gate would have gotten just as much scrutiny at Alabama is just plain wrong.

BTW I just love how some Buckeye fans are throwing Tressel under the bus now that we're in the Urban era. The tattoo violations were stupid shit and had they occurred at any SEC school would have been swept under the rug (like the free suits at Alabama). Tressel knew that and after conducting a cursory investigation chose to ignore the violations. That is not the same thing as WILLFULLY lying and cheating.  He may have violated the letter of NCAA rules but he did not violate the spirit by which everyone is conducting themselves (and by everyone I'm referring to the SEC).

@ BTAlbert

I understand what you're saying, but last time I checked in this country people were innocent until proven guilty. Not to be confrontational, but imagine somebody walks up to your wife or significant other and says "just so you know, i've got a source that indicates your husband is cheating on you" but they can't or won't fully prove it. Even if your wife is skeptical as she should be, she's going to keep that in the back of her mind now and everything you do going forward will now be "evaluated".

True or not it causes a problem for the people you're spreading the information about when it's negative, and the media has far too much freedom in this country to do those kinds of things to people if they can't prove it. So while you say it "may be true", you are correct, it might be true, but it may just as well be a complete lie. When media clowns like Dorkman can't make the crap they're throwing stick to the wall, I tend to think they're a liar. Otherwise they wouldn't have so much trouble proving it.

Fido, for me it's just pretty simple.  On this site, negative headlines and stories get linked or talked about much much more than a positive story.  I'm sure all being of the same fan base, this goes on at other blogs.  The same fans probably link the stories or mention espn on their social media sites.  Those links and webhits pile up in a hurry.  So, I don't think it's that much of a stretch to say that I believe ESPN's content is consumer driven, and by Ohio State's own fans behavior, ESPN gets more hits when they put less than flattering headlines out about Ohio State. 

You can count on it several times per week in the forum, blogposts, comments in buckshots, or in the writers content on the main page, there will be someone linking an ESPN article, or saying I just went to ESPN.com and they don't have this published, or Can you believe what ESPN just put out there on their website.  When that behavior stops, and it never will, then ESPN will have reason to change their content.

Fido - Wow, you are REALLY trying twist my words.

1) I admit ESPN has a southern bias....that is it. It shouldn't be that hard to understand.

2) I was using the words of others..."espn hates OSU" "espn wants to cripple OSU" etc. I was repeating what has already been said. Tell your conspiracy buddies to make sense.

3) I NEVER said ESPN was credible, only that they dont "hate" OSU, as others claim.

I'm not really sure what you are trying to debate here other than your poor reading comprehension.

@ Dmcdougal24

No worries, no offense taken. I haven't commented on the Paterno / Sandusky topic a whole lot, so I am not surprised you haven't seen my position on it.

On a semi-related note to the rest of this thread's topics about ESPiN -- it looks like ESPiN got rejected by the Ohio Supreme Court today in their efforts to sue Ohio State....there's that bias again. Does anyone know how often ESPiN sues Division I schools, or rather "attempts" to sue them? Glad Ohio State kicked their a$$ in this one.

Beer and BBQ?  Add that to a 3-B party and you have the ultimate 5-B Extravaganza.  Oh, the 3-B's are boobs, butts and baginas FWIW.

@FIDO - I like to think of ESPN as a kissing cousin to MSNBC or FOX.  Though most tend to attribute "bias" to either of the former news orginizations, the truth of the matter is that American news is incredibly unbiased.  Rather, both of the aforementioned outlets then "slant" their coverage along their respective political lines by employing commentators to frame said stories; but the truth of the matter is that their actual "news coverage" has almost zero differentiation.

I think this is the point that CINCYOSU's getting at; it's a view that I share wholeheartedly.  ESPN is constantly derided for the fact that they present other outlet's scoops as their own (typically by breaking stories with the line "sources tell ESPN that..." and only attributing their sources well after the fact), proving that while they are a credible outlet--they're certainly not first on the scene and are practicioners of some of the laziest journalism (if you can call it that) on Earth.  Granted, as has been mentioned above (and like MSNBC and FOX), ESPN's guilty of framing said stories in different lights--most typically along with their financial interests (so I would instead call them eSECACCTEXASSORTOFBIG12pn).  This generally means more favorable frames toward their assets, and less so for teams outside their sphere of monetary influence (see Ohio State, Penn State); but what it doesn't mean is that their "reporting" is any less credible than that of YahooSports/CBS/SI/etc.

That's what happens when the leader in sports coverage is also the leader in sports news.

@Dmcdougal24, what I was trying to impart is that an act of omission (which is actually what Tressel is guilty of) does not carry the same weight as an act of willful deception or misdirection. BT and a couple others keep besmirching Tressel's character by claiming he lied and cheated. I think that's misleading and false. When someone in the Athletic Dept asked him if he had received an email from Cicero regarding the illegal benefits, he unequivocally said that he had.

IOW - not reporting =/= lying and cheating.

Did he deserve to be fired? IMO no. I still think a suspension of some length was more appropriate to the violations than the Show Cause. He had a moment of bad judgement that he let linger for six months. Which the biased sportsmedia organizations steamrolled into the fiasco that it became. But like Tress, I'm moving on.

Hodge: I agree with your points, generally, except that I see bias as pervasive, unavoidable. The modern world is extremely complex. So, we're forced to filter reality through our perceptions, etc.

I agree, the news content - if viewed in isolation - as it is presented within the corporate-managed "news frames" as part of "straight news" coverage (i.e., not the talk shows) on Fox, MSNBC, or espn are probably not that much more biased, necessarily, than news content on other networks that perhaps have more flexible "frames." Nevertheless, if the frames are the key elements shaping content and presentation, perhaps more so than individual editors, writers, producers, the end result is still bias. Since bias is unavoidable, maybe what we're hoping for is higher standards of journalism. Well, my position is that espn's "journalism" is generally garbage.

It is garbage partly for reasons you mention: espn is simultaneously promoting a wide range of "media platforms" that tend to conflict with each other - e.g., journalism versus their need to promote "SECACCTEXASSORTOFBIG12pn," etc. As long as they can get away with pretending that they still retain some "journalistic" credibility, while promoting their other products, and make a lot of money in the process, they'll continue to do so. But it's our jobs as consumers who are not affiliated with "SECACCTEXASSORTOFBIG12pn," to forgo buying (or linking to) their shitty "journalism" and/or agenda-driven media products.

In general, the standards of the traditional journalism/media giants have declined in recent decades, while blogs like 11W continue to produce amazing results. However, among the few crappy media giants that are actually thriving in this climate, the media "frames" employed by espn are relatively unfavorable, or even hostile, toward Ohio State. For that reason, I am especially critical of them. But I'm not saying that espn has a monopoly on bias, is engaging in a grand conspiracy against Ohio State, and so forth.