ESPN continues to drown journalism into new depths of turd-ness

• BigAppleBuckeye

  

  Wow, this is just a new level of ESPN's shadiness:
  
  http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/ESPN-confuses-new-Jacksonville-with-old-Jacksonv?urn=nfl-wp13393
• gorocks99

  

  Looking forward to some overhead shots of the Kingdome on Monday.
• Laley23

  

  Why is this a big deal? Why would ESPN spend money for overheads of the same thing they spent money on 2 months ago? That would be dumb.
• hasbeen

  

  the only thing that was wrong was the shot of charlotte. it was a mistake.
  
  i agree with laley, why waste the money of something that probably wasn't THAT different anyways. i mean it's not like they had a huge turnover in the area.
• Laley23

  

  Yeah Charlotte was bad, but as mentioned that was a mistake. A big one, but a mistake. It isnt like they were trying to pass stuff from the 80s as live lol.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  Laley23;1006025 wrote:Why is this a big deal? Why would ESPN spend money for overheads of the same thing they spent money on 2 months ago? That would be dumb.

  It's called integrity.
  
  You don't (mis)lead viewers into believing you are providing something you aren't. If they aren't live shots and were taken months earlier, THEN SAY SO. Don't let people think they're watching something that isn't taking place.
  
  I know ESPN isn't about real journalism -- despite what they like to spout, when it suits their needs. The network is all about one thing: the network. How to promote what they show the best way possible, even if it's by pretending to be journalists, columnists, or whatever else they throw out there.
  
  Anyone with half a brain has known ESPN has been trash for a long time.
• hasbeen

  

  i'm not saying espn isn't trash, but they never said they were live shots. they were giving you shots of the jacksonville, yes, charlotte was a BIG mistake. but in the article they mentioned there was never anything saying the shots were live. granted, I didn't watch the game.
  
  i can understand why people want to bitch about it, but i find it very trivial.
• jordo212000

  

  I'd be interested to see the supposed Charlotte shot.
  
  I don't really see the big deal. It's more funny than anything.
• Laley23

  

  Writerbuckeye;1006055 wrote:It's called integrity.
  
  You don't (mis)lead viewers into believing you are providing something you aren't. If they aren't live shots and were taken months earlier, THEN SAY SO. Don't let people think they're watching something that isn't taking place.
  
  I know ESPN isn't about real journalism -- despite what they like to spout, when it suits their needs. The network is all about one thing: the network. How to promote what they show the best way possible, even if it's by pretending to be journalists, columnists, or whatever else they throw out there.
  
  Anyone with half a brain has known ESPN has been trash for a long time.

  Except when its live Tirico (or whoever) will say it, not to mention you usually get a graphic. Didnt have that.
  
  CBS does this all the time pre-taped footage of players warming up for basketball as the tease the next game. All those opens for sports games? Great number are pre taped. They dont say, well 20 minutes ago when we taped this open and got the shots of these players on the field...
• mucalum49

  

  Definitely the Bank of America tower..
  
  http://www.sportsgrid.com/nfl/espn-charlotte-skyline-jacksonville/
• stlouiedipalma

  Hey, it's not like they used crowd scenes from a political rally like a certain cable "news" outlet did.
  
  ESPN is too big for any criticism to stick.
• chicago510

  

  I guess I don't see the big deal with it. Its cheap of them, but unethical or something? No.
  
  You can find far worse journalistic ethics if you look into their coverage of the Bernie Fine/Syracuse scandal.
• ts1227

  

  I blame the SEC
• Ironman92

  

  Voted
• WebFire

  Writerbuckeye;1006055 wrote:It's called integrity.
  
  You don't (mis)lead viewers into believing you are providing something you aren't. If they aren't live shots and were taken months earlier, THEN SAY SO. Don't let people think they're watching something that isn't taking place.
  
  I know ESPN isn't about real journalism -- despite what they like to spout, when it suits their needs. The network is all about one thing: the network. How to promote what they show the best way possible, even if it's by pretending to be journalists, columnists, or whatever else they throw out there.
  
  Anyone with half a brain has known ESPN has been trash for a long time.

  Lighten up Francis. LOL at this being a big deal.
• dave

  who really gives a fuck?
• Writerbuckeye

  

  WebFire;1006153 wrote:Lighten up Francis. LOL at this being a big deal.

  Any "heaviness" to my post is strictly in your mind.
• jordo212000

  

  Writerbuckeye;1006391 wrote:Any "heaviness" to my post is strictly in your mind.

  Guess it is strictly in my mind as well
• BigAppleBuckeye

  

  I guess I am a stickler for journalistic integrity. ESPN presented those shots knowing full-well that viewers would perceive the shots to be taken live. If this was not the intent, then ESPN should have indicated so. Yes, its not a "big deal," kindof like how the New York Post reporting trashy stories isn't a big deal -- just sad to see this network stoop to new lows.
• pmoney25

  

  It's obvious ESPN did this as a slight against Ohio State to continue their Anti Buckeye Agenda.
• queencitybuckeye

  It's ESPN, not JSPN. Since when are these guys considered journalists?
• TBone14

  

  Never understood all the hate for ESPN? Imagine the world without them. We would still be stuck watching 3 college football games a week on TV instead of 40. Who cares if they use shots of JVille from 2 months ago or Charlotte. Shit, they could throw Dubai up there. All I care about is the games.
• Cat Food Flambe'

  

  Didn't CBS get busted for laying recorded bird songs over their golf telecasts a few years back? Some birdnerd recognized the call of a bird found only in the Southeast being used on a broadcast of a tournament in California.
  
  For that matter, I don't understand the need for overhead shots night games at domed stadiums.
• Laley23

  

  Cat Food Flambe';1009530 wrote: For that matter, I don't understand the need for overhead shots night games at domed stadiums.

  100% to get the sponsor in (whoever the blimp is, or whoever buys the rights for the "aerial shots tonight"
• stlouiedipalma

  Those night shots are also good for showing the fake lighting on downtown buildings, too.