(08-09-2019 03:24 PM)Schema Wrote:  

(08-09-2019 03:16 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  Note that he is not telling Spectrum customers to switch carriers.

When you combine that with the fact that Disney and Charter have gone past the expiration date of the previous contract without removing any channels, it does sound promising.

He's also omitting ATT, Altice, Sling and Direct TV from his list to switch from. I don't think the ACCN has signed with any of them yet. Sounds like there are also good prospects for getting deals with them in the near future.

(08-09-2019 01:31 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  And, by the way, here's a USA Today piece on the team behind ACCN, which is mostly women.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/20...955377001/

USA Today looked hard and found ACC content I'm not interested in: ACCN launch content as a fairing to house a political agenda. If the crowning achievement of the ACCN was that it was built with higher than average counts of ovaries, we are so screwed.

(08-09-2019 05:22 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(08-09-2019 01:31 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  And, by the way, here's a USA Today piece on the team behind ACCN, which is mostly women.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/20...955377001/

USA Today looked hard and found ACC content I'm not interested in: ACCN launch content as a fairing to house a political agenda. If the crowning achievement of the ACCN was that it was built with higher than average counts of ovaries, we are so screwed.

A couple of comments. First, as the article makes clear, ESPN didn’t set out to hire a bunch of women. That would be employment discrimination. They just tried to hire the best people and ended up with a lot of women. Second, what is your problem with giving women employment opportunities? Do you think ESPN should have discriminated against women job applicants?

What difference does it make whether the ACCN is built by women, men, insects, vegetables or Eskimos?

(08-09-2019 03:16 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  Seems like negotiations aren't going well with Comcast, DISH, Century Link and Frontier. The FSU AD is recommending that FSU fans using any of those carriers to not just contact their carrier but to now switch carriers.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EBjbJxpWwAAE...me=900x900

Note that he is not telling Spectrum customers to switch carriers.

Is Spectrum in Tallahassee? I think you’re overreacting.

(08-09-2019 05:58 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  A couple of comments. First, as the article makes clear, ESPN didn’t set out to hire a bunch of women. That would be employment discrimination. They just tried to hire the best people and ended up with a lot of women. Second, what is your problem with giving women employment opportunities? Do you think ESPN should have discriminated against women job applicants?

I think ESPN should have hired the best applicants and let the chips fall where they may. When your own "earned media" is churning out virtue signaling identity based politics that's cause to be concerned. Unless you think Ghostbusters 3 was the paragon of the franchise, if you catch my drift. More focus on content and carriage, absolutely zero focus on the genitals of the ESPN employees involved. The more nameless and faceless the off air employees are the better they're doing their job.

I'm in Tally, not aware of Spectrum being here.

Think most of town is Comcast. But FSU TV market isn't really about Tally. It is Jax, Orlando, Tampa, Miami. That is the $$$$$.

All I care about is does the ACCN deliver the $$$$ of a Network that the SEC DOES (or 80% of it).

A $1-$2 million increast (factoring in the $3 million penalty) does very little.

(08-09-2019 06:01 PM)Wear Purple Wrote:  What difference does it make whether the ACCN is built by women, men, insects, vegetables or Eskimos?

According to USA Today it's a milestone for gender equality and diversity. Be right back, I'm going to go change my gender to female and crush a bunch of women's field hockey teams to create my own milestone in diversity and equality.

Quote:“In a perfect world, this wouldn’t be a story,” said Amy Rosenfeld, a senior coordinating producer for ESPN who is heading production for the ACC Network. “Victory for all of us is when this isn’t a story anymore. But right now it is a story and it’s probably an important story.”

It isn't a story. Stop trying to make it one.

Quote:“I remember being in a meeting one day a couple years ago and looking around, and I noticed it then that I was sitting at a table full of women,” said Rosalyn Durant, the senior vice president of college networks for ESPN. “I paused and said, ‘Look around the room here. Do you notice this?’ It felt different, it felt very strong and it felt like tremendous progress from where the industry had been and it showed progress from where the company had been.”

I too feel empowered when I walk down the cosmetics aisle of the grocery store and it happens to be all men in the aisle. YOU GO BOYS! EQUALITY WOOO WOO!

Quote:“We talk about our core priorities at ESPN, and they include direct to consumer quality storytelling and innovation, but one of the ones we usually lead with is audience expansion,” Pitaro told USA TODAY Sports. “That means a bunch of things, but it includes being more relevant to girls and women, and if we’re going to be more relevant to girls and women we need an executive leadership team and an employee base on all levels that reflects that audience.”

How does having a few employees being female instead of male change the relevancy of your sports broadcast to women? Do the teams change? Do the leagues change? Do the players change? Do the venues change? Do the teams calling the games for ESPN change? Does the product change? If having more women and being more relevant to women was such a huge deal, why does what little women-only programming ESPN shows (typically WNBA) do so utterly awful in ratings? From actual measurable and objective criteria (Nielsen ratings) you fail at your own claimed goal when it comes to broadcasting women's sports.





O *clap* M *clap* G *clap* THIS IS SO FABULOUS.




*roll eyes* They better not Kaepernick up this launch. The stench of identity politics coming out of Bristol is strong. I get that the ESPN studio was free since they created another $50m+ studio for SportsCenter then didn't use it. But if this is the cost of being in Bristol, I'm fine taking a league pay cut for a year to move production to Charlotte as well. Keep the politics out of the coverage. That means out of the actual sports event coverage. Out of the "talking head" programming in the morning from Wes and the gang. Out of the behind the scenes coverage. Out. There's a word to describe the meaning of the ACCN launching with higher than average numbers of ovaries involved: irrelevant.

GOOGLE: BROADBANDNOW. Site shows all cable company's maps in U.S. for coverage. On top of page all providers. Sorry i couldn't link it. Great site !!!

(08-09-2019 07:34 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(08-09-2019 06:01 PM)Wear Purple Wrote:  What difference does it make whether the ACCN is built by women, men, insects, vegetables or Eskimos?

According to USA Today it's a milestone for gender equality and diversity. Be right back, I'm going to go change my gender to female and crush a bunch of women's field hockey teams to create my own milestone in diversity and equality.

Quote:“In a perfect world, this wouldn’t be a story,” said Amy Rosenfeld, a senior coordinating producer for ESPN who is heading production for the ACC Network. “Victory for all of us is when this isn’t a story anymore. But right now it is a story and it’s probably an important story.”

It isn't a story. Stop trying to make it one.

Quote:“I remember being in a meeting one day a couple years ago and looking around, and I noticed it then that I was sitting at a table full of women,” said Rosalyn Durant, the senior vice president of college networks for ESPN. “I paused and said, ‘Look around the room here. Do you notice this?’ It felt different, it felt very strong and it felt like tremendous progress from where the industry had been and it showed progress from where the company had been.”

I too feel empowered when I walk down the cosmetics aisle of the grocery store and it happens to be all men in the aisle. YOU GO BOYS! EQUALITY WOOO WOO!

Quote:“We talk about our core priorities at ESPN, and they include direct to consumer quality storytelling and innovation, but one of the ones we usually lead with is audience expansion,” Pitaro told USA TODAY Sports. “That means a bunch of things, but it includes being more relevant to girls and women, and if we’re going to be more relevant to girls and women we need an executive leadership team and an employee base on all levels that reflects that audience.”

How does having a few employees being female instead of male change the relevancy of your sports broadcast to women? Do the teams change? Do the leagues change? Do the players change? Do the venues change? Do the teams calling the games for ESPN change? Does the product change? If having more women and being more relevant to women was such a huge deal, why does what little women-only programming ESPN shows (typically WNBA) do so utterly awful in ratings? From actual measurable and objective criteria (Nielsen ratings) you fail at your own claimed goal when it comes to broadcasting women's sports.





O *clap* M *clap* G *clap* THIS IS SO FABULOUS.




*roll eyes* They better not Kaepernick up this launch. The stench of identity politics coming out of Bristol is strong. I get that the ESPN studio was free since they created another $50m+ studio for SportsCenter then didn't use it. But if this is the cost of being in Bristol, I'm fine taking a league pay cut for a year to move production to Charlotte as well. Keep the politics out of the coverage. That means out of the actual sports event coverage. Out of the "talking head" programming in the morning from Wes and the gang. Out of the behind the scenes coverage. Out. There's a word to describe the meaning of the ACCN launching with higher than average numbers of ovaries involved: irrelevant.

My goodness. You seem extremely bitter. And making a mountain out of nothing. Come on. Lighten up. Please.

The ACC has some really good women’s teams in basketball and soccer which I think can be marketed toward women and girls. If the ACCN intention is to try to reach out to this audience then I have no problem with this if it’s their sole intention. I think the channel should be diverse as much as possible without sacrificing the quality of the what most really want to see and that is men’s football and basketball content.

(08-09-2019 08:36 PM)Wear Purple Wrote:  My goodness. You seem extremely bitter. And making a mountain out of nothing. Come on. Lighten up. Please.

If you work in academia or information technology this identity based political fad is hardly nothing. Unless you consider being put in front of a human rights tribunal for using the wrong gender pronoun to be perfectly acceptable. And that's no exaggeration, that's the actual law in Canada. Jordan Peterson didn't become a household name for nothing or out of thin air. A firm no from me on creeping identity politics no matter where they show their ugly head. And this being a 50/50 joint partnership between ESPN and the ACC, the conference would do well to ensure that ESPN doesn't Kaepernick-up the ACCN launch.

(08-09-2019 09:08 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(08-09-2019 08:36 PM)Wear Purple Wrote:  My goodness. You seem extremely bitter. And making a mountain out of nothing. Come on. Lighten up. Please.

If you work in academia or information technology this identity based political fad is hardly nothing. Unless you consider being put in front of a human rights tribunal for using the wrong gender pronoun to be perfectly acceptable. And that's no exaggeration, that's the actual law in Canada. Jordan Peterson didn't become a household name for nothing or out of thin air. A firm no from me on creeping identity politics no matter where they show their ugly head. And this being a 50/50 joint partnership between ESPN and the ACC, the conference would do well to ensure that ESPN doesn't Kaepernick-up the ACCN launch.

Wow. Ok. As long as the politics are on your side all is well I guess.

Peace. Sheesh.

(08-09-2019 07:19 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(08-09-2019 05:58 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  A couple of comments. First, as the article makes clear, ESPN didn’t set out to hire a bunch of women. That would be employment discrimination. They just tried to hire the best people and ended up with a lot of women. Second, what is your problem with giving women employment opportunities? Do you think ESPN should have discriminated against women job applicants?

I think ESPN should have hired the best applicants and let the chips fall where they may. When your own "earned media" is churning out virtue signaling identity based politics that's cause to be concerned. Unless you think Ghostbusters 3 was the paragon of the franchise, if you catch my drift. More focus on content and carriage, absolutely zero focus on the genitals of the ESPN employees involved. The more nameless and faceless the off air employees are the better they're doing their job.

I am glad that USA Today highlighted the women involved with and instrumental in the launching of the ACC Network.

I find it newsworthy.

To each their own, I guess,

I remember loving sports because it was an escape from politics and political narratives.

Of course some things are good causes...or at least well intentioned. But the whole world seems to be 100% political narratives now.

Just one reason I watch less and less sports.

(08-09-2019 09:39 PM)Wear Purple Wrote:  Wow. Ok. As long as the politics are on your side all is well I guess.

Peace. Sheesh.

I'm for separation of politics and sports. It could be a puff piece about my favorite political candidate talking about my favorite pet issue and it would still be out of place on a sports network.

(08-10-2019 03:04 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(08-09-2019 09:39 PM)Wear Purple Wrote:  Wow. Ok. As long as the politics are on your side all is well I guess.

Peace. Sheesh.

I'm for separation of politics and sports. It could be a puff piece about my favorite political candidate talking about my favorite pet issue and it would still be out of place on a sports network.

Agreed!

(08-10-2019 03:04 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(08-09-2019 09:39 PM)Wear Purple Wrote:  Wow. Ok. As long as the politics are on your side all is well I guess.

Peace. Sheesh.

I'm for separation of politics and sports. It could be a puff piece about my favorite political candidate talking about my favorite pet issue and it would still be out of place on a sports network.

In addition to forbidding any discussion that touches on women working because that’s “political” must we also avoid discussions of women’s sports? What about discussions that touch on African American student athletes?

This isn’t a good place for partisan political discussions but in my view all news concerning the ACC and its forthcoming network is fair game. ESPN’s press release about the team running the ACCN easily qualifies. For goodness sake, the ACCN need women viewers.

I’m not going to censor myself to avoid offending some snowflake who considers something as mundane as women in the workplace offensive.