"England manager Roy Hodgson apologizes for monkey joke"

From Sports Illustrated

Analysis by Alexandra Sullivan in SRM 334 (section 2)

On Thursday October 17th CNN Sports Illustrated posted an article about England’s soccer team manager Roy Hodgson. England played Poland on Tuesday October 15th, which was a big game because the winner would advance to the World Cup. England ended up winning 2-0 against Poland. The article focuses on a greater issue rather than writing about England celebrating the win to advance to the world cup. During half time, Roy Hodgson compared player Andros Townsend to a space monkey. Hodgson meant the comparison as a compliment and did not think about a monkey being a racial slur. The media blew this story out of proportion because Townsend is half black, which means a monkey comment towards him could be taken offensively. Hodgson realized what he had said and apologized to Townsend, the team, and the FA (Football Association). Townsend and other teammates took to twitter to defend Hodgson. Townsend assured the FA and Hodgson that he did not take any offense to the monkey comment, he understood the point the coach was trying to make. Hodgson used the space monkey joke as a generation joke. Space monkeys were used by NASA in the 1960s and 70s and the monkeys were known to be intelligent animals that contributed to success in space flights. Townsend knew Hodgson used this comparison as a good thing. Anti-racism group Kick It Out and anti-discrimination group FARE are demanding an investigation to the story. These groups wanted to publicize this comment to make people aware that the words they are use can be taken offensively. Kick It Out and FARE took to twitter to comment about this story. These groups tweeted that Hodgson knew what he was saying and needs to be aware that he is in a diverse environment and should not be using those kinds of words. The chairman of the FA is backing up Hodgson saying he is an honorable man who is doing a great job coaching the England soccer team. The FA and team stand by Hodgson.

Hodgson is bringing in negative media attention to the team in a time of happiness and celebration. If it were not for social media this story would not have gotten as much attention as it is getting. Now-a-days people are able to freely express their thoughts for everyone to see. Kick It Out and FARE are able to reach more people through social media and get their thoughts to the public faster. Stories spread like wild fire on social media. It is easy for people to share stories to one another and give their opinions. In this case social media blew up the story more than it should have because Hodgson immediately apologizes and no one took offense to the comment. Even with no offense taken from the players, some people still had a problem with the words used and expressed their thoughts through the use of twitter.This issue is relevant to SRM 334 because it proves that everyone contributes to news stories. People can use blogs, facebook, twitter, and other social media outlets to quickly get information out or get their word out. Not everyone has to be a certified journalist or news reporter to get a story out into the public. It is easier for people to stay updated on breaking stories or access information on an issue through the use of social media. Twitter was used positively and negatively in this article. Townsend and teammates were able to assure the public that they still support their coach and this comment was an innocent mistake. On the other hand Kick It Out and FARE were able to use twitter to inform people that comments like that are not acceptable and people need to be aware of their surrounding and the words they use. 

---

Analysis by Samantha Mitchell in SRM 334 (section 2)

On October 16th 2013, Manager Roy Hodgson apologized for making a monkey joke during halftime of the England vs. Poland match, the day prior. Someone from Hodgson’s team leaked information to The Sun newspaper, that during halftime he made a joke about space monkeys in the England Locker room as he was trying to explain to his players that they needed to pass the ball to Andros Townsend. Townsend is African American and the word “monkey” has been used in the past in racial context. 

The monkey joke that Hodgson used was referring to space monkeys that NASA sent into space in the 1960s and 70s. In the statement that Hodgson released Wednesday night, he mentioned that he did not mean the comment in an inappropriate way and made that clear to Andros as soon as it happened. He talked with Andros again the next day to make sure Andros understood the way he meant the comment. Andros understood what he really meant with the comment and assured Hodgson and the Football Association that he took no offense to it.

Andros and many other England players took to twitter to defend Hodgson. None of the players thought it was meant in a racist way and think it is ridiculous that it is being reported on. Greg Dyke, the Football Association chairman, also defended and supported Hodgson. However Kick It Out, an anti-racism organization, does not want a similar situation to happen again, so they are demanding an investigation. Piara Power, the executive director of FARE an anti-discrimination organization, also took to twitter mentioning that Hodgson should have known better and it was silly of him to use that term.

If this information had not been leaked to the media and then published, this situation could have been completely avoided. The media took this and ran with it. Not a single player was offended by the comment made and Hodgson did not mean it to be offensive in any way. He explains in this article that it is more of a generational joke. So therefore, anyone who knows of the monkey joke that took place in the 1960-70’s would be able to realize what he truly meant with this comment.

When the media publishes something that should have never been published, people are going to get frustrated and turn to social media to take out their opinions. This is exactly what happened in this situation. Twitter became an outlet for players and other people to comment on this issue. This information being leaked to the media and then published on the front page of The Sun newspaper also took away from the fact that England qualified for the World Cup by beating Poland. Instead of shedding positive light on the England team, the media is shed negative light on Hodgson, which took away from this great achievement. This article is very relevant to this course because this course is about sports media. This article is covering sports and it has to do with the media making this situation a much bigger issue than it should have been. The media is known to take negative issues and report on them because of the drama it creates. The media has certainly done this with this particular incident and it has not given the proper credit to a team that deserves huge recognition.

"Paralympics to get live coverage from Sochi"

From SportBusiness Journal

Analysis by Katie Davis in SRM 334 (section 2)

After lackluster coverage of the London Paralympic Games, the NBC Sports Group is working with the United States Olympic Committee to create a deal that will give greater coverage of U.S Paralympic Athletes at the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympic Games than viewers have seen in previous games.

From a media and communications stand point, this deal marks a turning point in how disability sports, whether at the Paralympic level, or at a local level, will be broadcast. In the past few years, coverage of the Paralympic Games has increased, but not nearly to the level of the Olympic Games. These will the first games to offer live coverage of Paralympic events. I think that this broadcast will reach a larger demographic and make disability sports on television more common in United States households.

This deal demonstrates how the new model of communication is used. The deal entails not only 3.5 hours on NBC’s broadcast network and 46.5 hours on its cable channel, NBC Sports Network, but it also includes live streaming on the US Paralympics website. Presenting the option of live streaming by sport allows NBC and the U.S. Olympic Committee to reach various niche audiences. Having three different access points also allows viewers to have a more customized viewing experience, whether on standard television or through computers.Overall, after this deal is finalized, coverage of the Paralympic Games in Sochi will expand dramatically and allow viewers a more customized experience in how they watch the game. In turn, more people will become aware of disability sports.

--

Analysis by Craig Rollyson in SRM 334 (section 2)

On September 23, 2013, Sports Business Journal released an article announcing increased coverage for next year’s Winter Paralympic games in Sochi, Russia. Last year, NBC was heavily critiqued for not offering more coverage of the Paralympic games. The International Paralympic Committee, as well as persons with disabilities, expressed their frustration over such little exposure, mainly due to the significant impact last year’s games had on the Paralympic community. 

NBC sports group is finalizing a deal with the U.S. Olympic Committee (USOC), which will result in a total of fifty hours of coverage on NBC and NBC Sports Network. This is a dramatic increase from last year’s measly five and a half hours of coverage that was also taped and reached viewers at delayed times. NBC will be showing the games live, as well as offering live streaming of Paralympic events in which United States athletes will be competing. Anyone with a computer will be able to view the games, and the streaming can be found at USParalympics.org. Although the deal has not been finalized, the main terms have been agreed upon, despite a few minor “kinks” that are still being worked out between NBC and the USOC.

From a media standpoint, the additional coverage will greatly benefit niche audiences, as well as those who just want to watch the games. The live streaming that is to be offered will allow a person to locate specific athletes in specific events, which will give the viewers more control over what he/she watches. This ability for viewers to watch what they want reflects the new version of the sports communication model. Instead of the games being offered solely to the mass media (NBC), which can only reach out to NBC viewers, they have offered content for niche audiences who can view the games through live streaming. Content providers are giving the viewers more control over what they watch, which will greatly expand the audience NBC aims to reach. The additional coverage will also be beneficial for those who have an interest in the Paralympic games. The additional fifty hours of live coverage will be a significant increase from last year’s games, which was tape-delayed. These changes will allow the millions of people in the United States to view the Paralympic games like never before, and bring new light and positive awareness to the Paralympic community. In the past, NBC offered only re-caps of the games, and no live coverage whatsoever. Next year, the United States will have full coverage of the top athletes with disabilities in the world, which should greatly increase the popularity of the event. In class we discussed how expanding to niche audiences and providing new and exciting content for viewers benefits media broadcasting networks. NBC will be offering the games to niche audiences, as well as providing new and interesting content for viewers, which will positively impact the network’s and bring long overdue, deserving awareness to the Paralympic games and participating athletes.

"Grambling football team not bluffing"

From ESPN.com

Analysis by Michael Creighton in SRM 334 (section 1)

The Grambling State football team did not play in their game scheduled for Saturday October 19 against Jackson State. According to an article on espn.go.com, the players were protesting poor facility conditions, management, and the administration. During the week leading up to the game the players boycotted practice and walked out of meetings. The administration fired the head coach, Doug Williams, in September and replaced him with an interim head coach that the players did not approve of even though they had submitted a list of other possible coaches they would have been much happier with. Facility conditions and management of the team have been deteriorating since the beginning of the season and the players had finally had enough of it and refused to get on the buses to travel to Saturday’s game. If the players had not refused to play in their game on Saturday I don’t think the media would have gotten involved. 

Grambling State is a small school and does not receive much media attention as it is. Refusing to play in their game Saturday was the breaking point and now multiple media outlets are covering the story. It appears that the players were attempting to deal with the matter internally because there was no formal outcry or attempt to gain media attention. The original perception of the players boycotting the program was taken as a bunch of stuck up college athletes looking to corner the administration into getting what they wanted. As the media began to pick up on the story however, what they unveiled was a more serious matter that involved player safety and unsafe training conditions. 

The letter that the players wrote to the administration detailing their concern and frustration with the program has been leaked through media outlets and provides the public with a much bettering understanding on why the players chose to forfeit their game. Additionally the media has given the public the opportunity to actually see the conditions that the players are complaining about by uploading pictures to the Internet. The situation at Grambling State highlights the power of the college athlete and their ability to gain media attention so quickly. On Saturday, the twitter account for the school’s newspaper, The Gramblinite, had hour-by-hour updates of whether or not the players were going to get on the buses to travel. Last week The Gramblinite also tweeted every time the players skipped a meeting or practice in protest. In today’s world, a tweet about a local situation or controversy can spread so quickly that the national media does not even have to try to locate a story; it simply falls into their lap. When I first saw the tweets about Grambling State, the most popular ones that appeared on my news feed stated that the football team would not be traveling to their game. To understand why they were not traveling I had to do some investigating. I think the media’s take had an interesting spin to it because the bigger concern is the player safety, not the fact that they forfeited their game. Luckily for the Grambling State football team their situation is being brought into the national spotlight. However, it is a shame they had to go through such drastic measures to get there.

--

Analysis by James Naylor in SRM 334 (section 1)

On Tuesday October 15th, the Grambling State football team held a meeting with administration. A team decision was made by the players to not attend practice the following day. Administration realized that it was time to make a change so they fired interim head coach Greg Ragsdale. The players decided to not play in Saturday’s game at Jackson State. Buses were in the parking lot waiting for players to board at 2:30 but no one showed. The buses waited over an hour for the student athletes, but they made their message to administration clear that they were not coming.

What is getting so much media attention however, is the letter the players collectively made regarding all the problems they want changed within the program. They noted complaints of mold and mildew in the locker room, grass growing excessively too high on the field, jersey’s that aren’t properly washed and are giving the players staff infections and a number of other things. What is most important here is all the coverage Grambling State is receiving over this. ESPN, Bleacher Report, and various social media have brought the public’s attention to this issue. If this story had not been brought to the public, these players could have been stuck accepting these poor conditions or potentially lose their scholarships. The media has made this a major news story and now Grambling State is responding to these players’ concerns by renovating the weight room and looking at the other problems like the jerseys being properly cleaned. What is very surprising about the media coverage of Grambling State is that this team is a very poor FCS college team. This national media attention is mostly due to the fact that the team simply forfeited. USA Today tweeted about the whole situation on Saturday stating, “The most interesting story in college football is the team that won’t be playing Saturday”.

This story relates specifically to our class because it is the perfect example of the new model and how information is being spread across the nation. Various media such as print, electronic and social media are disseminating this information about Grambling State, many with the main goal of helping this team reach their goals. The fact that this team forfeited and the condition in the program are horrible is already newsworthy, but since the media is covering this story so in depth, administration at Grambling State will now have to respond to these players’ concerns and not just sweep it under the rug. This just shows the power and importance of media in sports.

MLB post-season coverage on TBS

From MLB.com and AwfulAnnouncing.com

Analysis by Steve Dombrowski in SRM 334 (section 1)

America is always intrigued by an underdog story. This year that story is the rise and sudden success of the Pittsburgh Pirates, a team who has not made the playoffs in 21 years. Every year for the past seven, TBS has had the rights to broadcast all of Major League Baseball’s Divisional Series along with one of the Championship Series. This year, while watching the Pirates take on the Reds at PNC Park along the Allegheny River in Pittsburgh I was absolutely shocked by the lack of coverage of the pregame ceremony. The Buccos have been waiting over two decades for this and the emotions were extremely high. As a baseball fan, I was extremely intrigued by what they would do to celebrate and all TBS did was talk in the studio about how emotional it actually was. So we did a little research on the subject and we discovered that I was not the only one let down by TBS’s coverage as a whole.

With the popular demand in our society for coverage of sporting events, it is now essential to have top of the line analysis of the game. Especially now that it is playoff time, every pitch is critical. During October, baseball is competing with the NFL, college football, NHL, and the NBA preseason. All four major sports are playing at some part of their season so it is crucial that TBS gets the game perfectly. However, they have not. Fans and other analysts within the profession have been complaining about the ridiculous camera shots and at times lack to a quality audio. Another issue TBS is having is lack of experience in the booth. Cal Ripken, former Orioles great, was taken out of the studio and put in the booth for the first time in these playoffs. He replaced former Braves pitcher John Smoltz, who was demoted to the “B game” announcer. Smoltz had a generally good reputation for his commentary and it was a bit curious why he was replaced. Luckily Ripken has not been doing anything too bad to get noticed. However, when an announcer is poor or biased to a part in the game, many fans will change to some other game or at best mute their television. This is not what you want if you are paying millions, possibly billions of dollars for the rights to air the game.

This topic is relevant from a media standpoint because these issues are all about the production and success and blunders that go in to trying to make a game as pleasurable as possible. For example, the Truss Cam that was implemented at a couple of stadiums for these games is a cool new way to see different angles and get you up close and personal from a outfielders perspective. An example was Carl Crawford falling in to the stands to make a catch. The Truss Cam followed his whole route to the ball and showed us what it took to make such a spectacular play. However, an important lesson I have learned from our class is that you need to listen to your audience. Learn what they want to see from a game and give it to them. Announcers and analysts are trying to steal the spotlight and it takes away from the pleasure of simply viewing the game. Personally, with all of the technology, there is sometimes nothing better than curling up to watch a great game in the comforts of your home. However, if TBS wants to compete on Sundays with the NFL and get majority ratings, they need to adjust to the wants of their audience. There is nothing better than October baseball. From the first pitch to the last, there is constant focus and intensity from every single player on that field. The game itself is great. That alone can draw viewers in to see what is going in a game out in Los Angeles, or Boston, or even Pittsburgh. However, the analysis makes or breaks the ratings and unfortunately TBS just cannot catch up.

Analysis of why athletes with injuries continue to sit out

From ESPN.com and Fox Sports

Analysis by Nick Toombs in SRM 334 (section 2)

The article that I chose is about Patriots Tight End Rob Gronkowski sitting out. The article is an ESPN piece highlighting player comments saying that they believe Gronkowski has been ready to return for a while. His team feels that he is ready to play but Gronkowski is waiting on clearance from his own independent physician, Dr. James Andrews. Several players are quoted within the article suggesting that Gronkowski appears to be ready to go based upon his performance in practice. There has also been tension between the organization and the player stemming from media coverage of Gronkowski partying with his injured arm during the offseason.

This article was retrieved from ESPN and was written by senior NFL writer Ed Werder. ESPN has had extensive coverage of Rob Gronkowski since he has entered the NFL. ESPN specifically plays a huge role in the types of sports stories that get major attention in sport media and they can influence the public’s perceptions of certain situations. By continually posting stories that suggest a rift between the Patriots organization and Rob Gronkowski, the media can create conflict whether real or perceived. ESPN ‘s reporting on this particular situation has been biased. Since they control most of the sport media market, they can sway public perception based upon their reporting. The article is titled “’Resentment’ toward Rob Gronkowski” which suggests negatively about the Patriots tight end. ESPN largely dictates what will become big news and what will not with every other sport media outlet available because ESPN is the leader in the industry.

This article is an opinion piece written by ESPN. Rob Gronkowski is a polarizing figure in sports, which makes this story necessary to be reported on in ESPN’s eyes. This article relates to this course because it shows how the media affects public perception. ESPN is a major news outlet so when they publish negative stories about a particular individual, the consumer of the information is subconsciously influenced. It is also in the best interest to publish as many stories about Gronkowski as they can because they can determine what becomes “newsworthy.
 
---

Analysis by Ayrton Glasper in SRM 334 (section 2)

Recently, the media has brought into the public eye, the questionable injury status of two top football players. Jadeveon Clowney, defensive end for the South Carolina Gamecocks and Rob Gronkowski, tight end for the New England Patriots, have been scrutinized by the media because of their lack of appearance on the playing field. Steven A. Smith, NFL Game Day, ESPN’s Sports Center, and sports magazines across the nation, to name a few, are dissecting under the microscope why these two very talented football players are either sitting on the bench with “injuries” or playing “hard” during practice yet nowhere to be seen on their respective game days. 

Firstly, Jadeveon Clowney a junior at South Carolina University gained instant fame, thanks to the media, with his “perfect hit” in the January, 2013, Outback Bowl. Due to much off-season hype, Clowney was soon reported to be the frontrunner for the Heisman Trophy. However, with a slow start to his season, multiple minor injuries, and making the decision to sit himself out of a game, media controversy on this talented footballer snowballed. Many football analysts question whether Clowney does not want to play this year in fear of risking a serious injury as did his teammate last year, Marcus Lattimore. It has been reported that such an injury could not only ruin his chances of getting drafted as a first-round pick but also derail him from a prospective NFL career with a huge contract. We as fans can only wonder how much of what is being reported by the media is true. Is Clowney being selfish by falsifying or exaggerating his injuries and only thinking of his future with the NFL, or are his injuries legitimate?

Secondly, the controversy surrounding Clowney and his “injuries” has been compared of late, to similar questionable behavior from Rob Gronkowski of the New England Patriots. The “Gronk” as he is known in the sports world, has also been plagued with injuries. Earlier this year, he underwent back and arm surgery causing the media to closely follow and constantly report on his possible return to the football field with the Patriots. To the media’s bafflement, even after hard weekly practices, the Gronk is still absent from the field on game days. Analysts are scrutinizing the reasons behind him not playing. Is this another case of not playing in order to avoid any risk of getting hurt and losing millions? It has been reported that under the Gronk’s $54 million dollar contract extension of 2012 with the Patriots, he could lose a huge chunk of it because of an injury. So could the media be right? Is the Gronk being selfish and delaying his return to playing football because of the contract the millions at stake?The media has brought a significant amount of attention, many would say too much, to both of these talented players by constantly reporting and debating on the reasons behind their lack of playing time on the football field. We the public can only speculate how much of these reports are true. We can only judge from what we read and see from the various videos, interviews, and articles however, at the same time we must also take into account that the media can be bias and have a subjective opinion on the topic/discussion. As far as these two players are concerned, the media appears to portray them as being selfish with underlying monetary reasons behind their so called “injuries.” Fact or fiction? Today, the media is highly advanced and with modern technology and the introduction of “twitter” and mobile “apps” for example, sports media coverage is intensive, fast, and easily accessible. The public now has access within minutes, even seconds, of any breaking news, scores, and all kinds of updates. Through the new communication model the media and fans can relay and respond respectively to all of the latest sports news.

David Price realized Twitter rant was a mistake

From USA Today

Analysis by Courtney Wright in SRM 334 (section 1)

After the frustrating game 2 of the ALDS, David Price took to twitter to let his followers be aware of how he felt. His frustrations stemmed from the TBS commentator’s comments on air and David Ortiz’s reaction to his two homeruns. On national television, TBS commentators Dirk Hayhurst and Tom Verducci said, “This is the playoffs, you can’t take any chances. He was out there past his prime. He should have come out sooner”. Price reacted to the commentators by insulting them and calling them nerds while implying they had never played sports at a higher level. 

After the media took such notice to Price’s rant, he decided to send out an apology to all those who were offended by his words and disappointed with what he said. Along with tweeting an apology, Price reached out in person to the media and to David Ortiz. Ortiz replied with saying how they respect one another as players and that is was “no big deal”. The media made it seem like Price had it out for Ortiz and vice versa, when in reality it was just post-season competition, there were no personal vendettas against each other. 

In light of the media coverage of Price’s twitter rampage, Rays’ GM, Joe Maddon, chimed in with his opinion of setting social media restrictions by stating, “I really hate to try to legislate behavior when it comes to these kinds of moments…David did the right thing after he did the wrong thing”. He does not think it is his place to make such decisions for his athletes and that they must learn from their mistakes and to respect the media. As we have discussed in class, respecting the media is important behavior by professional athletes in our modern day society. Price made it known how sorry he was for his actions and has learned a lesson he will most likely not make again any time soon.

---

Analysis by Monica Paolicelli in SRM 334 (section 1)

After David Ortiz, of the Boston Red Sox, hit a homerun and watched it intently from home plate, David Price was furious with his performance throughout the night with a 7-4 loss. He called it a “dark spot in his career” and the TBS commentators could not agree more. Dirk Hayhurst and Tom Verducci commentated this ALDS game 2 and Hayhurst said “Price should have been pulled from the game earlier, you can’t take any chances. He was out there past his prime. He should’ve come out sooner.” Price was extremely embarrassed by this and criticized the TBS broadcast crew as being nerds and water boys during their sports careers. He took to Twitter with this tweet after the game, “Dirk Hayhurst … COULDN'T hack it … Tom Verducci wasn't even a water boy in high school … but they can still bash a player … SAVE IT NERDS” -@DAVIDprice14. Price’s criticisms proved nonsense as Verducci has covered the sport of baseball for decades and Hayhurst made the majors. David Price is saying that only those at or above his talent and accomplishment level have the right to criticize his performance. Do commentators, for any sport, have the right to criticize performance when a professional player is playing badly? I believe that they do have this right to inform the public audience with who is having a record-breaking game and who is having a bad performance that night. Athletes like David Price need to be aware that they are on television with a wide audience and will likely be criticized for performance. The media has the right to produce stories based on performances, even though they have never played professional baseball. This current event is all about respecting social media as well as professional commentators. David Price was angry, took to Twitter, and he definitely learned his lesson. He sent out an apology tweet shortly after explaining how he embarrassed himself, his family, and his organization. General Manager, Joe Maddon commented about installing social media policies throughout the organization with, “I really hate to try to legislate behavior when it comes to these kinds of moments … David did the right thing after he did the wrong thing.” Respecting all the constituents involved in sports media as well as coaches and other players takes a lot of self-control and humbleness. This is rare to find in professional sports where all athletes have stellar backgrounds and multiple honors.

Performance enhancing drugs in professional sports and the media implications

From SBNation.com and ESPN.com

Analysis by Chris Huffman in SRM 334 (section 2)

For our current event we decided to talk about athletes using steroids; mostly about baseball players using them. Steroids have been a highly talked about subject in the MLB because of various reasons. Players feel that they are too small or do not have the natural athletic ability to compete with the top players in baseball today. 

Two of the most recent baseball players that have been caught using steroids are Yankees third basemen, Alex Rodriguez, and the Brewers leftfielder, Ryan Braun. Both started out denying they had ever used steroids or any illegal substances that are banned by the MLB. Later both of them were found guilty and faced suspensions during the season this year.

I believe that our media portrays both of them as lying and cheating the game of baseball because they both denied using illegal substances by the MLB and were later found guilty. I think that if they would have came clean at the beginning then it would not have blown up like it did. People would have been more forgiving about the mistakes they both have made and might of gotten off with a lighter suspension as well.

This article is relevant to the course because of how it was all over sports center as well as twitter too. Many people voiced their opinions about the suspensions and about how they felt about them taking banned substances. In the video on youtube the woman reporter talks about how parents are tired of worrying about their kids being introduced to things like this. They believe that their children are going to start thinking they have to take substances in order to receive a college scholarship or in order to make it professionally in sports, which scares the parents because of the harm it can do to their children’s body.I believe if the MLB and all leagues around the world made a stricter policy, for example, instead of giving athletes three chances, they should only give them one or two at the most. I believe this because it is taking away the integrity of the game and eventually people are going to get so tired of it they will stop watching sports because they will believe it has become a scam. 

---

Analysis by Titus Till in SRM 334 (section 2)

Steroid use by professional athletes has been an issue within professional sports leagues such as the MLB and NFL. This problem has tarnished the names of some of the most decorated athletes in recent years. Particularly, one of the most recent cases is the scandal that the New York Yankees all-star, Alex Rodriguez, is involved in. A-rod is currently in the process of appealing his 211-game suspension that resulted from his alleged involvement with the anti-aging clinic Biogenesis. Another similar case involves the Milwaukee Brewers slugger Ryan Braun who recently was suspended for the remainder of the season without pay. The suspension will withhold Braun from 65 games and it is estimated that he will lose $3.25 million as a result. 

The use of steroids and other performance enhancing drugs within professional baseball may have been a life saver for the MLB. Before the steroids era, baseball was losing fans at a rapid pace and the league was close to being extinct. When big names such as Mark Mcwire and Sammy Sosa came along and began to put up outstanding numbers and perform above and beyond the expectations of a professional athletes fans began to come back to baseball and sell out stadiums to watch these amazing athletes to perform. After many years of excelling in hitting home-runs, these players were found to be guilty of using steroids. This brought so much media attention to this problem and since then, reporters cannot wait to get their hands on a juicy story such as the Alex Rodriquez or Ryan Braun situation.

In the NFL, there are not as many cases around the league where you will find players using performance enhancing drugs or steroids but that does not mean they aren’t out there. The NFL has a policy that gives a 30 day suspension for the first offense of banned substances and a 1-year suspension for the second offense. The third offense is unknown due to the fact that no one has ever failed 3 drug test in the NFL. This is an issue that is relevant to this course because it is a very scandalous and news-worthy story when a professional athlete caught using performance enhancing drugs. The media has used this issue to bring the MLB back to life after almost going into extinction. Athletes that have used steroids in the past were able to do things unfathomable to the rest of the world and they may not have been able to do it without steroids.

"NFL of a controversy: Pressure mounts on Washington Redskins to change ‘racist’ name"

From Metro

Analysis by Kevin Barr in SRM 334 (section 1)

The article I read was released by Metro which is an online publication. The article discusses the recent surge for the Redskins to change their name due to the fact that the team’s mascot is actually an offensive slur towards Native Americans. The article shared opinions and quotes of multiple notable news sources such as ESPN, Sports Illustrated, and the Washington Post. The entire article had varying opinions about why they think the Redskins should change their names, but all had come to the same conclusion that a name change should be imminent. It also described a poll of Native Americans trying to seek out how they felt about the name and the results varied from year to year making the evidence inconclusive.

The media is whole heartedly attacking the Redskins organization. I believe it has a lot to do with the big media outlets attempting to be politically correct. The major news outlets know the difference between getting the best ratings and coming off as respectful and politically correct. I am sure producers and editors are forcing their particular media journalists and analysts to give off the most nationally accepted opinion when it comes to serious topics such as offensive slurs. We have learned in class how the media has evolved over the past century. The media no longer controls everything that is put out, but when they do publicize something, they must be wary of the consequences of that particular action. This directly relates to the Redskins name change conversation because it doesn’t seem possible for a news source to vocalize their opinion on this topic unless it would please the masses overall.

Based on research and statistics I found while doing this current event project, I learned that the average fan and the media had completely opposite opinions of the name change decision. I realized that because fans now have the majority of the power in the media due to their seemingly limitless access to social media and blog spots. Everyone is able to put out their opinions without being put under the microscope unlike major news outlets that have consistent pressure to say the “right” thing.

The media is constantly becoming more wide open in today’s world and it gives the outside public an opportunity to be involved. Social Media and debate TV shows are leading the way in this opinionated society and I see no sign of this new era media stride slowing down.

---


Analysis by Will Pompa in SRM 334 (section 1)

The Washington Redskins name was established in 1933 starting what is said to be one of the most recognizable and followed franchises in professional sports. According to the Metro sports section article “NFL of a Controversy” the Redskins name is a racial slur towards Native Americans. Many Native Americans have protested for a name change since the Redskins name is derogatory towards their culture. Starting in 1993 when the Redskins were in the Super Bowl, Native American tribes expressed their discontent with the name and it has spread like a wild fire by means of the media ever since.

“NFL of a Controversy” article has shown that the Native Americans would like the Redskins to change their name but the Redskins are opposed to doing so. Daniel Snyder stated “We’ll never change the name. NEVER—you can use caps.” The article showed that the Redskins organization and those who are tied to the organization in some way are against changing the name. Those that are not tied to the organization emotionally or financially such as the media have a different view. For the most part the media wants the Redskins to change their name. Ever since the Native Americans brought the idea of a name change to the media in 1993 the media has coincided with the Native Americans to bring about a name change. This controversy creates great story material for the media which in turn shows why the media would be pushing for something to change in the NFL.

The media has to be politically correct. They are presenting their material to all types of audiences and being politically correct will please the majority of readers. The media views the Redskins name as a racial slur because they have to be politically correct and professional with their views on not only sports news but political news as well. This story is no longer just a local sports story. This is a story that local media outlets have brought from a small controversy to a national political debate with even President Obama weighing in with his opinion. With the help of the media the Native Americans have been able to voice their opinions and have very powerful people in the United States take their side on the name change controversy. After reading this article I was able to connect what I have learned from class to this ongoing controversy. The media is a powerful tool today (the new model of media) as it connects to many different audiences. All types of people with many different views are able to use social media, blogs and other media forms to voice their opinions. The Redskins are feeling extra pressure to change the name because of the ability of the public to interact and voice their opinions. The power of the media is driving this story. It developed from a local controversy to a national debate by means of the media developing the story, asking the Redskins organization questions, informing the general public about the meaning of the Redskins name and persuading them to join the side of the media and Native Americans to cause a change in sports. As long as there is change there will be a subject for the media to report and write about for the public’s interest.

"FOX Sports Girls heading out on FOX Sports 1 road trip"

From FOX Sports West

Analysis by Chris Lee in SRM 435 (section 2)

The article, “FOX Sports Girls Heading Out on Fox Sports 1 Road Trip,” basically summarizes the many marketing and promotional efforts that FOX Sports employed to raise awareness for the launch of their new sports network. FOX Sports 1 is a 24-hours sports network that features various sporting events such as NASCAR, college football, college basketball, UFC, and soccer. It has over 5,000 hours of live events, news, and original programming offered annually and its launch was the largest in sports cable network history.

As a way of gaining exposure about the launch of their new network, FOX Sports 1 had Cleatus, the FOX Sports robot, as well as the FOX Sports girls travel on a cross country bus tour to raise awareness and create hype for the launch which occurred on August 17. The 45-foot FOX Sports 1 bus journeyed throughout the United States, starting in San Diego and eventually ending up at Boston for the Shogun v. Sonnen light heavyweight bout and the long awaited unveiling of their network. Throughout the tour Cleatus and the FOX Sports 1 girls attended several Major and Minor League Baseball games, NFL training camps, the Fort Campbell Army Base, viewing parties, and finally the UFC fight in Boston. Basically, what they did was take pictures with fans, talk about the release of the new network, and hand out FOX Sports 1 gear.

Overall, I thought that FOX Sports 1 was very effective in their marketing strategy. By traveling to different locations throughout the country, they were able to gain a lot exposure and create good brand impressions for potential customers. They also did a good job utilizing social media outlets such as Facebook and Twitter (#RoadtoLaunch) to raise awareness about their new programming. Furthermore, they had commercials air during the MLB All-Star game which approximately 11 million viewers were watching at the time.

In my opinion, the one thing that I would have done differently is increase the variety of sporting events that Cleatus and the FOX Sports 1 girls visited. I found the vast majority of stops during the cross country bus tour were at baseball games. I think by doing this, FOX Sports 1 narrowed their target audience to mainly baseball fans, especially considering the airing of the commercials during the MLB All-Star game. I believe that a stronger approach would be to diversify the types of sporting events they attended, thus broadening their target market and hopefully gaining more viewership.

The article is relevant to this class because it is directly related to sport marketing and sales, the very title of the course. The Road to Launch marketing campaign reminded me of the Allstate Ultimate Road Trip Sweepstakes, which similarly had to do with driving cross country and spreading the word about their brand. Overall, the article dealt with the promotional side of sports marketing, making it relevant to the course, and the historical launch of a new sports network that should greatly impact the industry.

---

Analysis by Josh Revitch in SRM 435 (section 2)

The article we are discussing in today’s class, “FOX Sports Girls Heading Out on FOX Sports 1 Road Trip”, is about the cross-country promotional tour for the launch of FOX Sports 1. Fox has recently launched a new, 24-hour sports network, which aired on August 17th showing the Red Sox-Yankees game and UFC Fight Night. 

On August 4th, FOX Sports 1 and the FOX Sports Girls, along with the FOX NFL Sunday robot, Cleatus, went on a cross-country trip, Road to Launch. This trip was created to raise awareness for the launch of the new network. The tour started in San Diego for the Padres game against the New York Yankees. Each day, FOX Sports went to baseball games in different cities to promote the new network. The FOX Sports girls talked about the new network, took pictures with fans, and distributed FOX Sports 1 gear to sports fans across the country. Fans were able to follow the tour bus and the FOX Sports Girls through Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter by implementing the hashtag, #Roadtolaunch. Also, FOX Sports 1 aired its major promotional video during the MLB All-Star game.

I believe that FOX Sports did a great job promoting the launch of the new network. The target market of this network are sports fans and FOX promoted the network directly to fans by going to different baseball games. By promoting a new sports network at a sporting event, this will most likely increase the number of viewers by spreading awareness. Fans at the different baseball games gained more knowledge of the new sports network and will most likely share that information to friends and family, thus increasing the number of viewers. Also, FOX Sports will probably gain brand loyalty from the fans at the baseball games due to the free FOX Sports 1 items that were distributed. Those who received the free gear might be more willing to tune into FOX Sports 1 because they feel affiliated with the network.

Also, FOX Sports 1 utilized social media to promote and spread the awareness of the new network. By using social media and employing the hashtag, #Roadtolaunch, fans feel like they are a part of the process. Sports fans can learn more about the network and the cross-country tour and join in on the action easier now through the use of social media. By implementing social media, people and sports fans become more involved and will most likely increase the number of viewers because they feel like they have a connection to the network. This article is relevant to this class as it is about the use of promotions to spread awareness of a sports network. FOX Sports implemented many aspects that we discuss in class such as promotions and social media. Using promotions such as free giveaway items can increase the number of fans and viewers of the network. By promoting to sports fans directly, FOX successfully marketed its new sports network.

NFL Player Safety and the Media Effect

From ESPN.com

Analysis by Anthony Brown in SRM 334 (section 2)

A recent ESPN, Outside the Lines story, focused on a $765 million proposed concussion settlement between the NFL and its former players. The settlement concludes the NFL will pay $765 million plus legal costs, but will admit no wrongdoing. The lawsuit included over 4,500 former players, however, the settlement went beyond just those who filed suits to cover all of the league’s retired players, making the number able to receive compensation total over 18,000. The money from the settlement would go toward medical exams and concussion-related compensation for retired players and their families. In addition, $10 million will go towards medical research (Steve F. & Mark F., 2013). 

This settlement is of an incredible importance to the media. Over the course of the last decade, there has been an increased emphasis on the injuries sustained within a player’s career and how that affects their life post NFL. In the past two and a half years alone, there have been three suicides committed by former NFL players with ties to brain damage. In one instance, former Chicago Bear Dave Duerson, committed suicide with a gunshot wound to the chest so that his brain could be researched for chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE). The university of Boston researchers found CTE in the brain, which is the same disease found in other deceased NFL players. This is important because it has been known over the past few years that these injuries are being caused during player’s careers but the extent has been unknown (Josh, L., Steve, A., & Joe, S., 2013). These extreme cases resulting in death have forced the media, as well as the NFL, to take a closer look. The available research has led to this settlement, which now will provide former players with funding to better assist their condition, support their families, and provide medical research not only for themselves, but for future players as well.

The NFL has not solved their player safety issues entirely. While the proper steps seem to be taking place off the field, on the field is another issue. New rules have been implemented to insure player safety, including leading with the crown of the helmet, launching into a player, and/or targeting defenseless players. Breaking these rules can result in fines and possible suspensions. However, there are many questions now as to what is legal, and what is not. Bernard Pollard, safety for the Tennessee Titans, was recently fined $42,000 for a play that was not flagged and deemed legal.

"The bad part of it is, for us as players, for the fans, for the coaches, for the refs, there's a lot of gray area. So they don't know what to call and what not to call. There's no call and now you come back and fine me $42,000 for ... a play that was legal… But like I said, if you don't want us to play defense, don't call us defense. Take us off the field. Just let them go against air. Let's see what that does to the ratings,” Pollard said.

Situations such as these are the NFL’s biggest media issue surrounding player safety. Players such as Pollard who are repeat offenders of the conduct policy continue to speak out against the policy, its effect on the game, and television ratings. The media coverage continues to focus on these player’s comments because it is a noteworthy story. There are not any players making statements about the positive aspects of the policies, just those who are negatively affected. The issue with this is that it takes away from the true meaning of the rules. The rules are being incorporated solely to focus on player safety. The media spins this into being more focused on the player, the hit, the fine, and/or the suspension. Using this instance for example, the story has no focus on the concussion the player hit received. The entire story is based on dollar amounts, ripping the NFL, and television ratings. This completely misses the point the NFL is trying to establish. Until the NFL, its players, and the media can get on the same page, all publicity surrounding these policies will continue to focus on all the penalties players receive, not the injuries the NFL is trying to prevent. This is a shame because the since the NFL has introduced these rules, the percentages of concussions have dropped tremendously. CNN reports that in 2010, there were .679 concussions per game (218 in 321 combined preseason & regular season games). In 2011, there were only .594 concussions per game (190 in 320 combined preseason & regular season games) (Library, C. 2013).

The last issue the NFL faces within the media is its own hypocrisy. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell once wrote in a letter to personnel and fans, "There is no higher priority for the National Football League than the health and wellness of our players." However, the NFL continues to insist on an 18 game schedule being implemented, more games in London being played, and Thursday night games every week. All of the desired changes are completely revenue oriented and not a bit focused on player safety. Adding more games to the schedule, shortening player preparation during the week, and adding more travel is only going to make players more susceptible to injury. The NFL is trying to have the best of both worlds. Implement safety policies to cover the league, while increase marketability to put more dollars in their pockets. It’s a very thin line that they are toying with and the media continues to cover all angles in this billion dollar industry. The NFL must be careful with their choice of words and the decisions they make going forward. Everyone is watching, not just the media, and the most prominent sports league in America has some decisions to make regarding the future of their sport. The before mentioned player suit was considered by many to be a potential demise of the league, they were able to escape that, going forward they must not be greedy and look out for the best interest of the players, not their wallets in they want to maintain credibility.

---

Analysis by Trevor Nichols in SRM 334 (section 2)

In the Outside the Lines report, written by Steve Fainaru and Mark Fainaru-Wada, details in the $765 million settlement between the NFL and former players are discussed. They highlight key parts of the settlement, including individual caps based on what type of injury a player sustained while playing football. They also discuss some players that will be left out of the settlement because the injuries occurred before 2006. The authors go on to discuss the number of brain injuries that are occurring in the NFL and the impact this has on players for the rest of their life. They close the article by describing how some lawyers may get paid multiple times.

The authors do a great job of presenting the details of the settlement and offering opinions of former players involved with the settlement. They present different quotes and thoughts from players that are both happy and unhappy with the settlement. They also dig deeper into the story when they talk about the increase in concussions and chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE). 52 out of 54 players who signed agreements to have their brain studied after death had CTE. Currently, it can only be tested postmortem but some doctors believe there could be a way to test and treat the disease for living athletes in the next few years. The authors also incorporate how much players will get paid based on the settlement regarding different diseases. They write that relatives of deceased players would be eligible to collect nearly 1 billion dollars, which is almost 33% more than what the settlement was agreed upon. The last part talks about how the NFL agreed to pay a “common benefit” fund for lawyers so all the settlement money could go to the players; however, within individual contracts between players and lawyers many of them already agreed upon a number at the beginning of the process. Potentially lawyers may be getting paid out multiple times by the NFL and then individual players as well. The article closes with a quote from Boyd when he talks about his frustration and how the settlement seems to not have accomplished anything and that players are back to where they started.

This is relevant to the course because it is a high profile case in the sports world. The media covering the story need to be able to present the facts to the public so the public can make their own opinion on the NFL and their take on player safety. The media always highlights big hits because that’s what makes them the most money. They also seem to only interview athletes that do not like the rule changes which may distort the opinions of the public. The media should make bigger stories out of some of these players that commit suicide and suffer from CTE. In an industry that makes 10 billion a year, they only agree on 765 million to cover players that have made them all the money. The media has the power to influence the public and they seem to only cover one side of the story.

"South Carolina's Star Player Jadeveon Clowney Hasn't 'Lost His Swagger'"

From Bleacher Report

Analysis by Alex Mosley in SRM 334 (section 1)

Jadeveon Clowney is one of the most gifted, explosive and most talked about players in college football history. He makes freakishly great plays that seem impossible for a person of his stature, seem like routine plays. Not in recent years has a player, that plays the same position, created such a huge star power about themselves. The article talks about the media frenzy about the player known as the freak, Jadeveon Clowney. Clowney has unique abilities and skillset that separates him from other defensive lineman. His size, strength, quickness and agility are all qualities that give him an advantage and gave him the identity of being known as the “freak”. A major quality that he has is being able to use both his left and right hands when getting into a stance. Coaches truly admire this as I allows him to play on both sides of the line which does not allow offenses to key on where he is going to be. That is a quality most guys in college do not have, as they are only comfortable with using their right hand. Wrapping all of these qualities into one and combining that with great technique has allowed him to be recognize as one of the best football players in the country. Coming into the year he was seen as a Heisman Trophy candidate and potential number one overall draft pick. The hype that surrounds him was accelerated throughout the summer in anticipation for another breakout yea. After a win against rival North Carolina, he faced major criticism. Clowney had only three tackles and was condemned to being “out of shape” as he seemed to have taken plays off. It was later discover he had a stomach virus the day before, but the criticism still followed. The media still ran with it as it seemed now that he was more human as he did not make the plays fans and reporters were accustomed to. What the article focuses on is that he is human and that though he has yet made any highlight plays, he still is “the freak” for a reason because of his major impact on the field.

It is ironic as to how media can create such hysteria on one person, build them up give them insane hero like abilities then break them down and overanalyze that same person. Jadeveon Clowney has been viewed as a freak of nature in the media, the hype surrounding him is unreal as it is said that he could play in the NFL right now. For a college football player, that is one major statement . Though is a great player, the media depiction of him makes one believe that he is somewhat of a superman and will make every single play. That is not the case as it was evident in his first couple of games this year. He has made plays but offenses realize his dominance and scout around him. If you listen to media reports though, you would think that he has made no plays and that he was over hyped. In my opinion, the media overanalyzes him, on one hand when he makes plays he’s the most dominant player in college football and on the other hand when he doesn’t make the highlight play, he is seen as being no as dominant.

---

Analysis by Dana Allaband in SRM 334 (section 1)

Jadeveon Clowney, a defensive end for the University of South Carolina, was recognized for his sack against Michigan’s player Vincent Smith. This was Clowney’s rise to fame, just one hit and he immediately spread throughout social media. Since then Clowney has been scrutinized for his performance in his games thus far for the 2013 season.

In the article “South Carolina’s Star Player Jadeveon Clowney Hasn’t Lot His Swagger,” Brian Leigh explains how much the media has been extremely critical over Clowney’s performance on the field. Leigh states that the public has created the image that Clowney is a “God.” That due to one impressive highlight play, he will now be expected to perform at that level every game and if he does not the world will hear about it. For instance in the article, it states that Clowney was ranked first in a poll for the Heisman award after his highlight play. Now after only three games into this season he is left off the list completely. Also Leigh states that, “there was a time when Clowney was the bar-none favorite to go No. 1 in next April's NFL draft,” and this now has become questionable. The medias’ involvement in Clowney’s life has essentially altered it. In this instance Leigh is explaining how the media has become overly involved in Clowney’s life and he is defending him to a degree. Leigh states that the this issue with “impossibly high standards; they’re impossible.” Meaning that the media should not portray him as this unbelievable player. They should just state facts and statistics and let the public form an opinion about Clowney’s ability to play instead of being influenced by the media. For instance after South Carolina’s game against UNC the media stated that he was tired throughout the game, that he had to be pulled off, and that he will not win a Heisman with that performance. When in reality, if the public watched the game they would see that he performed extremely well against UNC. For most of the game he was double teamed, UNC placed two players to block him. Even with this in front of him Jadeveon managed to force UNC to rush their plays for a majority of the game. This exemplifies how the media can tweak a story so that the public will become interested and want to talk about it. Overall Jadeveon Clowney, an exceptional player, has become a name in the media and his performance this year will be scrutinized by the media because of this. The question left to ask is how will he react?

"Eagles receiver Riley Cooper uses racial slur at a Kenny Chesney concert"

(Disclaimer: this video contains a sensitive subject matter)

From USA Today

Analysis by Sean Wheeler in SRM 334 (section 2)

On June 9th, 2013, Riley Cooper, Philadelphia Eagles wide receiver, alone with his coach and some of his teammates attended a Kenny Chesney concert in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Cooper, teammate Jason Kelch, and coach Chip Kelly were invited on stage by Kenny Chesney to perform his song, “Boys of Fall.” Cooper then, after a security guard did not allow him to go backstage, said a racial slur regarding African-Americans. On top of that, Cooper also got into a verbal altercation with people outside of the concert. After all of this hit the fan, Cooper released a serious of tweets apologizes for the incident, as well as, personally apologizing to his black teammates. He was eventually fined and sentenced to three days of sensitivity training.

From a media standpoint, this was blown way out of proportion. The media has the power to “blow-up” stories and this was exactly the case. The media made it seem like Cooper committed a serious crime and even publically viewed him as someone like Aaron Hernandez, New England Patriots wide receiver who was recently charged with murder. Cooper understandably did and said a horrible thing, but he did not commit a crime and, therefore, should not have made national news.

Another point to be made, regarding the media, is that everything is documented now-a-days. Because of the advancement in technology this past decade, not so important stories like this are being viewed and taken to levels they should not be taken to. For example, without cell phones and cameras this incident never would have been made publically like it did. People in this generation care more about taking a picture or video of something rather than fully enjoying the experience firsthand and not through a lens. Sure, people would talk and a good amount would have found out about it, but it would not have been talked about around the entire world (twitter). Furthermore, because of twitter, it allowed anyone to voice their opinions on Cooper to millions of people, which they absolutely did. Other athletes, like Marcus Vick, and many non-athletes showed their anger and attacked Cooper via twitter. This would have never happened ten years ago before twitter and all of this advanced technology was created. The Riley Cooper incident is relevant to this course because this is a textbook situation that we could be in and might have to deal with in the future. Whether it be working in PR or being an SID, you never know what you might have to deal with or the decisions regarding players’ actions that you are going to have to make, especially due to the fact that athletes are constantly acting as they should not be and doing “stupid” things. Furthermore, this is relevant because we learned about the advancement in technology and how it took over the media; one little slip-up can make national news and really turn someone’s life around.

---

Analysis by Brooks Shyman in SRM 334 (section 2)

For our current event Sean and I chose the topic of Riley Cooper and we chose the article “Eagles Receiver Riley Cooper Uses Racial Slur at Kenny Chesney Concert.” The article starts by giving you background on what happened before the event. It tells you that Cooper and some of his teammates were even invited on stage to perform the song “Boys of Fall” with Chesney. Then the article goes on to explain the event behind Cooper using the racial slur. It also tells you that Cooper got into another verbal altercation with a group of people outside the concert, and has videos of both incidents. The article concludes by telling you how the Eagles organization feels about the article and tells whether or not they think the NFL will discipline Cooper.

The media took this story and ran with it. It was major news the second the video became public. This happened in large part to technology improving. Think about it, would this have even been a story 10 years ago in a time before cell phones and cell phone cameras? Now a day for athletes everything you do is documented and can be out in the media within 10 seconds of you doing it. Another media aspect to this story is twitter. Many athletes and celebrities were able to tweet out there opinions to millions of people in an instant. Even Cooper’s teammates were going out on twitter and criticizing him. But not only were people able to tweet their opinions; they could tweet directly to Riley Cooper themselves. And while I did not tweet to him, I can only imagine the kind of messages he was receiving. This story also shows you the power the media holds. This Riley Cooper incident in the media was about as big a story as Aaron Hernandez; and Aaron Hernandez is accused of murder. And of course, what Riley Cooper did was terrible, but to be held on virtually the same level as someone who’s accused and likely guilty of murder really shows you the power the media has over public opinion.

This article/incident is very relevant to us as a class. We all want to go into different jobs in this field, and some of us are bound to end up working in media. Whether its being in PR and having to clean up an incident in, or being a journalist and writing an article; it’s a predicament any one of us can be caught in the middle of. Also the media is changing, and it’s something that we will all have to adjust to. With all different kinds of social media out there, there are a lot more ways to break a story.

"Special Report on Oklahoma State Football: Part 5 -- The Fallout"

From Sports Illustrated

Analysis by Lindsay Butler in SRM 334 (section 2)

The Oklahoma State scandal is something we have seen time and time again in the world of college level sports. Players receiving payments or benefits of some sort as an incentive to push them to do their best and win is not a dirty secret kept by few, but instead a major issue on the rise, specifically in football. Although, Sports Illustrated shocks its audience when in a five-section spread they expose not only cash rewards but also drug use, female hostesses used for sex, and the falsifying of grades. With numerous players coming forward with allegations and accusations made against boosters, professors, and coaches the media became the number one information source for curious readers. 

Sports Illustrated broke the story in a way that would draw reader’s attention and keep them wanting more. Disguising an over talked on issue as something much more they released the story in sections with each headliner completely different from the last and never giving readers a conclusion telling them to wait for the next section. A cleaver marketing strategy that worked just how the SI team planned. Whether you believed the stories being released or thought it was a load of junk you would still read the story upon it being released to judge the information provided. After the fifth section finally hit the public, media sources of every kind began examining the content and looking to interview any party associated with the scandal.

ESPN reacted immediately with an article that questioned the credibility of those quoted in the SI release and pulled facts that disproved multiple claims made within it. With two of the largest sports outlets in the nation touching on the issue Oklahoma all of a sudden became a hot commodity and was receiving media coverage from every angle. If you hadn’t had the opportunity to read the full story on Sports Illustrated you could easily gain access to it through a link posted at the end of the article released in response to it by ESPN. In the modern world we live in today the internet is a powerful source and this scandal was not going to escape from it. Looking toward social outlets such as Twitter we see not only the accused players responding to the article but news sources tweeting quotes from interviews with those affected by its accusations. Potentially one of the most impacting articles in response to SI’s was from Kansas City Sports where they finally said what no one else had, “who cares”. Quotes from this particular article spread like wildfire through short clips posted on YouTube, and once again Twitter. As fans and spectators we crave the most up to date news on our favorite teams and wait for bad exposure for our least. It is the job of members of the media to exploit stories such as the scandal in Oklahoma State. The media touches the lives of nearly every citizen daily and it is their responsibility to find a way to make us stop and look at the stories they provide us with. The headlines chosen by Sports Illustrated were short and to the point so readers knew exactly what that portion of the article would be about before reading the first sentence. By breaking their story into sections SI also ensured that the interest level of readers would stay high until they had all the dirty details and could make a firm opinion of their own. Within the world of sports, communications is critical for the reason that it can either benefit you or you can become victim to its wrath but you can’t escape it. As a student with intentions of working in the field of sports I believe having the knowledge of dealing with media is extremely important for a successful career.

---

Analysis by John Boitnott in SRM 334 (section 2)

The five parts series of Sports Illustrated’s investigation into Oklahoma State’s football program included over 60 interviews of former players who talked about their experience while at the school. The five series addressed the money, the academics, the drugs, the sex, and then the fallout faced by many players after they were no longer on the team.

This story was investigated and reported by Sports Illustrated, arguably the nation’s most popular sports magazine. Whether through television channels, websites, social media, or in this case print media, the sports stories we talk about and discuss with the people around us are all influenced by the media and help shape our views of the issue. While these days ESPN seems to always be the ones that come out with the breaking news of what is going on in the sports world, it was interesting that Sports Illustrated (SI) was the first one to reveal the story. Most everyone in our class seemed to think that print media will completely die off within 10-15 years and is becoming less relevant to how we find out information. But with SI being the first to find out and tell us the information on such a huge story it showed that print media may not be as far behind digital and social media as some think. Because of a media source breaking the story the NCAA will most likely conduct their own investigation in the matter soon, and if SI didn’t shed light on the matter it is very possible the NCAA would not have found out about all the infractions and violations.This article was relevant to the course because it focuses on things we have discussed during class, such as how the players were interviewed and also how media loses trust when coaches or administrators do not communicate with the media. Both coaches Miles and Gundy would not talk about the subject when SI asked to interview them about what they knew, which led to the tone of the article having a lack of trust in the coaches due to their non-compliance when asked about the possible infractions their players may have committed.

"Rolling Stone Writer Believes Aaron Hernandez Could Be Back in NFL ‘Within Three or Four Years’"

From NESN

Analysis by Adam McElrath in SRM 334 (section 2)

With the Boston Marathon Bombings and the Aaron Hernandez arrest happening all within the month of June, the New England area has been the center of attention for the media in recent months. Jake and I have focused our attention to how the Hernandez arrest became all that was talked about on numerous television and social networks. We also wanted to take a different approach to our presentation and look at the future of Hernandez after coming across an article by Mike Cole of the New England Sports Network titled, “Rolling Stone Writer Believes Aaron Hernandez Could Be Back in NFL ‘Within Three or Four Years’” This article is interesting in many different ways. First off, at this point in time it seems farfetched that a return to the NFL for Hernandez is remotely possible. Also, in this article Cole interviewed Rolling Stones journalist Paul Solotaroff, who is responsible for writing a polarizing article delving into the criminal’s dark past with interviews involving close family and friends of Hernandez. From Cole’s interview with Solotaroff and his viewpoints on the legality of the case, we see a distant possibility of the John Mackey Award winner returning to the league. If this ever does happen and Hernandez is found innocent or completes a short term in prison, the media will have a frenzy speculating which teams will be willing to take the risk.

The media was in uproar when the story first broke back in the middle of June. With the bulk of the action being located in the town of Bristol, Connecticut, ESPN was one of the first to report on the subject. Shortly after ESPN arrived at Hernandez’s home, the word was out everywhere and from a viewers standpoint, it was almost impossible to escape the talk as Twitter and Facebook exploded with rumors and stories and how all major television networks were right in the heart of it all, covering it 24/7.

The mass media continues to put large emphasis when any new, developing stories arise involving the possible sentence Hernandez will face. TMZ outbid Barstool Sports for $20,000 over a handwritten letter from Hernandez in his jail cell to one of his friends as Hernandez kept pleading his innocence and how “God” has a plan for him all while begging his friend to keep this off social media. In this day in age, no matter how close of a friend he might be to the former Patriots’ tight end, no way was he not going to take this opportunity to bank a lot of cash.
All in all, as a student in a Sports in Media class, it is easy to see how the media loves to get their hands on intriguing stories before their competition does. And it is also obvious to see how these same people feel the urgency to be the first to break a story to the public. But with this being the case many rumors can start making their audience “trust” that they are being provided with facts ultimately leaving no chance for other opinions on the subject matter. In the Aaron Hernandez situation, the media has portrayed him in any way possible as a criminal, a convict, and a murderer.

---

Analysis by Jake Porter in SRM 334 (section 2)

While researching articles for this presentation Adam and I found a vast amount of reports that have detailed the Aaron Hernandez murder case. This made it very easy to find a relevant report even though we had to sift through and find what was fact and what was speculation. Our main article written by Mike Cole gives a somewhat fresh viewpoint on a story that has already been blown out of the water by major news outlets like ESPN, CNN, CBS, etc. This article introduces the idea that Aaron Hernandez could possibly be integrated back into the NFL, given that he beats the multiple murder charges standing in front of him.

In the article Mike Cole interviews Paul Solotaroff, writer for the Rolling Stones, who claims that Hernandez can easily beat the alleged murder charges set before him. The article explains that Hernandez is likely looking at about 3 years of jail time for gun charges, but Aaron is young and pending his release will have, "very low mileage on those legs of his and a lot of time to heal up" (Cole). Paul is later quoted in the article that he would not be surprised if some NFL teams pursued Hernandez if or when the charges are dropped against him.

No one knows what the future really holds for Aaron Hernandez. The future may l look grim to some, but there are plenty of optimists out there that would not be surprised to see Hernandez back in the league within the next half decade. During the course of this project it has been interesting to see the role the media has played in this case. From the day the story broke to the weeks following it seemed that most major news outlets covered every minute detail. Even though the story has died off in recent months, the media can still play a big role in the future. Hypothetically if Hernandez is released and charges are dropped, the media will play a huge role integrating him back into the league, because they have the influence to turn a man once seen as a monster back into a cherished NFL superstar.