Sprinter-Turned-Bobsletter Lolo Jones Misses Power of Sarcasm, Social Media with Video

Lolo Jones (AP Photo)

Mark this down as latest example of an athlete who makes a fool of themselves on social media. And afterward -- after the reaction that anyone with even a tad of common sense could predict -- any amount of clarification and positive spin does not help.

Lolo Jones, the Olympic caliber hurdler best known for her good looks, close-but-not-quite finishes on the biggest stages for simply being well known, spent the past seven months working the the U.S. bobsled team, attempting to transfer her athleticism and speed into a spot with the team at the Winter Olympics. She helped the U.S. team win three medals in her first season.

Still, her recent foray into social media put a damper on what's been a somewhat positive story when she posted a video about what she considered her paltry paycheck ($741.84) for seven months of work with the team. Of course, she's much better off than many members of the team because of her numerous sponsorships.

So, the video was in poor taste and poorly timed.

Other members of the bobsled team complained, including U.S. gold medalist Steven Holcomb. He told USA Today, "It wasn't very well taken. People were really kind of insulted. You just make $741, more than most athletes in the sport. So what are you complaining about?"

While Jones later issued a statement to clarify she was trying to point out the lack of monetary support for bobsled competitors and teams, it was too little and too late.

Sarcasm never plays on social media, and rarely plays much better on video. Trying to salvage it afterward did not make her look like a champion for her fellow competitors or the sport. It just made her look like someone trying to stop the bleeding, maintain her other sponsorships and perhaps even keep a spot on the bobsled team going forward.

Bloggers, Commentators and Social Media Types A-Twitter About Ombudsman, But There's More

Robert Lipsyte

One man rarely garners general support (let alone a majority) from the strong pool of critics, reporters and writers who cover sports media on a regular basis.

With so much passion and talent, those commentators have deeply rooted opinions and they're not afraid to share what they think.

In the case of ESPN ombudsman Robert Lipsyte, though, there has been unusual unanimity -- and almost a giddiness. It seems everyone with a blog or word processor wants someone to critique the work of ESPN. Or they at least want validation of their own critiques of the all-sports network.

They clearly think that's coming with the naming of Lipsyte, the accomplished author and journalist, formerly of The New York Times. A longtime critic of the "jock culture" of TV sports, Lipsyte will write his first column for ESPN later this month.

Still, at 75 and an admitted observer of many things other than ESPN, Lipsyte's 18-month tenure could be interesting -- both for what it produces that makes the cadre of critics happy and, perhaps, for what it does not produce or any results that the supporters find unsatisfying.

Sports Illustrated standout Richard Deitsch provided a quality question-and-answer session with Lipsyte as part of a recent column, and almost cheerleader-type support has come from folks such as Josh Koblin of Deadspin and Ed Sherman of the Sherman Report on recent weeks.

After the SI interview, Koblin and Sherman used the Q-and-A session as a source for additional insights about Lipsyte, and perhaps some slightly cautionary hints about what they expect and what Lipsyte might deliver.

Because of ESPN's impact and sheer size, an ombudsman that critiques the company's work fills a necessary role. After all, an organization can get too big and overstep its bounds. And, along with the broadcasts and on-air action, ESPN's many business relationships inevitably muddy the waters that shape what viewers watch.

In fact, that's one area that might eventually provide a point of conflict for commentators and Lipsyte.

In so many ways, sports business and sports media overlap and even rely on each other. Beyond observing and reporting about what happens on air, Lipsyte will need to bring an understanding of the business (as well as the many factors and people that influence it) in order to do his job to the satisfaction of other commentators.

At the same time, he told Deitsch he plans to derive a decent amount of his direction from the comments of ESPN viewers.

Well, what if it turns out those fellow commentators are worried about different things than ESPN's viewers? How will the former react when Lipsyte serves the latter first and foremost?

No doubt, it's a good move, a journalistic tradition, for ESPN to have an in-house advocate for viewers and a critic for itself, but the largely positive initial support for Lipsyte by other commentators seems to indicate ESPN has an abundance of reasons to apologize for its work. That's just not necessarily the case. And there's no reason other sports media outlets -- especially those quite similar to ESPN -- have not been scrutinized for their lack of an ombudsman or viewer advocate.

Along with the joy of ESPN adding Lipsyte, there should also be a clamor for Fox Sports 1, NBC Sports Network and even CBS Sports Network to find someone for a similar role. The opportunity for those outlets (which range from less-proven challengers to start ups when compared to ESPN) to bend journalistic rules or conduct themselves poorly exists just as much -- and maybe more -- than at the "worldwide leader."

Holding ESPN to a different standard because of its impact and size makes sense, but not holding its rivals (even if that's a charitable term in this case) to any standard makes no sense at all.

'Small' Outlet Hampers Paterno Family Message

After months of anticipation and waiting, the family of Joe Paterno broke its silence and offered more fuel for the ongoing fire of the Jerry Sandusky scandal and aftermath at Penn State when it announced that it was filing suit against the NCAA this week.

Others named in the suit were NCAA president Mark Emmert and Oregon State president Edward Ray, who was chair of the NCAA's executive committee when the NCAA announced its sanctions against Penn State.

In the view of many at Penn State and especially Paterno supporters, the NCAA last July coerced the university into accepting a "consent decree" based on the findings of the controversial Freeh Report rather than completing its usual investigation process or offering some sort of due process.

The announcement of the lawsuit was not unexpected, and the suit was joined by a handful of Penn State board of trustees members as well as an interesting mix of former players -- everything from former captains to at least one player with well-publicized legal problems.

Still, the family's official legal response was an important message that needed to be shared. It was another step in the ongoing saga at Penn State.

It's a saga that has played out fairly typically for the media as well -- with a hefty reaction to the initial story and then a somewhat subdued or quiet response to nuances and updates along the way ... especially those that might contradict initial storylines.

Unfortunately for the Paternos and their supporters, the medium they chose to share their message this week was "smaller" than the message itself and what the family really needed -- some sort of validation from the show's host -- was lost as well.

When the Sandusky scandal broke, NBC and its then-recently launched news program "Rock Center with Brian Williams" was the forum for sharing information about the scandal at Penn State. The show and its Penn State segment were the centerpiece of a primetime schedule for the network. The story was the keystone for a couple of episodes in back-to-back weeks, as well as subsequent updates.

In the initial episode that focused on the story, generally respected NBC Sports veteran Bob Costas conducted an interview with former Penn State defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky that garnered abundant attention and propelled the show's ratings. Millions of people watched, and formed opinions as a result.

It was actually a high point for the ill-fated "Rock Center," which was canceled earlier this year.

Conversely, the episode of "Costas Tonight" with the Paterno family response on Wednesday night aired 42 minutes later than it's scheduled 11 p.m. airtime on NBC Sports Network, which gets watched by a fraction of the audience of NBC or ESPN, even on a good day.

Segments, including some video, from the show were shared with other media outlets before the episode aired but, simply put, not many people got to see the Paterno's side of the story.

Plus, for the Paternos and their supporters (whose lawsuit seems less frivolous as the missteps of the NCAA become more obvious to a wider audience) the news of the lawsuit was not really what mattered. Again, people expected a lawsuit.

More than anything, the Paternos and their supporters -- who could eventually emerge victorious in the court of public opinion because of the NCAA's ongoing problems and the questions that come to mind with a logical examination of the case -- need some sort of seemingly high-profile neutral voice in their corner.

That could've been Costas, who pledged a few months ago to review the Freeh Report (because of problems with it that have become obvious) and the situation in general. His opinion and response were not among the take-away messages from the latest episode of "Costas Tonight" or the latest episode in the Penn State saga overall, though.

If the family's opportunity to to share its side of the story ends up as the extent of Costas's evaluation, that might be a little less than the Paternos need. And, if the story continues to play out on a barely watched and under-distributed sports channel, that's not a good thing either -- even if the host ranks as one of the best in the business.

No Nuance -- Just Pontification and Preaching

In lieu of facts and often without a timely point to be made (especially during a long offseason), college football relies on pontification and preaching in an effort to shape perceptions. It's all a power play.

Unfortunately, the media never really knows how to handle such messages or even play the game -- and that's especially so when those messages are delivered by coaches.

For many reasons -- from the desire to be first with news or an ongoing effort to secure higher ratings -- the media simply stumbles. There's no nuance or perspective. All to happy to have anything to report, the media amplifies the shouting, diminishes up the quality of the message and gives fans/viewers less as a result.

Simply ignoring the inane never seems to be an option, either.

In just the past couple weeks, there have been several examples of the approach, as well as the meaningless results.

First, no radio or TV station could avoid the booster club-style remarks of Michigan coach Brady Hoke as he playfully jabbed Notre Dame and its supporters about the end of the schools' series. He talked about the Irish "chickening out" when speaking to a group of Michigan supporters, and in this age of social media the comments got attention all over the country.

Still, the comments were intended mostly for the people in the room, and every media member who propelled them further knew that as well. So, the amplification was irresponsible.

Sure, Hoke's opinions matter but as much as he knows all the factors that play into the hiatus for an on-field football series between Michigan and Notre Dame so too does the media know that he's just making a point in a room full of die-hard supporters of his program. For the comment to go much farther beyond that is simply sloppy.

At the same time, any message delivered over and over sometimes becomes almost accepted as fact -- and that seems to be the approach of some Southeastern Conference football coaches and programs when it comes to Alabama coach Nick Saban.

Too often in recent months, rival coaches have -- again, mostly in program-specific booster sessions -- referred to him as "the devil" or even "Nicky Satan."

Again, they might be nice laugh lines, a cool jab for folks in on the joke, but it should take more for it to become news -- and unfortunately it does not. Vanderbilt coach James Franklin later apologized for his line, "Nicky Satan," but that did not stop Florida offensive line coach Tim Davis from taking a shot at a man on whom's staff he previously worked.

Said Davis when comparing Florida coach Will Muschamp (also a former Saban assistant) to Saban: "I've always wanted to work with Will. Will's got a plan. Will coached under the devil himself for seven years. I only did three. He did seven. And is DNA is not any different than Nick."

Really? You have to wonder how Davis's time served ("only did three") helped propel his career. You also have to wonder how Saban can be so evil is Muschamp's DNA is not any different.

It's just meaningless bull -- a coach talking to hear himself -- and not really news. But, barring any real context or depth, minus a story on anything related to the academics or safety of student-athletes, sports fans get such drivel instead. Sure, the comments end up on message boards after boosters parrot them when they get home from rah-rah events, but there should be a difference between message board fare and honest-to-goodness journalism.

Agreements, New Network Ensure Profits, Stability

While the on-field action at the top level of college sports might not officially be irrelevant or secondary, it certainly took a backseat to a couple of sports-media moves announced in recent weeks that have ensured the profitability and stability of intercollegiate athletics for years to come.

The long-expected announcement of the SEC Network came this week. It's a deal about longevity and revenue.

The Southeastern Conference and ESPN announced the 20-year agreement through 2034 to create and operate a multi-platform network that will launch in August 2014 and be based in Charlotte, N.C. The deal gives CBS Sports the one football game it has had each week for years (usually at 3:30 p.m. Saturday) and the rest of the inventory belongs to ESPN outlets, including the SEC Network.

According to several different sources for revenue estimates, the SEC Network could generate as much as $29 million per season per school, slightly more than the $25 million produced by the Big Ten Network -- which created the business model for conference channels that has produced huge profits and prompted imitators (such as the SEC Network).

The SEC Network could have some advantages, too.

First and foremost, there's ESPN's muscle and multi-platform promotional approach. While the Big Ten Network and partner Fox (which owns 51 percent of BTN) have set an impressive and profitable standard for such a conference channel, ESPN remains the biggest player in the big-money sports business.

In addition, the Big Ten Network has limited itself in a way the SEC Network might not. By not accepting ads for alcohol and other vices, the BTN has made money with some apparent standards. It's not clear the SEC Network would partner with such advertisers, but the SEC has never attempted to burden itself with all the academics-first and student-athlete rhetoric of its rival conference to the north.

Because ESPN has a 100-percent ownership stake in the outlet, the SEC Network could also impact everything from game selection to college football news in general -- including what gets covered and what does not. At the least, it will impact the perception of those things.

The 20-year agreement gives conference members guaranteed revenue, and a reason to stay put. Not that any school would consider leaving the SEC.

Last month, though, the Atlantic Coast Conference moved to keep its teams from departing through a similar approach -- when all current ACC members surrendered their media rights to the conference, even if they were to leave the league. Because TV money holds the key to any conference's lifeblood, that move prevents any program from exiting for the Big Ten Network or someplace else.

That approach was a bit more unexpected, an unusual, than creating a conference network, but it certainly made an impression. And it should keep the ACC together and viable -- perhaps for as long as the ESPN-SEC deal lasts. (Or at least until some other really rich conference, one like the Big Ten or SEC that has its own network, figures out a way to make a move somehow more lucrative for a school to move.)

While the ESPN-SEC agreement does not automatically result in riches for everyone involved, it's darn close, and work during the next 15 months -- as ESPN and the SEC Network iron out agreements with cable networks throughout the Southeast -- could hold the biggest key to what happens initially.

For example, Big Ten Conference officials had trouble getting some cable networks agree to carry their network (it took more than a year in some instances), but once a cable company came on board the channel could start collecting higher per-subscriber fees to carry the channel. If the rabid approach of SEC fans carries over to their cable subscribers, those negotiations could be interesting.

They'll either go quickly, because cable operators will know they need the programming to keep viewers happy, or they could become contentious and lag. In that case, it'll be interesting to see who gets painted as the bad guy in the process.

Either way, the profits will come for conference members. And with that comes a reason to embrace stability.

An Anniversary, An Apology and More

Sports media reaction has been predictable in the wake of Jason Collins' announcement that he's gay.

The free agent NBA center, who has played for a half dozen teams during his 12 years as a pro, made his coming-out announcement in Sports Illustrated this week. It's the magazine's cover story (LINK) and it ignited a to-be-expected mix of knee-jerk reaction, thoughtful response and, not surprisingly, media-on-media attacks as people shared their opinions.

Reaction on on radio and TV ranged from ignoring the information (an approach championed by satellite radio sports-talk heavyweight Chris Russo) to focused discussion, as should be expected on ESPN's usually excellent "Outside the Lines."

Still, no matter the venue, lines were drawn. And one of the early notable lines was drawn by ESPN the Magazine senior writer Chris Broussard, who left the politically correct approach at the curb when he shared his opinion on the matter. That response can be found in the first of two links below. At the same time, Broussard showed his personal opinions do not impact his reporting during a "SportsCenter" segment, visible in the second of two links below.

Broussard Video -- Opinion on 'OTL' / Reporting on the NBA

There's nothing wrong with what Broussard did in either appearance. Maybe he was too frank on a touchstone topic, but he was doing his job. And where other media members, or members of the public, fail the media and themselves is when they criticize Broussard for having an opinion. He has been open about his opinion on the matter before, and he knows the climate that exists around team sports in the United States.

Many people who cover sports, play sports or watch sports have many divergent opinions on controversial topics. Broussard should not be penalized -- in any way -- for doing his job.

Collins' announcement follows months of buildup (and some legitimate news) for the NFL Draft. In fact, the NFL (and the Collins news this morning) has relegated other potentially important and interesting sports media news to almost irrelevant or overlooked status in the past week or so.

Here's a look at some of what should stand out -- as well as a couple pieces of news sports media types have given a little too much attention.

Act: Anniversary of launch of "Wide World of Sports," April 29
React: Hardly anybody mentioned the anniversary of the first quality sports anthology show, and that's a shame. It was probably a non-starter to begin with, especially because the last episode ended in 1998 and the show probably became irrelevant as much as a decade before that, but "Wide World of Sports" created an approach, launched numerous trend-setting careers and saved a network, ABC. The show was imitated, but never successfully, and it remains a cultural touchstone as well as a piece of American  history -- because it introduced so many people in the United States to their neighbors, both near and far, competing in everything from the offbeat to world-class sports.


Act: "Monday Night Football" play-by-play man Al Michaels remains silent
React: It's been a couple of weeks since Michaels was arrested and charged with in with driving under the influence. Yes, he was barely over the legally intoxicated limit, but it's time for him to apologize. As DUIs go, his case seems mundane (though some would certainly argue there's no such thing). Still, that's the process ... make a mistake, take cover from your network's publicist and eventually apologize. It will not prevent him from doing his job, but it's interesting that it's gone this long without an apology.


Act: Love for ESPN's "Elway to Marino"
React: Another standout film in the "30 for 30" series -- an endeavor that regularly showcases the best of the all-sports network and its partners for the films. In this case, the film (and it's a film, not a documentary) was carried perfectly by agent Marvin Demoff and his meticulous notes. Every piece of archival coverage was appropriate and the interviews hit the mark as well. The commitment to reconstruct the ballroom where the draft was held in 1983 was a nice touch as well.

Act: ESPN names Robert Lipsyte as ombudsman
React: The award-winning writer and author begins an 18-month stint as ESPN's fifth ombudsman in June. He'll offer independent analysis and critiques of ESPN's work. It's a necessary role, and a position sports media types have wanted filled for months. Still, it's a position few beyond the business care about. It's an appropriate and interesting hire, but the question is how many people will notice. Then again, if he points out the gaffe's ESPN makes (especially if it continues with some of its recent problems in the past 18-plus months), Lipsyte should not have a hard time getting attention for his work.

Act: Media awaits announcement of selection committee for College Football Playoff
React: Sorry, it just seems to be much ado about nothing. People in charge will invest hundreds of thousands of dollars informing the committee, transporting the committee, housing the committee and making it's work possible and all they have to do is select the top four teams to participate in the so-called playoff system. (Keep in mind it's nothing more than a plus-one approach, but that's another topic for another day.) Honestly, the only thing a committee could do would be to cause problems. The previously existing BCS formula worked as best it could, and someone will still run those models. About the only thing a committee could do to prove it was working wold be to select a team from outside the polls' top four ... and once they do that there will be all kinds of emotional, and probably appropriate, reaction. Waiting to see who gets named to a group that has, at most, a ceremonial role -- or should have only a ceremonial role -- seems much ado about nothing.

NFL Draft Offers Proven, Reliable Reality TV

It was the first and it remains the best. In the world of sports, as in the world of reality television, the NFL Draft holds an unrivaled position.

From Thursday through Saturday, with start-to-finish coverage on two networks (ESPN, NFL Network), the draft will attract viewership that dwarfs just about every other sporting event on TV -- except for NFL games themselves.

The draft is a near-perfect, made-for-TV event, with established stars from college football up for grabs, a reliable schedule, with predetermined time periods between selections, and a rooting interest for dozens of different fan bases. It works as something a hard-core fan could watch from beginning to end, and it works as background noise -- providing regular news and easy-to-find entry points for viewers to get information whenever they want.

Both ESPN and NFL Network will provide on-screen tickers of players selected by team as well as by position. With viewers used to on-screen information now more than ever, they'll be able to see who was just picked, who picks next, and who remains as the best available talent, according to the networks' respective experts.

In addition, thanks to cooperation from the broadcast partners and the NFL, viewers even get a play-along, top-down approach to the selection process. Never mind breaking any news, neither ESPN nor the NFL Network plans to have its reporters reveal picks before they're announced by the commissioner during the first round Thursday or the second round Friday.

After that, though, news might come without having to originate from the mouth of a league official first.

Still, most viewers (87 percent, according to a poll by Sports Business Daily) like the approach. It might  be ceding control to the league, but fans appreciate and trust the TV approach that has been crafted and protected by the NFL and its partners in regard to the draft.

They should, too, because the NFL does the draft well.

Great Guide
No one who writes about the draft and what to expect on TV does it as completely, or as well, as Richard Deitsch of Sports Illustrated. His preview of what to expect, and some strong opinions about who to watch and why, follows.
LINK: Media Circus