Is ESPN The Real World Wide Leader in Sports?
| 14
|
by user AWeiner18
This weekend I was just reading Scoop Jackson's article on his working relationship with Jason Whitlock. Now as a die-hard sports fan, I was not aware of the comments Whitlock said about Jackson and Mike Lupica. So I investigated, read Whitlock's column in The Kansas City Star, and made a general opinion.
I am not going to take either Whitlock or Jackon's side. The reason is because I do not know EVERYTHING. But the biggest factor of making an overall decision was in Whitlock's article. He discussed his decision to leave, or in other terms, why he was fired, citing that "ESPN did not approve his criticial comments." He has questioned ESPN in their overall take on journalism.
With that said, I concluded that Whitlock is right in one thing: ESPN is getting out of hand. ESPN fired Whitlock for freedom of speech but why did they hire a former drug addict (Michael Irvin), and a talking head that doesn't care what he says about people (Rush Limbaugh). They have fired Harold Reynolds for undisclosed reasons, but in all honesty what did nice man Reynolds do to deserve his dismissal? And they fired Sterling Sharpe too...but why? And why did they hire Jim Rome?
Quite frankly I am a little disappointed in ESPN. Are they really the World Wide Leader? They are starting to hurt their reputation for being too media friendly and not as opinionated. Scoop Jackson's article is what ESPN needs; a debate between two columnists.
One great thing that will remain with ESPN: Bill Simmons.
