The first name in second reads.
Economic crisis gets "sports-ized"
Calhoun's tirade begs bigger economic questions
It's a basic principle of journalism: Localization - the process of taking a national news story and relating to the audience in your geographic area. And when the story is as big as a nationwide economic crisis, it's sure to be localized... but how about "sports-ized?"
Stories have been cropping up in the national sports media -- namely SportsCenter -- regarding the economy's impact on the sporting world. Most are legit, new concerns such as burdened MLB teams dealing their top earners long before the trade deadline to free-up some funds or the NBA taking out a $200 million loan to help some 12 of its teams. But it was a blow-up from a college basketball coach earlier this week that got the Disney media giant at its cross-coverage best.
On Saturday, following a victory over South Florida, UConn's Jim Calhoun had some harsh words for a reporter (a freelancer, btw) who questioned Calhoun's $1.6 million salary. That figure makes Calhoun the highest paid state employee in Connecticut, a state which is facing billion-dollar deficits. You can see the video here, but Calhoun says he won't "give a dime back," and goes on to justify his compensation -- as most in sports do -- by talking about the profitablility of his program.
Coverage stayed pretty quite early in the week, but eventually, the mainstream media had caught wind of the story (and Calhoun had won his 800th) and it showed up on "Good Morning America" (on ESPN-sister-network ABC). Following the package, they went live with "Mike and Mike" - on GMA, I remind you - for some additional "expert analysis." And then later, on "Mike and Mike," the Mikes returned the cross-promotion favor having ABC anchor Charlie Gibson on their show.
The salaries of sport figures is a routinely debated topic, and given the current economic climate, you can't blame ABC and ESPN for to joining up to discuss. I think Calhoun's reaction was a bit overly-spirited, but his justification - as oft-used as it is - holds up. The biggest problem I have in this whole scenario is with Ken Krayeske, the reporter who posed the question.
Calhoun was right to want to keep the line of questioning on basketball; It was a postgame press conference. And while I think Krayeske had a legit question (and a potentially deep story brewing), he chose the wrong time and place to ask it. A story of that nature is better served with a sit-down, private interview.
There's a heap of issues to comment on here: ESPN/ABC cross-coverage, sports and the economy, the Calhoun/Krayeske incident and so on. Pick you poison and get to it below.
Stories have been cropping up in the national sports media -- namely SportsCenter -- regarding the economy's impact on the sporting world. Most are legit, new concerns such as burdened MLB teams dealing their top earners long before the trade deadline to free-up some funds or the NBA taking out a $200 million loan to help some 12 of its teams. But it was a blow-up from a college basketball coach earlier this week that got the Disney media giant at its cross-coverage best.
On Saturday, following a victory over South Florida, UConn's Jim Calhoun had some harsh words for a reporter (a freelancer, btw) who questioned Calhoun's $1.6 million salary. That figure makes Calhoun the highest paid state employee in Connecticut, a state which is facing billion-dollar deficits. You can see the video here, but Calhoun says he won't "give a dime back," and goes on to justify his compensation -- as most in sports do -- by talking about the profitablility of his program.
Coverage stayed pretty quite early in the week, but eventually, the mainstream media had caught wind of the story (and Calhoun had won his 800th) and it showed up on "Good Morning America" (on ESPN-sister-network ABC). Following the package, they went live with "Mike and Mike" - on GMA, I remind you - for some additional "expert analysis." And then later, on "Mike and Mike," the Mikes returned the cross-promotion favor having ABC anchor Charlie Gibson on their show.
The salaries of sport figures is a routinely debated topic, and given the current economic climate, you can't blame ABC and ESPN for to joining up to discuss. I think Calhoun's reaction was a bit overly-spirited, but his justification - as oft-used as it is - holds up. The biggest problem I have in this whole scenario is with Ken Krayeske, the reporter who posed the question.
Calhoun was right to want to keep the line of questioning on basketball; It was a postgame press conference. And while I think Krayeske had a legit question (and a potentially deep story brewing), he chose the wrong time and place to ask it. A story of that nature is better served with a sit-down, private interview.
There's a heap of issues to comment on here: ESPN/ABC cross-coverage, sports and the economy, the Calhoun/Krayeske incident and so on. Pick you poison and get to it below.
Comment using
