Lalala - Not listening to you, Ombudsman

June 6th, 2006 | Posted by PostmanE

If you’re unaware, ESPN has been publishing columns by its Ombudsman, George Solomon, on the front page of ESPN.com for some time now.

Typically, the columns are built on relatively light-hearted criticism of ESPN’s operations. George will bristle Bristol a little bit, asking politely if those kids could stop, you know, practicing a perverted devolution of respectable journalism, please. Please?

But Solomon’s last column - titled “ESPN needs more journalism, less sensationalism” - is basically about the greatest thing I’ve ever read. Therefore, it’s pretty much 100% guaranteed no one in power at ESPN is going to give it even a second glance.

It even includes anonymous comments from people inside the organization, whose names Solomon conceals so as to “protect the innocent families.” Ha. Ha. We would chuckle, if we couldn’t very clearly picture telescreens in every cubicle.

To his credit, Solomon pulls no punches in this column, though. Let’s check it out (Solomon in italics):

GS: Would love to see more journalism and text-driven stories - ESPN has the resources do more of “Outside The Lines”-type journalism, but much of that work doesn’t translate into exciting television. Still, ESPN has the responsibility and a staff capable of doing more than it currently does.

Yes. It does. But Silly George, that’s not as much fun as watching Bob Knight yell at people.

GS: Covering the big-name stars and doing the sensational story vs. reporting the hard news and simply telling a good story.

I don’t know what you’re talking about. I’ve never seen ESPN over-cover anyone before.

GS: …such as Terrell Owens and Barry Bonds…

Oh. Right.

GS: Too many mistakes made during the course of a day’s news cycle without an appropriate and sufficiently visible method of making corrections.

Clearly, ESPN does not make mistakes, or they would correct themselves all the time. ESPN DOES NOT MAKE MISTAKES!

GS: Too much on-air use of former athletes over more experienced sports reporters and commentators.

Not even going to touch this one. Leaving that to the professionals, am I.

GS: Let me declare that I believe NO ombudsman, or sports editor, has ever been asked to pose for GQ, the classy monthly men’s magazine. Still, I was surprised, and not so pleased, to see the GQ promotion this month featuring SportsCenter anchors Steve Levy, Trey Wingo, Mike Greenberg, John Anderson, Chris Berman, Kenny Mayne and Jay Harris modeling clothing for LYCRA, NYNE, CoolMax and Macy’s.

Al Jaffe, ESPN vice president for talent and production recruitment, said permission for such outside activities would be withheld if “the commercial or service was done by an announcer who might be asked to comment on the product he or she has endorsed.” I know I’m out of touch, but I still view these guys as news anchors and reporters.

Ohhhhh, man. It’s like he just wants to come out and say it, but can’t. Come on George. You can do it. Say it with me now. These guys are dou-…these guys are douche…these guys are douchebags! Douchebags!

(Well, except Kenny Mayne. He was kind of cool like 10 years ago.)

GS: The Sunday Conversations on SportsCenter, as well as other interviews, should be sharper, with more edge. That would mean asking tougher questions. And I would add a personal plea for additional post-game interviews on SportsCenter with players and coaches, as ESPNEWS does so well.

But, if you ask the tough questions, then people won’t sit down for the interview, George. You see George, people like Barry Bonds want Jim Gray to interview them, because they know the final edited product - little more than a promotional, “I’m a humble, normal athlete” video - will be aired under the guise of “news” in millions of homes around the country at absolutely no cost to the athlete. You can’t pay for that kind of advertising, George! It’s brilliant!

Which brings us to our next problem entirely…

GS: Bonds on hold - ESPN announced May 24 that it was putting the “Bonds on Bonds” series - which has run weekly since April 4 - on hold. While the production by the Tollin/Robbins company was often creative, and seeing Bonds in different situations was sometimes interesting, the ethics of having the network’s original entertainment division in a business relationship with someone so prominent in the news was not worth the conflicts.

Oh, so that’s why ESPN cancelled “Bonds on Bonds” - the journalistic compromise the network faced (see below). Hmm. That’s why. Funny, because I thought it might have been due to the fact that no one was watching, because Barry Bonds did steroids, and NO ONE LIKES HIM OR WANTED HIM TO BREAK THE RECORD.

GS: ESPN’s decision to air the series caused some resentment inside and outside the network’s Bristol headquarters. Some viewers even expressed unhappiness over ESPN’s cut-in shots of Bonds’ at-bats in his efforts to tie and surpass Ruth’s 714 career mark. It put the news division, including reporter Pedro Gomez, in a difficult position.

Certainly not the first difficult position Pedro’s been forced to submit to at the hands of Barry. Oh - ba dum ching! But seriously, people with degrees from high-ranking journalism institutions had a problem with airing a show on a news network over which the main subject of such news had strict editorial control? Really, they had a problem with that?

It goes on, but you get the point. I really like Solomon, and I guess ESPN deserves the credit for having an Ombudsman at all.

But if the concerns the Ombudsman airs publicly aren’t dealt with internally - and they won’t be - what’s the point?