Media Curmudgeon

« Why We Should Care About Chauncey Bailey's Murder | Main | Journalism Educators Behind the Curtain »

August 09, 2007

Bonds Coverage

Even though I hate Barry Bonds, I watched ESPN Tuesday night to see if he was going to break Hank Aaron’s all-time home run record of 755. He did, and ESPN provided straightforward coverage—nothing exceptional or glitzy, just solid, objective coverage. ESPN and its second-string announcers let Bonds be the star, which wouldn’t have happened if the self-absorbed blowhard Chris Berman had been in the broadcast booth.

ESPN’s baseball play-by-play A-team of John Miller and Joe Morgan were not the announcers. Miller was calling the game for KNBR-AM, his regular gig, and I had heard that the acerbic Joe Morgan didn’t want to call the record-breaking home run. I’m with Morgan; I wouldn’t have wanted to be part of it either.

For me the star of the evening was Hank Aaron. To everyone’s surprise, Aaron gave a 51-second video-taped congratulatory tribute to Bonds. Aaron was gracious and eloquent. He said, “I would like to offer my congratulations to Barry Bonds on becoming baseball’s career home-run leader. It is a great accomplishment, which required skill, longevity and determination.” He ended by saying, “My hope today, as it was on that April evening in 1974, is that the achievement of this record will inspire others to chase their own dreams.” In other words, he hopes someone will beat Bonds fair and square.

In the sports world it was common knowledge that the beloved Aaron felt that Bonds had probably cheated and taken performance enhancing drugs and steroids to help him chase his hallowed 33-year-old record, and wanted no part in congratulating Bonds. But he relented, and his tribute to Bonds was pure class—the very opposite of Bonds.

Sports heroes are role models for young people, whether or not they believe it or like it. We would all like for our children to grow up to be polite, gracious, and dignified like Aaron, not mean, nasty, selfish cheaters like Bonds. That’s why I think Aaron stole the show—he was the star; he was the role model, not Bonds.

Wednesday morning, NPR once again demonstrated that it knows nothing whatsoever about sports. It covered the Bonds record-breaking blast, reluctantly, I’m sure (and it sounded like reluctant coverage), and interviewed John Miller. NPR wrongly identified him as “ESPN’s John Miller,” and did so twice, so it was no mistake. NPR should have identified Miller as “KNBR’s John Miller,” which ESPN radio correctly did that same morning. The NPR Miller interview was perfunctory, while ESPN’s “Mike and Mike in the Morning” program asked smart questions and got equally smart answers. ESPN Radio’s coverage was excellent—in depth, balanced, and thoughtful. It didn’t duck the steroids issue but gave Bonds the credit he deserves for an amazing accomplishment.

NPR shouldn't try to cover sports and it should get rid of of the arrogant, elitist, dull snob, Frank Deford. Let him do program on satellite radio with Bob Edwards--two boring peas in a pod.

The New York Times coverage was factual, but pontificatingly ponderous, as usual with sports. The Times’ Bonds editorial on Thursday was judgmental, boring, self-righteous, and prissy—well, the NY Times. The Times should drop its pitiful, ad-bare sports section (the fact that advertisers won’t touch it should give them a clue) and tell people if they want sports, go to ESPN.com. I mean, after all, how much political news do you get on ESPN? The only good piece I’ve read in the Times’ so-called sports section was by Selena Roberts, published April 8, and titled, “The Road to Success Is Paved by Cheating.” Let Roberts blog about sports, but drop the sports section—send traffic to ESPN.com and make a deal to share ad revenue. The Times would cut expenses and increase revenues—something Sulzberger doesn’t seem to know how to do.

Posted by Charles Warner at August 9, 2007 11:29 PM

Comments

bob hoffman at August 10, 2007 08:37 PM writes:

Post a comment