Sports talk radio. It seems like the only time you hear about it is when somebody says something crass or offensive (read: Rush Limbaugh). Basically like vocal blogging (only with FCC regulations), it’s an opportunity for sports fans to hear opinions and share opinions on the current events of the sports world. According to a Sports Business Journal article, “Credibility Helps Esiason Establish Broadcasting Career,” Rick Reilly once said that “It’s delivered to people who are holding down couch springs by people who should be holding down couch springs” (Kavanagh 38). (http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/58094)
That is one opinion, but it got me thinking. Sports radio provides opportunity for fans to agree and disagree with the host and each other, an interactive medium of sorts. Reilly’s stereotype of the average sports talk listener may seem unfair, but with so few of my friends listening to sports talk at all, it’s difficult to make an assumption either way. A lot of people these days seem to be getting their news online or from TV, so is sports talk dying out?
Chapter 5 of Wenner’s “MediaSport” talks about television and the changing scope of the relationship of sports and the media. Sports and television were made for each other, as we like to see the amazing plays, again and again, not just hear about them. Not only that, but it is a monumental revenue source for every sport, star athlete, and TV network itself. As supported from Chapter 5, “Television through its power to manufacture ‘stars,’ sell products, alter lifestyles, and most importantly, commodify audiences made spectator sports an element of mainstream culture” (Bellamy, Jr. 74). Radio can only offer this on a small level, and really has to have a loyal following to have any sort of success, it just seems a little flat compared to full screen video play-by-play.
From Raney and Bryant’s “Handbook of Sports and Media,” Owens has an entirely different view. He thinks that radio can only continue to expand, “…as radio reshapes itself through the advancement of alternative delivery methods” (28). Though I don’t doubt that satellite radio, and its sports talk channels, have a loyal following, doesn’t this “reshaping” takes away the essence of participating and listening to sports talk radio? It is no longer a medium for everyone like it was before.
With new technologies like blogging and podcasts, the Internet and 24/7 coverage at your texting fingertips, it feels like sports talk radio is more of a dying breed than an advancing medium. Do you agree or disagree? Are you a sports talk listener, or have you been in the past? Do new media take away the interactivity of sports talk radio, a major selling point of its success in the first place?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
When you look at sports talk radio, I believe there are two ways of looking at it. For one, it has been an evolving medium as it has expanded its coverage with the help of syndication and the use of Satellite Radio. According to Owens, Sirius inked the NBA and NFL for coverage of their games, while XM picked up the MLB and NASCAR (124-25)
ReplyDeleteThe other way to look at sports radio is that it has stuck to its root. Radio will always be radio. However, some radio shows like Mike and Mike on ESPN are now shown on television. I think it would be interesting to learn about what this has done for their ratings.
With that being said, is radio being radio a bad thing? I believe the answer is absolutely not. Radio is the one medium where the fan's voice is heard, literally. Fans have the ability to call in to these radio shows and let their voices be heard. Personally, sometimes I enjoy listening to what people have to say, whether or not I agree or disagree with the person.
Owens also points out with the Jim Rome Show, how it has showed how popular sports talk radio can be. Owens writes, "they posited that The Jim Rome Show has replaced the sports bar or corner pub for many men as a place where they can reaffirm their sense of manhood." (126) That's what I believe is so special about radio is that it gives the listeners that sports bar feel, where everyone's opinion is hear whether if it makes sense or it doesn't. Radio being radio is when it is at its best.
Since I am not an avid sports fan, I have a very biased opinion on sports in general. You will never find me watching Sports Center or ESPN (accept for MSS420). Out of all the ways sports are broadcasted, I find coverage of sports on radio the most appealing. I like to listen to the radio broadcasters argue and give their opinion on games and players, and listen to the callers come on the radio and give their opinion as well. Radio broadcasting is like another form of blogging. It gives fans the opportunity to give their input whether they agree with the radio broadcasters or not.
ReplyDeleteOf course radio is slowly dying due to technology enhancements.. in a way, radio is "out dated". A lot of people get their sports information from the Internet, TV, newspapers, and magazines. However, radio tends to be a more personal approach to deliver sports commentary.
Owen's described that in the early 1920's Americans loved radio broadcasting especially with the popularity of boxing and college football. As the decade progressed there was more and more scheduled sports programming. Radio also drew people in to listen to baseball broadcasting that was becoming very popular in the 1920's.
In 1987, New York's WHN turned into WFAN, a 24-hour all sports radio, which was a HUGE risk since it had never been done (Owens, page 123). Nowadays there are channels on TV that are dedicated to solely sports news... even the YES network which is most likely any Yankee fans' favorite channel.
Is radio dying out or just evolving? It can really go either way. However, in today's society it is hard to keep radio in high demand. People are embracing new technology that leaves radio in the dust. Sure it is inevitable that you will turn on sports broadcasting in the car on the way to work (if you aren't already listening to your Serius commercial free radio already), however sports broadcasting has come a long way since the 1920's. Sports radio is still entertaining, and still listened to, but as time goes on, I won't be surprised if radio eventually becomes extinct.
-Kathryn Devlin
Christina Gaudino
ReplyDeleteThe Original Blog:
Have you ever listened to a radio talk show numerous times? You get a feel for the host, their personality, their view points, and you paint your own picture of them in your mind. Then you see them for the first time and it is a completely different person than you had pictured. That has to do with lack of personal connection to the audience. Radio talk shows are unable to reach their audiences on a personal level. As Adrienne points out in her blog, Sports Talk Radio: Dying Out or Just Evolving?, talk radio needs loyal followers in order to survive, but establishing loyalty with an audience whose catching bits and pieces every other day is almost impossible.
Sports radio to me is the original blog. One fan giving his “credible?” perspective on the game or players while other fans agree or disagree. This touches on our societies love for argument and commentary, but it doesn’t reach the same mass media bloggers can, and without FDA’s restrictions blogging can be a lot more liberating.
In our textbook Wenner refers to the value of sports programming to be considerable, and goes on to explain the up and coming changes for sports broadcast. Why listen to a sports talk show on the way home from work, when you instead you can listen to music, and watch the entire recap on the computer when you get home. Our ability to access any information we want at any point eliminates the need for the sports radio talk show. In my opinion, sports talk radio is dying bread. It’s become a last resort, and taken a backseat to easy access internet sites and TV. Eventually Sports radio will most likely become more of a wrap up or fast highlight report, instead of an open discussion with listeners.
In chapter 7 (Handbook of Sports and Media,) “sports fans understand that despite the limitation of providing only audio coverage of a sporting event, radio encourages its listeners to produce their own highlights with an unlimited palette of images supplied by the human mind.”(Raney, Bryant p117) Sports are different than other news and entertainment outlets, people like to talk, they like the conversation and the interviews. People can’t enough of sports, they like to call in express their opinions and hear what other people have to say. Fans get attached to personalities and become loyal listeners. Mike Francesa from the WFAN, and ESPN’s Mike and Mike to name a few are popular stations and familiar voices. You can tune in the morning and get all the updates from the night before.
ReplyDeleteAn all sports radio station is specifically attracted to men. Ron Barr explains the attraction of sports programming through the radio when he says, “We can relate to sports because sports is a reflection of life itself. We all compete every day; sports is that release”(Brown, 1998 p.50) I found this quote to be true when my Dad explained to me the very same reasons why he is still a loyal listener to all-sports talk radio stations. People like sports because it gets their mind off their daily stresses of job, economy etc.
Sports talk radio is still alive and well, you can read about the Super Bowl in the newspaper/online but come Monday you want to turn on Mike Francesa and get the whole analysis and review of the game. Sports talk radio takes you so much more in depth than the newspaper.
There are so many sports fanatics out there, people will turn to sports talk, especially people that are interested in college basketball that doesn’t receive enough coverage on T.V, if you want to go beyond the game people will turn on the radio to discuss strengths and weaknesses. You get a professionals take on games, strategies and reasons for game changing plays. Although, the internet has unlimited amount of information on sports, radio is a media outlet where people can actually hear the voices and opinions of fan fanatics.
The media is ever-evolving. Nowhere is this more true than in sports talk radio. It wasn't long ago when call-in radio shows were unheard of. Now you can be driving almost anywhere in America and you'll probably be able to pick one up somewhere on your AM dial. "Today, ESPN Radio provides some level of talk and play-by-play coverage for more than 700 affiliates" (124).
ReplyDeleteWhat strikes me as particularly interesting is when you hear a sports radio host being introduced, his name is usually prefaced by "Radio Personality." That's exactly what they are. Personalities. I remember listening to Chris "Mad Dog" Russo being interviewed soon after his split with Mike Francesca. Russo said that occasionally he would say things that he didn't necessarily believe, but knew would get a rise out of his listeners. In such a competitive field, both Russo and Francesca knew that it was vital to garner as much of a listenership as possible.
There are those that feel that this style is too brash. Author David Goldberg feels that sports talk radio sustains "the licensed arrogance of self-opinionated expression where anything goes as long as one is heard to say it forcefully and angrily enough" (125). This point is well taken, but this type of talk radio is what brings in listeners. People like to hear other people screaming at each other. And since the bottom line, after all, is trying to get the most people to listen to your station, this type of sports talk radio is here to stay. Just another example of how radio is evolving and changing with the times.
-Corey Hersch
I agree and disagree that sports talk radio is a dying medium. I agree because there are a lot of other ways to get your sports news and information. I myself would rather go look at a sports blog then set my radio to a sports station. This is also because I do not readily have access to a radio, ironically I more often have access to the internet. If I needed the score of a game I would not reach for the dial of my radio, but first go to TV, and then if the game wasn’t on I would watch it on play-by-play. I feel like most of my friends would agree that the radio is mostly for listening to music, and not listening to sports talk radio. Even listening to the radio is questionable when it comes to new technologies.
ReplyDeleteHowever, there are also reasons why the radio will remain a prevalent part of sports society. The text states, “There is evidence to indicate that this symbiotic relationship will continue as radio reshapes itself through the advancement of alternative delivery methods” (Bryant 128). This brings up a good point; the radio has been around for a long time and has survived new technology like the TV by always reshaping itself. For example talk radio has adapted to new technologies by shifting into satellite radio. The text also accounts radio’s survival to loyal listeners. I feel like that there are still a lot of loyal listeners, but most of them are probably older. Some of my earliest memories involve my dad listening to sports talk radio when driving home from a baseball game. Because of this memory I still sometimes, when I’m driving, check the radio if a game is on. I think due to examples like this radio will be able to survive, even with the new technologies.
I feel as though when it comes to sports talk radio, at this very moment it’s at more of a plateau than dying out or evolving. There have certainly been ways that sports talk has improved over the years like trying to get more fans involved in the conversations. However, there has also been a decline over the years with adding so many commercials that essentially pay for the stations to keep going, but people don’t want to listen to them.
ReplyDeleteAccording to John W. Owens in chapter 7 of the Handbook, he quotes (Ghosh, 1999, p. 55) in saying, “All my friends in the industry thought I was an idiot. People thought it was too narrow – that nobody would listen to sports all day” (123). I originally laughed when I read this because now when it comes to die hard sports fans, listening to sports radio 24/7 is all that they want. Sports talk radio is a big industry these days because it gives sports fans an outlet to openly discuss anything they’re feeling about the sports world at any given time.
Another aspect of sports radio is the fact that it has influenced so many people throughout the twenty-first century thus far. Radio still plays an important role in the coverage of sports in the twenty-first century (124). I definitely agree with this statement, but I don’t think sports radio coverage is nearly as effective as much as people in the industry would like it to be. When it was up and coming, many people doubted it because no one thought that listener’s would want to hear about sports constantly. Nowadays, sports talk radio is popular, but I think that people in the sports radio industry wishes that there was a much greater following. That’s why I think it’s at a plateau because our society has so many other avenues where they can go to get their sports fix. Television is a key place where fans go for sports information or updates. Now, with the internet so popular, a lot of fans will resort to websites to tell them the information because it’s the most up to date and you can find just about anything on the internet. So, I think that sports talk radio is definitely important, but they need to branch out to different demographics to try to gain a new audience and find a way to maintain a strong following so it can evolve further and not die out.
Technology is forever evolving, and I’m sure with in another 5-10 years there will be multiple new ways in which to discuss sports and other issues. I think the internet as well as television has more popularity than radio. It seems as if only really avid sports fans listen to the radio shows, where as your average person might flip through sports shows while watching television. Some of the reasons why sports started doing so well on television in the 60’s compared to radio still hold true today. In the Handbook it says “many factors contributed to the rise of sports television at the time. First, television had penetrated a large majority of American homes….And finally advertisers were more willing to support this new medium and its coverage of sports (122-23). Advertising on television is still doing better today than it is on radio. Television, blogs, and other online forums are more interactive and engaging, and therefore draw in more advertising dollars.
ReplyDeleteI think that radio has been going downhill over the years not only in sports but overall. Take for example XM/Sirus which has been teetering on the edge of bankruptcy for the past few weeks now. FM/AM stations are not doing any better. I’ve worked for a radio group for two years and people keep on getting laid off because the company isn’t making enough money (and this is one of the largest radio broadcasting corporations in the country). I don’t think radio will die out, but a fading in its popularity is very evident especially with the current state of our economy. If it can't find a way to make money, then it's not going to do well.
I think there will always be a loyal and active audience for the sports talk radio industry and thus I feel it will continue to evolve even as the internet and online blogs continue to grow in popularity. I feel this way mainly because of the very unique nature of sports talk, something that can never be matched by television or the internet. It has and continues to be a unique forum for sports fans to listen to reactions about "the big game" and then be able to call up and voice their own opinion to the host as well as to all the other fans listening.
ReplyDeleteMany people heavily criticized and ridiculed the idea of a 24 hour all sports station when WFAN emerged in New York. Jeff Smulyan was the man who was willing to take that risk and experiment with this new format. In the "Handbook of Sports and Media" he talks of this prevailing doubt; "all of my friends in the industry thought I was an idiot. People thought it was too narrow- that nobody would listen to sports all day" (123). Smulyan was quickly proved to be a genius as by 1996 WFAN became the nation's top-billing radio station. It became clear that there was an enormous audience of people who were willing to listen to "just sports all day".
Personally I am a huge fan of sports talk radio as my favorite show of all time was WFAN's "Mike and the Mad dog" which aired Monday through Friday, 1-6:30. I literally listened to this show every day after school, and later watched on the YES network, because I wanted to hear Mike (Mike Francesa) and Chris' (Chris Russo) reactions about the latest game or coaching change or trade rumor. I respected their opinions immensely and loved how passionate they were about sports. I also loved their interactions with the fans as more often than not some one would call up furious with something they were talking about and an interesting debate would ensue. The chemistry between Mike and Chris was second to none and that is what made them so great to listen to. Obviously it was a very difficult day for me when I heard the news that they were breaking up after nearly 20 years together on the show.
In my opinion the greatest beauty of sports talk radio and another way in which it greatly differs from television is that die hard sports fans such as Chris Russo and Joe Benigno (WFAN talk show host) can become hosts of their own show. These guys would never make it on national TV because they both are not overly good looking by any stretch and each have thick New York accents but on radio that is irrelavent. Sports fans like myself want to hear from other passionate sports fans who more than anything know what they are talking about and who aren't afraid to voice their opinion even if it is controversial. That is what I knew I could get every afternoon from listening to "Mike and the Mad dog" and what will always seperate sports talk radio from any other medium.