The Ship Be Sinking

Mouth Almighty

Fuck You, ESPN

I do not understand the insane, masturbatory thing some journalists have which seems to amount to the idea that only they can save a free society by… spoiling UFC PPV results. It is NOT so fucking hard to respect your viewers by hiding those results under a headline which says, simply “Early Results of Two Title Fights At UFC 112.” Instead They put the fucking results IN THE ACTUAL HEADLINE, which is unnecessary on every level, and appears to be done only because they can and because it gives them a pathetic little thrill of power to do it. It’s not like there’s even the ghost of an argument for overriding public interest here. This is what happens when you have an entire self-indulgent business edifice which confuses “Mike & The Mad Dog” with Woodward & Bernstein and thinks they’re the most important part of the industries they cover. The mainstream sports media in this country needs to fucking go out of business already. Or would that mean America would suddenly face a strategic disadvantage in Tiger Woods coverage in the international community? Surely the North Koreans will be invading shortly there after.


April 10, 2010 - Posted by | Uncategorized


  1. I have to disagree with you on this one. The PPV was made available live at 1 pm. So it’s no difference then reporting a boxing/UFC PPV that happens at 10 pm. Now, if the event happened at 1, but wasn’t available in the US until 10, then I might be more inclined to agree. But to me, if you don’t want to know the result of a sporting event, don’t watch ESPN.

    Granted, it’s easy to say “SPOILER ALERT”, but that’s also kind of useless because it’s a constantly scrolling screen. So if you didn’t see the “SPOILER ALERT” for the second it was up, and then look up just a second/minute later, the results will still be ruined.

    ESPN’s job is to report the news. If you don’t want to know a score, then definitely stay away the station, otherwise you’re asking for trouble.

    Comment by Tony M | April 12, 2010 | Reply

  2. A fair objection if I were talking about the TV station, but my complaint is with the website where it’s easy to both satisfy the journalistic need to report the news and not screw with your audience just by changing the headline. The fact that they’re not willing to make that minor change to me says a lot about their mentality.

    Comment by theshipbesinking | April 14, 2010 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: