re: ESPN taking a big subscriber hit lately ...

quote:

---

ESPN Ombudsman Jim Brady, admitted that the network lurched way too far to the left in recent years, alienating many viewers.

---

I think many that are arguing that this has NOTHING to do with politics missed this part. If this statement is properly sourced then ESPN themselves has done their homework. Yes there is a push going toward streaming, but their politics isn't helping. Two major contributing factors no doubt. This statement is based on "reason for canceling" metrics. ESPN is the anchor for Cable. Like HBO is for that next tier of Cable.

Also, there are clearly people on this board who are canceling or not watching due to leftwing political spillover, so saying it has nothing to do with it is just wrong.

I have UVerse ONLY for CFB in the fall. That's it. I don't like ESPNs politics, and frankly can't stand being forced to listen to women commentators. If I could truly find a solution to be able to watch all games I am able to now I would cancel. And "cord cutting" to save money isn't close to be the top reason. Social engineering, and clear agenda pushed throughout cable is just getting way out of control.

quote:

---

I think the separation of ESPN channels, and how some are better off than others is being forgotten here too. The convo has just moved to ESPN main channel only.

---

The reason why is because the datapoint OP tried to use to prove people are sick of ESPN's political bias was subscriber numbers for ESPN 1.

In fact Neilson's data (what all this is based on) shows that ESPN U/Classic subscribers are dropping at a slower rate than ESPN 1, which basically proves my point that people like you who sign up for cable at least once a year just to get sports are one of the few groups left under 55 that don't want to cut the cord.

quote:

---

Also, the overall point is that their political spillover is a factor. Like it or not. No need to look into or try to spin it any further.

---

Well isn't that a convenient stance to take?

"I am right and you are wrong and that is that. No reason to try to put forth more evidence to prove otherwise." I bet you were a kickass debater on the kindergarten schoolyard when that kind of argument worked.

quote:

---

Quite simple 2 major factors contributing here...cord cutting by the milinial type, and solid portion of the non-millinials tired of wanting sports but getting left-wing agenda crap like katyln Jenner, etc

---

So tell me, how are there two factors when the second "factor" still subscribes to cable and therefore ESPN to get the sports games (like you admit to doing) and therefore adds to the subscriber numbers?

Let me just say it as clearly as I can:

OP tried to make the point that ESPN is being punished for their agenda due to lost subscribers to ESPN 1, yet you want to say that people like yourself that still subscribe to cable to get the ESPNs at least at some point in the year to get the games somehow count towards the number of people NOT subscribing to ESPN.

It doesn't make sense. If you subscribe to ESPN to get their games there isn't some part of the Nielsen report that says "yeah he is paying them but he hates the agenda." That data point doesn't exist, the nuance wasn't there to make that conclusion.

Now if you want to say that ESPN's agenda is why Fox Sports One is beating them in ratings I won't argue. That makes sense.

The fact that (mostly men) who still subscribe to cable to get sports game don't subscribe to cable because they are pissed at ESPN's agenda makes no sense. It is a contradiction of facts.

I feel like yall are taking crazy pills.

I cut the cord this year. I taped an antenna up in the front window to pick up ABC, CBS, NBC, and FOX for free. Sling TV costs me $35/mo and includes all the ESPN channels - even SEC network. I'm good.