We've examined before the changing rules of news media reporting brought on by use of social sites like Twitter and Facebook. I've even posited that while it's clearly possible for "old" media to successfully use "new" media, the examples of successful symbiosis are rare.
Enter sports information giant ESPN, which last month set rather draconian rules for its on-air talent regarding use of Twitter, Facebook, and the like. In short, ESPN apparently prohibits its sports experts from engaging in social media discussions of...sports.
I understand some of their thinking here: ESPN seems to be trying to guarantee no cats are let out of the bag. In an increasingly competitive cable marketplace, the network clearly wants to ensure fans have every reason to tune in to its flagship programs, and no reason to expect the information in another format. Advertisers don't sponsor Ric Bucher's Tweets, after all. And I also understand to a degree their assertion that their on-air personalities have a following in the first place precisely because of ESPN. It's a little bit chicken-or-the-egg, but I can see where the network is coming from. I disagree with them, but I can empathize.
What I don't understand is ESPN's failure to capitalize on one of its strongest attributes, that is, being an authoritative source of information. Yes, ESPN is the preeminent sports entertainment network because it carries countless college and professional games on several channels around the clock. But its flagship program, SportsCenter - and other sports journalism programs, including Around the Horn and Pardon the Interruption - are equally responsible for the success of this branding. And that is because of the anchors, analysts, and reporters who engage the viewer with exclusive content and irresistible style.
Virtually every other national news organization apparently encourages interaction on social sites by its personalities. Most local news channels and newspapers use the medium as well. These news journalists - at least ideally - use Twitter and Facebook to disseminate information and push to their bread-and-butter outlets at the same time. I can think of at least one exceptional example where an organization's reach has been exponentially broadened by allowing this type of back-and-forth.
And allowing two-way communication and interaction, between people and between consumers and brands, is what social media is all about. ESPN either does not trust the ability of the medium to provide this successfully, or does not trust its personalities to exercise enough discretion so as to maintain the viability of one of the network's major products. They are journalists, after all, and should have mastered the art of teasing a story long before employment with ESPN.
Either way, ESPN's is an unfortunate stance, even if offered in good faith.
You feel me?
AF
1 comments: