On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Darren Glass <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 12:36 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Okay. You and Joe take your sports commentary *way* more seriously than >> I ever have. :) >> >> I see your point, but I think this is gonna be one of those "we'll have >> to agree to disagree" moments. If I know the broadcast is tape delayed, it >> wouldn't bother me a whit if the commentary was recorded live or not. >> > > And I think right here is the crux of the problem, and the reason why I am > willing to give NBC far more credit than many people seem to. There are > some viewers who want to view sports as a news-like event. There are > others who want to view it as entertainment. Trying to please both groups > (and everyone in between) is very difficult, if not impossible. > > Personally, with the Olympics, I *like* the "show everything in a curated > manner, edited to just see the exciting parts and tape-delayed to my time > zone" approach, and I am actually more annoyed with the people who seem to > have jobs that let them watch everything live and then post online about > the results spoiling it for those of us who want to treat it as a primetime > television event. For these events, I don't care if an announcer knows > ahead of time. > > On the other hand, if you were talking about Braves baseball games I would > feel very differently, and I treat those as 'news' -- I want journalistic > integrity (or some variation thereof) from my reporters and I am the > annoying one who posts in real time when I am watching live. > > Is this intellectually consistent? No, but it is how I feel. > I can accept that NBC wants to treat their primetime show as entertainment in order to earn back as much of their huge financial investment as they can - they need to attract more than just sports fans if they are going to do that. But at its core the Olympics *are* sporting events - there is a line that bounds basic integrity that, if crossed, makes the whole thing meaningless, even from an entertainment point of view. If not, NBC could save a hell of a lot of money by just airing an extended version of "So You Think You Can Dance?". There must be a lot of people who feel the same way about baseball that you feel about the Olympics. Indeed, it is possible that they could significantly increase ratings for Braves games if they played all games during the day and then broadcasted them, edited, in a one hour slot during primetime. They could edit out all of the "boring" stuff, like when there are no hits, or the Braves opponent scores runs. They could add commentary after the game to hype the Braves performance, and foreshadow later drama or the success of the home team, or favored players. Of course real baseball fans would be screwed, but if more viewers, who really didn't care much about baseball but liked the nightly reality show tuned in, then what difference would it make? Your position is not just intellectually inconsistent, it is practically inconsistent, in the terms that you identify as important to you - namely spoilers. In the dark days when NBC first took over the Olympics they would regularly add commentary in post-production. One of the problems with that practice was that it was almost always obvious from the beginning of an event what the outcome was going to be - either from indirect cues like tone of voice, or direct cues, like what the commentators focused on. In this case, *if* portions of the gymnastics had commentary added later, it would be particularly odious, since Bob Costas, in his opening remarks the first night of primetime coverage, looked into the camera and promised the viewers that, while all of the coverage he would be showing over the fortnight would be tape delayed, it would be presented by announcers who were commenting in real time, without knowing the outcome in advance. I suspect Costas at least cares enough about his sports journalism credibility that he would not be happy if he was later proved to be a liar. Note that I am not saying the gymnastics commentary was added later - that is a speculation from the writer at Deadspin. This has just been a discussion about why it would matter if it were. -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
