Cc: Mitch Rosen

ESPN gathered its front-facing employees Wednesday at its home base in Bristol, Connecticut for a two-hour summit. According to ESPN’s official release on the meeting, the gathering included two primary messages: 1. ESPN is fine. 2. Stick to sports.

Per ESPN, president John Skipper told employees, “At the end of this meeting I want you to be confident about the future of ESPN,” before describing various company strategies, including the maintenance of the network’s rights portfolio and its ESPN+ venture.

VIDEO: Heisman and NFL MVP Winners


Later, Undefeated editor-in-chief Kevin Merida reviewed ESPN’s social media policy, emphasizing that on-air personalities should stay away from non-sports issues. That message comes about six weeks after the network published new social media guidelines limiting who can break news on Twitter and warning against overtly political posts. Per ESPN, here is what Merida, who led the effort to write those guidelines, told the assembled crowd Wednesday:

“ESPN is a journalistic organization – not a political organization. We should do nothing to undermine that position,” he said. “ESPN’s focus is sports. By-and-large we are not experts on politics, healthcare policies, terrorism, commerce – that’s not what we do.

”Our audience is not looking for our opinions on the general news of the day,” he added. “And believe me, I get it. It can sometimes be difficult to control impulses or ignore trolls, but that’s what we’re called to do for each other.”
The stricter ESPN social media policy is presumably a response to the controversy that engulfed the company over the summer after Jemele Hill called Donald Trump a white supremacist on Twitter and the White House called for her firing.

The next part of Wednesday’s program might raise some eyebrows. Per the ESPN release, the company had anchor Sage Steele interview sales and marketing executive Ed Erhardt in what sounds like transparent tangle of editorial and business operations. The fact that someone whose job is to sell advertising addressed a group of reporters and sports analysts certainly lends some extra credence to the longtime claim that ESPN lets its business interests bleed into its content.

Obviously the official ESPN account of the summit wouldn’t reflect any tension or discord, nor would it reveal any message execs might have shared that isn’t for public consumption. But it does give us a sense of the agenda items at the gathering, which was important enough that attendance was mandatory for all front-facing employees, and what ESPN wants to convey to its rank and file at the end of a rough year. Essentially, the takeaway seems to have been that the company is better off if everyone pipes down a little.

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.

It's good to see ESPN going back to its roots. Licking the balls of corporate America.

_________________

I get why they're doing this but they're going to have to revamp a lot of shows and not ask certain questions. When politics bleeds over into sports you're not being journalists and you're being disrespectful to your audience if you don't cover it and for certain shows offer opinions.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!

Not every station can take the brave stance of being against child rape

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.

It's telling that they picked Sage Steele for this exercise. Bootlicker that she is.

_________________
There are only two examples of infinity: The universe and human stupidity and I'm not sure about the universe.

Wasn't the point of Black Sportscenter that they wouldn't just stick to sports? How is that program going to continue, especially with Jemele Hill?

_________________

We can only hope this is a new corporate thing and the new Score owners will also apply it to their radio stations.

_________________
Elections have consequences.

Yay corporations!

_________________

_________________
Elections have consequences.

It's amazing how sensitive sports fans are.

I can't handle social issues in sports! Just show me the same Cowboys highlights I've seen 5 times!

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

You really can't understand this?

_________________
Elections have consequences.

Yes.

MANY of the people who bemoan "snowflakes" can't seem to handle social commentary they don't like.

_________________

I understand why ESPN has to do this.

However, if you can't handle Jemele Hill on twitter saying things you disagree with then you are a safe space needing snowflake who is just as bad as those college kids that need adult coloring books and naps to deal with life.

As Peeps said, it's just amazing to me that the same types of people that rail on millenials for not being able to handle differing opinions go into a rage because their sports world has differing opinions being shared.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Ok well then this is a snowflake thing I guess. I don't even want to hear stuff I agree with. Since my last post I was trying to find another place where politics gets inserted into other things where people might object. Only came up with the award show stuff.

I don't use twitter so that doesn't concern me but I would rather not tune into sportscenter and get a 20 minute segment on a political issue.

_________________
Elections have consequences.

This is spot on. It’s not that I can’t handle political talk—in fact, I watch MSNBC and read the Huffington post to see what the “other side” is saying.

But I want my sports to be an escape from that. Switzerland, neutral, fun. I understand that politics can creep into sports, but that doesn’t mean I want a sports anchor’s editorial on it. When I watch the news, I don’t expect, nor want, Mark Giangreco’s thoughts on the tax bill or Roy Moore.

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.

What do you mean? It happens in almost everything to do with media. Remember the Dixie Chicks vs. George Bush thing?

I don't watch much sportscenter either but that isn't really what happens. It can have a longer segment if it is sports related(NFL players vs. Trump).

I don't know if this describes you personally, but it does come off as it often, but there are many people who seemingly feel they are victims because they get exposed to liberals talking about stuff they disagree with and they get really upset by it. I'm not sure if it is because Fox News has given them a place where that literally doesn't happen except for sacrificial lambs being brought on to be yelled at by a woman who had a judge tv show. Just think about why you would get upset that politics on Sportscenter and try and figure out why you would be that sensitive. Can you come up with a good reason? Hear the other perspective and ignore it if you want. It's good to hear opposing views.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

It's only really talked about because of a logical sports connection. Do you really think that ESPN was heavily covering the Roy Moore issue? I highly doubt it.

A lot of this came up from what a few ESPN personalities said on their personal twitter accounts. It had nothing to do with the show they were on, though Trump obviously will get mentioned on sports shows when he is calling out NFL players and doing the stupid "I uninvited you to the White House!" stuff.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

I bolded the only part of my post you need to know really. The rest of your post going on about Fox News (which I do not watch) or anything else is pointless. Yes, the story of the NFL Trump is perfectly appropriate for ESPN. As was the Penn State story. That said it probably was overly dragged out especially show on local radio as we know. Without a direct correlation like that I don't need it or want it.

_________________
Elections have consequences.

Honestly ESPN is probably better off talking as much politics as possible. They've alienated everyone other than their liberal bubble already, why stop now? Its too late to reverse course for them.

I vowed to never consume another minute of their programming, aside from broadcasts I could not get anywhere else, because of their continued anti-White Sox bias.

you can't be "anti" something if you don't even know they exist.

I don’t know what ESPN reported, because if it’s not a live broadcast, I no longer watch ESPN. I think there is a distinction between reporting on a political sports issue (e.g., NFL players kneeling), and editorializing by the anchors.

IMO, Sportscenter is a sports newscast, and should stick to sports. A show like PTI, however, is a opinion show and I think they can talk about whatever they want. The problem with ESPN is they blurred the lines so much, there is no longer a distinction between reporting and editorials.

Back in the old days, the 10 PM news would call out when an anchor was giving an opinion—they called them “editorials,” or in Walter Jacobson’s case, “Walters’s Perspective.”

The loss of this distinction is important, especially in ESPN’s case, when only one side is acceptable to preach.

Guy who refuses to consume the product no matter what they do is complaining about what he guesses the content is of the product. Is this the B&B section?

Even the news doesn't simply report the news now. It's a great idea that just doesn't exist any more. As I said, my Sportscenter viewing is limited but when I have watched it was mostly sports highlights, followed by off the field sports stuff including our President with things involving sports, and then opinions most of which are "SHOULD AARON RODGERS RETURN OR SIT?".

Now, you are correct that they've created a few special Sportscenters built around hosts, and those have more opinions, but that's kind of the point of those shows. There are many other Sportscenters you could watch that aren't built as shows like that.

The ultimate point is that it comes off as being quite sensitive if you can't deal with the fact that people on tv sometimes share opinions on political topics that have to do with sports but not necessarily on the field.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

It's good to hear well-reasoned opposing views.

I'd say that ship has sailed.

I don’t watch sportscenter, but I do read this board and other sources. In all honesty, I did not know who Jamelle Hill was until I saw her thread on here.

I’m really not sensitive. As stated, I watch MSNBC and read the HuffPost to get a different perspective. Like MANY, sports is my escape from reality. I’d rather not have that other political crap creep in, but some at ESPN want to drive politics it into sports.

And, it’s just obviously one-sided. While roughly half the country voted for Trump, name an ESPN anchor that is pro-Trump. I’m guessing there isn’t one, but I could be wrong.

_________________

Matt, from ESPN or just our culture at large?

It's simply not reasonable for people to ask for politics to be quarantined from their sports coverage. Politics runs through every part of our lives now. Do you really think it should be constrained to cable infotainment channels? What a life of luxury to think you can exist this way.

_________________

Politics are sports now.

It only makes sense to combine coverage of the 2.

_________________