I've got a half-baked concept on sports coverage that's about degrees of separation from actual games. So - play-by-play is 0 degrees of separation. Game narrative ("The comeback fell just short as Smith tired down the stretch") is maybe one degree of separation. Then things like player injuries or playoff seeding are maybe at a second degree. Talking about potential draft picks are way down the list - maybe just as far as things like contracts, potential free agent signings, and the like. And even farther are the inane 'narrative' things like discussing what players said in a press conference.
LIke I said, it's not a fully formed idea, but it's useful as a reminder to myself to keep track of when it's about the actual sport and when it's not. Sometimes it's easy to get caught up with smart or charismatic commentary, and it always feels like empty calories when I do - like I've just binged through a bag of chips that I didn't even really enjoy.
This has happened in politics too. Instead of focusing on the issues - taxes, subsidies, income distribution, industrial policy, justice - they focus on which team is going to run which player in which race and what trash talk has who upset about it. The actual point of things, the playing of the game or actual legislation enacted, has become a side show. I read the Washington Post, so I expect a certain amount of side show. DC is a company town. On the other hand, I have to read a variety of bloggers to get coverage of what's actually happening.
I've got a half-baked concept on sports coverage that's about degrees of separation from actual games. So - play-by-play is 0 degrees of separation. Game narrative ("The comeback fell just short as Smith tired down the stretch") is maybe one degree of separation. Then things like player injuries or playoff seeding are maybe at a second degree. Talking about potential draft picks are way down the list - maybe just as far as things like contracts, potential free agent signings, and the like. And even farther are the inane 'narrative' things like discussing what players said in a press conference.
LIke I said, it's not a fully formed idea, but it's useful as a reminder to myself to keep track of when it's about the actual sport and when it's not. Sometimes it's easy to get caught up with smart or charismatic commentary, and it always feels like empty calories when I do - like I've just binged through a bag of chips that I didn't even really enjoy.
This has happened in politics too. Instead of focusing on the issues - taxes, subsidies, income distribution, industrial policy, justice - they focus on which team is going to run which player in which race and what trash talk has who upset about it. The actual point of things, the playing of the game or actual legislation enacted, has become a side show. I read the Washington Post, so I expect a certain amount of side show. DC is a company town. On the other hand, I have to read a variety of bloggers to get coverage of what's actually happening.