In Defense of ESPN

"Bruce Springsteen, Madonna,
Way before Nirvana
There was U2 and Blondie
And music still on MTV
Her two kids in high school
They tell her that she's uncool
But she still preoccupies
With 19, 19, 1985"
- lyrics from the trendy new single "1985" by Bowling For Soup

Ladies and gentlemen, or should I say seniors and citizens, it is time to wake up and realize the era you live in.

Snake-skin skirts, music videos on MTV, non-stop news on CNN, and insignificant sports coverage on ESPN are out, while belly-button piercing, Ashlee Simpson, Wolf Blitzer, and Pardon the Interruption are here to stay.

Before you pop in your cassette tape and blank out the rest of what I have to say, it's time to reevaluate your scolding opinions of the chic generation.

While some have started a boycott of the four-letter sports station analogous to the abhorrence of electric guitar when it was first introduced, the reality of it is that the cold shoulder is led by an immaterial minority.

There's no need to panic, it happens to every cohort, and one day I too will be as quaint as Sega Genesis. That day I will spit scathing venom at the most novel of trends that the next set of baby boomers will adore.

But luckily, my time is not now.

ESPN is known as the "World-Wide Leader in Sports" because they have continued to transcend generic standards by creating new ones, and have persistently pushed the bounds of creativity.

The new modifications have not sat well with many members of the old demographic, but that's the exact problem. They are no longer part of who ESPN is targeting.

If you are naïve enough to believe that ESPN is the only station that's morphed into the cool and the hip, then you need to open your eyes to the television revolution.

Gone are the days of gee-golly shows like Family Matters and The Partridge Family and their replacements are risqué reality shows such as Fear Factor and Joe Schmo. I wonder what the wholesome enthusiasts of the Full House would think of Trading Spouses: Meet Your New Mommy?

There was a time when reality shows were deemed to be a passing fad. A type of show that the old demographic could just toothpick out of their TV dinners once the craze dissipated. The low cost for production and the growing popularity of these programs have stapled real TV into the new millennium, whether the Danny Tanners like it or not.

ESPN's swapping of the informative, yet insipid David Aldridge with Steven A. Smith is a symbol of what kinds of alterations have been drafted. Bland, muffled opinions have been waived in favor of more passionate and valued thoughts.

New talks shows Around the Horn and Pardon the Interruption express fiery opinions in a competitive theme. Skeptics who title Tony Kornheiser and Woody Paige as loud are remindful of our old-fashioned mothers who would yell, "turn the music down," at the peak of the chorus. The dysphemism "shouting" to describe the on-air fervor is inaccurate, and the critics who mislabel likely enjoy Bran Flakes for breakfast instead of Fruit Loops or Cinnamon Toast Crunch.

The youth of this age band are not interested in drawling and mild-mannered conversation. Energy and vigor are required for a crop of fans whose attention spans are minimal.

While other television networks have offered a "like it or leave" approach to their once hallowed viewers, stations like ESPN, CNN, and MTV have offered a nursing home for the erstwhile audience.

ESPNews, ESPN2, MTV2, and CNN Headline News have all been supplemented to the regular content so that previous spectators have a half-way house in case they are not down with the in-things.

Fed up with the groovy? Punch in ESPNews for the serious happenings of the day. Tired of tedious political debates? Flip over to CNN Headline News to find out the latest pertinent headlines.

The music videos on MTV are gone, but in has stepped a market of shows that rack up higher ratings and a larger gallery that watches. Would the esteemed executives continue these "outlandish" strategies if the ratings didn't reciprocate? Of course not.

The modern SportsCenter does not resemble an eye lash of what it used to look like, but then again, neither do the Olson twins.

The very sports that we closely follow, such as hockey, baseball, football, and basketball have also modernized, isn't it fair to expect the networks that cover them to redesign, as well?

Just like the grayed observers who scowl at the amendments of SportsCenter, past athletes would frown upon supplements, domes, and the science of current sport.

The close knit group of hardcore sports fans pine for the days of ESPN being the only channel to comfortably play all day, but there is a part in all of us that covets the past. One day, that age group will invite their grandchildren upon their lap and reminisce: "Back in my day, ESPN was a lot better..." and just like your elders tell you about how movies, music, and television were much preferred in their time, you will not care at all.

You don't have to watch ESPN, because somebody else will.

Then you better start swimmin'
Or you'll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin'.

Bob Dylan and TV ratings mix like Mondays and me.

This column is in response to a previous column by SC's Brad Oremland, entitled The MTV-ization of ESPN. Your comments and thoughts are welcomed in the section below.