Programming

There was a tiny item in the Tribune Sunday sports, just six lines that I almost missed, about the NBA and ESPN working to put together a show.  A select group of players would take part in a H-O-R-S-E competition.  And people would pay to see this why?

 

The answer is simple, because sports’ networks are desperate for new programming.  At some point, viewers are going to have their fill of old golf, or baseball or basketball or football or hockey, no matter how “classic” the game or tournament.  (Do they even bother to run old soccer?)  And, when that point comes, my friends, the various sports’ channels will turn into one big house of cards on a windy day.

 

I probably would’ve passed over the H-O-R-S-E news if not for a story by Kevin Draper in last week’s NYT; it appears cable customers already are starting to ask what kind of sports they’re getting for their monthly cable charge.  Given that the answer is nothing new, the demand is building for refunds.  I know I’d like my Comcast bill to be $8.25 lower.

 

That’s what Comcast—or perhaps you say Xfinity—is charging me for stale sports.  God help anyone who needs to watch old golf; I can barely stand ten minutes of Hawk Harrelson doing a 2005 White Sox game.  I wonder how people who wanted the Cubs’ Marquee channel like paying for filler programming.

 

I imagine all the businesses involved in this money-grab publicize what they do to be good corporate citizens in a time of crisis.  Well, as soon as they stop charging sports’ fans for repeats, I’ll be among the first to sing their praises.