N/S Pat McCAfee Claims ESPN is trying to Sabotage Him (1 Viewer)

[kcirdor]

pretty sure this thread is all about how that is not the case regarding the Pat McAfee show. That Pat is bigger than the whole political influence.

 

[STB1]

pretty sure this thread is all about how that is not the case regarding the Pat McAfee show. That Pat is bigger than the whole political influence.

It is in that McAfee dared have someone on (Rodgers) who didn’t tow the ESPN company narrative much like Steele.

 

[kcirdor]

It is in that McAfee dared have someone on (Rodgers) who didn’t tow the ESPN company narrative much like Steele.

And it didn't affect McAfee at all... even after the Rodgers stuff, he still had Rodgers on. so he's bigger than any political influence. It's proven.

 

[STB1]

And it didn't affect McAfee at all... even after the Rodgers stuff, he still had Rodgers on. so he's bigger than any political influence. It's proven.

Only because McAfee has F you money and an audience. He doesn’t need ESPN and ESPN knows it.

 

[RJS]

It's mind boggling to me that an NFL quarterback insinuating that a late night TV talk show host is a pedophile is somehow deemed as political speech by some. What a time to be alive.

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

I don’t care what either side discusses but when ESPN blatantly picks a side, how is that fair? Coming from a side that always whines about fair and inclusion and equality? It’s not. Let’s just be honest about it.

One side says the earth is flat - the other side uses observable data to determine an answer
Not all sides merit broadcast
In fact it is irresponsible (and sometimes unethical) to broadcast some ideas solely because a number of people hold them

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

It is in that McAfee dared have someone on (Rodgers) who didn’t tow the ESPN company narrative much like Steele.

Nope it’s very specifically about the bald face lying that someone did to balm his poor ego

 

[STB1]

One side says the earth is flat - the other side uses observable data to determine an answer
Not all sides merit broadcast
In fact it is irresponsible (and sometimes unethical) to broadcast some ideas solely because a number of people hold them

I didn't realize Rachel Maddow had a Saintsreport account.

 

[STB1]

Steele and Shilling never commented on Kimmel, so why did they get the boot?

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

I didn't realize Rachel Maddow had a Saintsreport account.

Thank you for proving my point

 

[bigdaddysaints]

Can you give us an example of this that turned you off?

if i was a betting man, I'd bet his answer would be because they didn't condem kneeling during the national anthem...

 

[bigdaddysaints]

It is in that McAfee dared have someone on (Rodgers) who didn’t tow the ESPN company narrative much like Steele.

i mean, when you bring on the tin foil hats, that's what happens..

 

[STB1]

Thank you for proving my point

Thanks for proving mine.

 

[Loco Hornet Fan]

Steele and Shilling never commented on Kimmel, so why did they get the boot?

But they did make anti-protest, anti-trans, anti-vax anti-immigrant rights comments, as well as Sage Steele questioning Obama for referring to himself as black and whether females in sports are asking for the harassment they routinely receive.

I mean, you don’t want politics in sports, so…

Sage Steele is also a bad host, who recently had a prepared interview with Dana White but called him Joe Rogan, and instead of being able to roll with it on air, crumbled and tanked the segment.

 

[STB1]

But they did make anti-protest, anti-trans, anti-vax anti-immigrant rights comments, as well as Sage Steele questioning Obama for referring to himself as black and whether females in sports are asking for the harassment they routinely receive.

I mean, you don’t want politics in sports, so…

Sage Steele is also a bad host, who recently had a prepared interview with Dana White but called him Joe Rogan, and instead of being able to roll with it on air, crumbled and tanked the segment.

So you're saying they aren't left wing shills. Thanks for proving my point. ESPN is one sided, partisan drivel. Van Pelt, Spain, and Foxworth are still there spewing their nonsense. No repercussion; no push back. And that's fine. It's a private company not the government so the first amendment doesn't apply but to say it's not biased is just lying.