ESPN Misrepresentation

Here is a good example of the thing ESPN has been doing for years: overhyping certain types of players, namely Kobe and Brett Farvre.

Notice the coverage - focused on Kobe getting to the hoop, scoring several buckets, and then hitting a late jump shot to tie the game. Then they introduce that the Rockets won the game. The reason I pick this out: I was listening to this game on the radio at about the 6 minute mark until the end. Michael Thompson was talking only about how Kobe was having a terrible game and shooting poorly and how the Lakers were winning despite him - not because of him. And remember, Kobe is Michael Thompson's favorite players. Pau and Sessions were having really good games. The box score bears this out - Kobe shot 10 of 27. Yikes. Pau shot 10-14. Kobe had a huge turnover toward the end of the game. The Laker defense collapsed and gave up a 10 point lead with like 4 minutes to play. Bynum got ejected. None of this in the ESPN coverage. They made it seem like Kobe was carrying the Lakers all game and then somehow the Rockets suddenly came back, Drajic hits a big 3, and they win. This is what I object to in ESPN coverage of these games - they simply reinforce narratives like "Kobe is a closer" and "Brett Farve is a clutch cowboy" by selectively choosing highlights that tell this story. Say, for instance, all the hype about Kobe is correct and he is a killer and a closer and the best player in basketball. I think this is a false narrative, but let's just say for the moment it is correct. Why does it need to be reinforced on a random Tuesday night at this point? Everyone knows Kobe has 5 rings. Everyone knows he's having a good year. Why isn't the story - Kobe shot 10 for 27 tonight - and Sessions and Gasol lead the way and then the Laker D let the team down. That's what actually happened. How would the truth harm Kobe's reputation if he reputation were in fact true?

Here's what I think: ESPN is lazy and needs to put things together quickly. Narratives and reputations develop - some are correct, others are less correct, and others are totally incorrect. But either way, ESPN reports and reinforces the narrative -- because that's what people like to see. They don't want the narrative disrupted. So even though Brett Favre went 10 years without getting into the Superbowl and ending the season on an unnecessary interception about 5 of those years, he still has the reputation of being a great late game player (which he was for 3 seasons or so). Ask someone who knows only a little bit about football this question - Brett Farve played for 20 years - how many Super Bowls do you think he won? Just ask them. They will guess based on his reputation, I'm betting, a lot more than the true number (1).

Ask someone who knows a little about basketball what Kobe's shooting percentage is in the 4th quarter of important games, given that his lifetime shooting percentage is (whatever it is). They will guess more, even though in truth, it is less.

Kobe and Favre fans: explain.