By: Diane Negra

Diane Negra — Mon, 15 Jul 2013 07:30:28 +0000

An interesting piece, Myles. The questions about broadcast prioritization on ESPN posed here are very useful ones. The politics of gender and class around Wimbledon and other sporting events deserve more academic scrutiny. I don’t know whether you heard about the controversies that arose over UK coverage of Wimbledon this year — a BBC commentator called John Inverdale speculated on air after Marion Bartoli’s win that her father had coached her to be tenacious in her sport because “she was never going to be a looker” while social media castigated Judy Murray as unattractive/competitive and BBC cameras assiduously cut to male players’ girlfriends for reaction shots. Hadley Freeman, Tanya Gold and Barbara Ellen have all written about this in The Guardian. The dynamics of class in/around Wimbledon are likewise interesting with a good deal of coverage tracking who’s sitting in the royal box and savoring the sense that those who are there represent the nation’s elite in a powerful and meaningful way. The royal box is policed by numerous military officers in dress uniform, little straw hats are handed out to the occupants when the sun gets hot and most depart for tea at a pre-ordained hour unless the match is at a particularly undecided stage.

By: Lainejay

Lainejay — Fri, 05 Jul 2013 18:03:20 +0000

As a tennis fan, I want to see the best players, regardless of their nationality or gender. I have long been dismayed by American broadcast networks decision to air the matches of lower ranked Americans instead of better players from anywhere else. I’ve missed seeing many great matches because they had the misfortune of being played at the same time as some lower ranked American getting their butt whupped.

Comments on: ESPN, Wimbledon, and the Limits of Broadcasting Equality

By: Diane Negra

By: Lainejay