Leave a comment

Pink Bats: Not Just About Breast Cancer Anymore

On Friday I wrote about pinkwashing in baseball, but I want to take a minute to address the argument that it’s good because it raises money for breast cancer awareness and research.  Cancer is serious and sad and horrible.  My mom survived breast cancer.  For a 28 year old, I probably know an above average number of friends and family members who have had cancer.  Some have survived, some have not.  It’s really sad.

The problem I have is that the pink bat campaign, as currently constructed, does more to promote branding and corporate synergy than it does to increase the chances that we make any real progress in eradicating breast cancer.  From Paul Lukas of Uni Watch:

You know those pink bats that players use on Mother’s Day? It turns out that Louisville Slugger is the only bat manufacturer allowed to put its logo on those pink bats — an exclusive status that it purchased by making a large donation to the breast cancer charity group Susan G. Komen for the Cure. Other bat manufacturers can make plain pink bats, as long as they have “no ribbons, corporate logos, distinguishing marks or names of charities are included on the bat.”

But not every baseball player likes to use Louisville Sluggers.  Some — like Baltimore Oriole Nick Markakis and Minnesota Twin Trevor Plouffe — prefer the brand MaxBat.  According to Yahoo! Sports’ Jeff Passan in a report on Friday, Markakis and Plouffe each wanted to honor their mothers — both breast cancer survivors — so MaxBat sent them black bats with pink logos, which the manufacturer believed would be in compliance with the above rule.  (And it seems like they should, no one said anything about non-pink bats, but anyway..)

However, Passan reported that the players were told by MLB not to use the bats with the pink MaxBat logos because they didn’t comply with the league policy giving Louisville Slugger exclusive rights to pink bats.

Pink Bats

Pink Bats

According to Lukas, after Passan’s article was published, “MLB issued a clarification, stating that MaxBat and any other bat manufacturers could include their logos on a pink bat — as long as they made a contribution to Komen for the Cure.”

You’ll remember that Komen pulled funding from Planned Parenthood, which provides low-cost mammograms across the country, and from stem cell research, which could actually lead to curing cancer.  And that they lend their brand to manufacturers of guns and toxic perfumes.  So if MaxBat did want to show support for cancer victims by making pink bats, they would have to donate money to an organization which basically only cares about saving women’s lives to the extent that that goal also perpetuates the existence of Komen itself.

In the end, Markakis didn’t use his pink-labeled MaxBat.  Neither did Plouffe.  What was supposed to be a time to honor breast cancer survivors and victims was turned into a disgusting display of corporate greed and marketing opportunism, and practically speaking resulted in fewer symbols of support on the field.  As Lukas wrote: “Congrats, MLB and Louisville Slugger — you maintained your precious brand integrity.”

 

Plouffe Tweets

I really wish MLB would use this bad press as an opportunity to take their support for breast cancer awareness in a new direction.  Cut ties with Komen.  Cut the exclusive deals on the pink bats.  Just please cut the pink bats altogether.  Here’s an idea: give money to an organization that subsidizes testing for mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes (the price of which Angelina Jolie drew attention to this week), or other testing that will help women make informed health choices.  And let players show their support however they want.  Stop looking at your bottom line and do something that will really help honor mothers, wives, sisters and friends.

Leave a comment

Nine for IX Isn’t Fine

ESPN recently announced the premiere dates for its spin-off from the popular 30 for 30 film series produced by Bill Simmons.  Called “Nine for IX,” this is series of nine short films “focused on captivating stories of women in sports told through the lens of female filmmakers.”

Nine for IX (via ESPNW)

The topics of these films are:

I don’t want to give you the wrong impression by the title of this post: I am absolutely thrilled that these topics are getting the 30 for 30 treatment, and I think every one of them deserves my interest and attention.  (Of them all, I’m probably most excited about “Let them Wear Towels,” which is the one about the female sports reporters.  But I also loved Katarina Witt, and man…Venus fighting for equal pay?  I’m so there.)

My problem with this series is that it is reinforcing the idea that women somehow need to be treated separately to be equal.  Certainly, this plays into a larger discussion about how ESPNW itself fails women’s sports (Lydia and I both firmly believe that sports are sports, and that separating out women’s sports into special coverage reinforces the idea that they are somehow different than “regular” (read: men’s) sports.)  Again, I’m not complaining about the coverage; it is fantastic that ESPN is devoting resources to covering women’s sports and to celebrating the anniversary of a law that changed women’s sports forever.  But by separating out these films from the 30 for 30 series, ESPN is giving people permission to ignore them as “those ones just for women.”

In all the seasons of 30 for 30, which was originally conceived to celebrate 30 years of ESPN’s existence as a network, there have been only two films about women – one about the rivalry between Martina Navratilova and Chris Evert, and one about Marion Jones.  There was also one film about a transgender woman, Renée Richards.  So that makes 52 films, three about women.  Grantland has also released 11 shorts as part of the series, none of which were about women.

I don’t take fault with those films that exist.  In fact, “Four Days in October” is probably one of my favorite pieces on the 2004 Red Sox.  But I absolutely can’t stand that by creating the Nine for IX series, ESPN is saying it’s okay to keep the women’s stories separate from the original series.  Separate but equal isn’t equal, and we’re not even talking about numbers that approach equal here (63 vs. 11.)  Title IX was written so that women and men would have access to the same educational opportunities and funding.  By keeping this series of films about women’s sports separate from the original series, ESPN is violating the spirit of the law they are trying to celebrate.  Did anyone really think we wouldn’t notice?

Leave a comment

Links Post: Everything That’s Been Sitting in our Inbox Edition

Sometimes we save up articles for a links post and then forget to do one.  Sometimes there are news items we discuss writing about but don’t get around to it.  Sometimes we’re just busy.  Or lazy.  This edition of the Links Post is the result of all four.

  • SNY Anchor Kirk Giminez Tweets, Then Deletes Aggressive Twitter Message – As if people haven’t learned from Anthony Weiner yet.
  • Heat Bird-Flipper is Millionaire With Intriguing Past – Phyllis Tobias flipped Joakim Noah the bird during a Bulls-Heat playoff game this week.  While we don’t really care, a picture of her doing it went viral and the Sun Sentinel published a feature-length article on her background.  If Tobias had been male, do you think we would have cared at all about the person’s backstory, or even noticed that the person did flip the bird?
  • Plackets and Jackets – Uni-Watch, one of our favorite websites, takes a look at a 1965 Schacter’s baseball uniform catalog.  Of particular note: separate “girls ball uniforms” which were intended for women playing baseball, and “softball uniforms” which were for men.

    Girls Ball Uniforms (via Uni-Watch)

  • There’s an awesome exhibit running at the Metropolitan Museum of Art through July 7 called “A Sport for Every Girl: Women and Sports in the collection of Jefferson R. Burdick.”  The exhibit features advertising cards that were issued by various companies that feature women playing sports and enjoying leisure time.  We plan to hit the exhibit before it closes, but wanted to give you New Yorkers a heads up.
  • The GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network) highlights how the gay and allied community is winning respect in sports.
  • The Chicago Bears would like you to know that they do not support the National Organization for Marriage.  (Good.)
2 Comments

The Mets’ Marketing-to-Women Problem

A recent study revealed that the New York Mets have more female fans than any other MLB team. As a fan of the Amazins myself, my heart swells with pride. And yet, the Mets — consistent with baseball across the board — still don’t quite get us.

Exhibit A, via Metspolice.com, is this Mets press release:

METS LAUNCH SEARCH FOR METS MOMS

Exclusive Panel to Provide Feedback on Ways to Enhance Citi Field Experience for Families

Applications are Now Available at Mets.com/metsmoms

FLUSHING, N.Y., May 8, 2013 – The New York Mets today announced they are searching for Mets Moms to participate in an exclusive panel that will provide feedback and ideas for the club’s outreach to moms and families throughout the tri-state area and beyond.

Fans can fill out an application at Mets.com/metsmoms now through May 31 for a chance to become a Mets Moms panelist.

The team is looking for Mets Moms panel members to represent the Mets fan base and bring the organization innovative ideas and suggestions on how to maintain and grow relationships with moms and families.

“By developing this panel, we want to solicit ideas from our fans about enhancing the experience for families at Citi Field,” said David Newman, Senior Vice President, Marketing & Communications, Mets. “This is part of our ongoing effort to incorporate and encourage feedback from all our fans.”

In a recent survey of baseball fans conducted by Exponential Interactive, the agency found more female fans of the Mets than any other team in Major League Baseball. Exponential Interactive tracked more than 1.3 million fans online in March 2013.

The Mets maintain a family-friendly environment at Citi Field highlighted by FanFest, an interactive kids zone featuring Mr. Met’s Kiddie Field, batting cages, a dunk tank and video game kiosks.

This Sunday, May 12, the Mets are hosting a Mother’s Day Brunch that includes a Baseline Box seat, an Amazin’ Mom T-shirt presented by 1-800-Flowers, and a pre-game brunch buffet in the Caesars Club for $45. Tickets are available at Mets.com/momsbrunch.

Mother’s Day will also feature a special pre-game performance by The Wiggles, the world’s favorite children’s entertainment group. There are a limited number of tickets providing access to an exclusive meet and greet with The Wiggles. Fans can visit Mets.com/thewiggles for more information.

I like that the Mets are considering the input of female fans but here’s my beef: stop equating women with families. Certainly dads are competent to provide input about what is good for families, and certainly female fans provide value other than that related to our ability to reproduce.

Bloomer Girls contributor and frequent commenter Mike suggested to me that — in addition to making money of course — one objective of baseball marketing is to foster the next generation of baseball players. Since a woman has never played in the Major Leagues, it follows that little purpose is served by marketing to girls. A cynical viewpoint, but it does make sense. Taking this position one step further, moms take their sons to Little League, right? So moms are worth marketing to because they take care of the kids. Maybe that sounds far-fetched, but the Mets seem to reinforce this theory with the above press release.

I’m not a mother but in theory I will be some day, and when I am, I would like to be seen as a person who shows up for the team through thick and thin, and as someone who will raise her children as loyal fans (though of what team I’m not sure; their theoretical father is a Yankee fan), not as someone who would want to Meet The Wiggles. Ever. And not as someone whose chief concern is making the ballpark a family friendly place.

My other beef is, naturally, enough with the pink. Here is the Mother’s Day email I received from the team:

Mets Mother's Day email

Mets Mother’s Day email

I won’t go into why I hate pink-washing in sports. Read all our pink-washing posts here. Especially this one.

This morning I had the following Twitter conversation:

metspolice convo

What do you think of his idea? I like it! Look, I wish the whole women and pink connection wouldn’t exist (and yes I know there’s the whole breast cancer awareness thing, go read that other post), but if it has to exist, then I do think pink uniforms (as opposed to the arm band, or the handwarmer in football, or socks) would make it better. The Mets (and other teams too) wear special green uniforms for St. Patrick’s Day, camouflage hats on Memorial Day (on this I share Paul Lukas’s view), American flag hats on July 4th, and probably a few more that I can’t think of off the top of my head. They don’t wear pink jerseys for Mother’s Day.

Whether you’re a fan of these specialized, non-team color jerseys or not, the fact that there is not a pink jersey on Mother’s Day is an important distinction that I’d never thought about before. Although pink has been used negatively in men’s sports, and male athletes wearing pink is newsworthy in some mainstream media outlets, is it really that emasculating for male athletes to wear a color stereotypically associated with women? The fact that MLB has seemingly never considered it as an option — even though they’ll look for any reason to make new merchandise — reinforces the notion that pink is for the female fans, and not, say, a symbol used as part of a unified effort by everyone in baseball to fight against a disease that is diagnosed in 200,000 American women each year. (Plus, these hot pink Everton jerseys are fresh!).

What do you all think? And are there any Mets fans/moms out there who signed up to be on the panel?

5 Comments

Another Double Standard: Celebrating Out Male Athletes, Ignoring Out Female Athletes

On Monday, NBA veteran Jason Collins became the first openly gay male professional athlete in America, a huge step forward for American sports, culture and society as a whole.

As the mainstream sports media, players, fans, owners and bloggers all reacted to the news, a common untruth was repeated again and again: “Collins is the first professional athlete to come out during his mid-career.” This is simply false. He is the first male professional athlete to come out during his career.

(As an aside, he is the first male professional athlete to come out during his career. Indeed, several retired male professional athletes have come out: former NFL player Dave Kopay retired in 1972 and came out in 1975; former MLB player Glenn Burke retired in 1979 and came out in the 1990s, former NBA player John Amaechi last played in 2003 and came out in 2007. There are more; ESPN has a list, so does Wikipedia.)

Tennis great Martina Navratilova, whose career spanned from 1972 to 2006, came out in 1981. (Billie Jean King‘s story bears mentioning but doesn’t necessarily follow either narrative; she was outed in 1981 after retiring in 1980, but came out of retirement in 1982). Maybe Navratilova is different than Collins; if part of the worry about being gay in sports is locker room dynamic, maybe we need to only look at team sports. Soccer player Megan Rapinoe, who had 1 goal and 3 assists for the U.S. Women’s National Team in the 2011 Women’s World Cup and 3 goals and 4 assists in the 2012 Olympics and who now plays for Olympique Lyonnais in France, came out in July 2012.

Several female basketball players in the WNBA have come out during their careers. Among them are Michelle Van Gorp, Ann Wauters and Sue Wicks. Maybe you’ve never heard of them, and maybe for some reason that makes it less newsworthy. But how about Brittney Griner, who dazzled viewers with dunks for Baylor in this year’s March Madness tournament, who was the first pick overall in this year’s WNBA draft, and who Mark Cuban said he’d consider inviting to try outs for the NBA’s Dallas Mavericks? She noted that she is gay in an interview with Sports Illustrated two weeks ago. (I say “noted” because she simply mentioned it in passing, something that I hope can be the norm one day). When asked about her sexuality in light of being the first overall pick, Griner said: “It really wasn’t too difficult, I wouldn’t say I was hiding or anything like that. I’ve always been open about who I am and my sexuality. So, it wasn’t hard at all. If I can show that I’m out and I’m fine and everything’s OK, then hopefully the younger generation will definitely feel the same way.”

From Someecards.com, via @zombiemarcus

From Someecards.com, via @zombiemarcus

Griner’s statement made very little news, but since then I’ve been thinking a lot about why. So has OutSports, where Anna Aagenes wrote:

Undoubtedly, Brittney is a basketball legend-in-the-making, and the fact that people aren’t making a big deal out of her coming out is both shocking and disappointing. Imagine if this happened with the same caliber athlete on a men’s team. (Let’s say the male equivalent as a young LeBron James.) I assure you, my Facebook page would be exploding with friends and family saying, “Did you see this? It’s all over the news!” I’d no doubt receive text messages and voice mails from well-intentioned friends about how sports culture has “finally changed.”

With all the recent media frenzy over pro male athletes coming out or not coming out, we lose our focus on the incredible female athletes who have come out. Here are a few recent headlines regarding coming out in sports from this month: “Leagues prepare for day when gay athlete comes out”; “Professional athletes coming out would be biggest step yet for gay rights”; “Major Sports Leagues Prepare for the ‘I’m Gay’ Disclosure.” The list goes on.

I hate to break it to them, but there are already out pro athletes. They are women.

This double standard is highlighted all the more now that an active male athlete has come out. So why? Why does the #1 WNBA draft pick come out to little fanfare but the first male athlete to come out during his career — a decidedly mediocre player in the twilight of his career (or should this not matter?) — gets a front page Sports Illustrated spread? (I’ll stop short of saying “top billing on Sportscenter,” because ESPN was pretty terrible about coverage, opting to focus on the Jets’ expected announcement to cut Tim Tebow [about which I would be more mad but I just relish so much in Tebow's failure, see here] and allowing Chris Broussard to say this on the show Outside the Lines).

I think there are primarily two reasons, which in my research for this post I saw were both mentioned in the comments on an OutSports post on the issue.

  1. People don’t care about women’s sports. We write all the time on this blog about women’s sports playing second fiddle to their male equivalents, which is reinforced by sports media who apparently would rather ignore women’s sports instead of market them and make money off of them. Women’s team sports struggle to exist, are scheduled at weird times and in weird places. Why? Because people, self-fulfilling prophesy or no, do not seem to care. So I guess if you don’t really consider them to be important, in stark contrast to the “big four” pro men’s sports, then female athletes coming out is likewise not important.
  2. Lesbian athletes reinforce stereotypes about who plays sports. Take the classic trope that playing sports is what boys do. Sports are manly, girly girls are girly and they don’t play sports. So if a woman plays sports, she’s manly, a tomboy, boyish. Hey, maybe she actually is a man, let’s test her DNA! Certainly Brittney Griner has had her fair share of being called a man. So it follows in this gendered, transphobic, heteronormative logic that female athletes, manly as they are, should like women. Brittney Griner rocked a totally badass white suit and Chucks for the draft when other players wore dresses. If you subscribe to stereotypes, she looks butch, so she likes women. Whereas with male athletes, all the stereotypes are subverted. Collins himself addressed this in his piece when he said: “My mouthpiece is in, and my wrists are taped. Go ahead, take a swing — I’ll get up. I hate to say it, and I’m not proud of it, but I once fouled a player so hard that he had to leave the arena on a stretcher. I go against the gay stereotype, which is why I think a lot of players will be shocked: That guy is gay? But I’ve always been an aggressive player, even in high school. Am I so physical to prove that being gay doesn’t make you soft? Who knows?”
Griner at the 2013 WNBA  draft, via MoreThan-Stats.com

Griner at the 2013 WNBA draft, via MoreThan-Stats.com

But I’ll go one step further and say there’s a third reason why female athletes who come out while active are treated differently.

One driving force behind homophobia is the same thing that’s at the root of racism and sexism: fear of dismantling the hegemon. If the ruling class — comprised of straight white men — “gives” rights or equal treatment to an oppressed group, the thinking must go, they cede some of their power. I mean that’s really at the heart of discrimination against “minority” groups, the unwillingness to give up any power currently held by the majority.

Women are already an oppressed group. We are a suspect class in American constitutional law. We are underrepresented in our “representative democracy.” So if women are already oppressed by, for example, the pay gap, or the lack of paid parental leave, or the incessant attacks on our ability to control our reproduction, then what difference does it make if a woman is gay? She’s not a threat to those in power anyway. But men are different; men benefit from patriarchy. As a result, gay men are more threatening than lesbian women and a gay man causes a bigger stir, especially in the male-dominated arena of professional sports.

I’m not quite sure where we go from here. Jason Collins’ announcement is a huge step forward for American sports and the LGBT community as a whole. At the same time, it’s patently false to call him the first professional athlete to come out pre-retirement. All three reasons that I suspect contribute to the prevalence of that falsehood are based in stereotypes about women’s place in society and in sports. If women were considered equal to men in sports and elsewhere in society, the milestone we reached on Monday would have been reached decades ago — another reason the fight for women’s equality is so important.

2 Comments

NBA Center Jason Collins Comes Out

Today Jason Collins became the first openly gay male professional athlete in America, coming out in a beautifully written front page article in Sports Illustrated.  You’re doing yourself a disservice if you don’t read the whole thing, but here are few highlights:

I’m a 34-year-old NBA center. I’m black. And I’m gay.

I didn’t set out to be the first openly gay athlete playing in a major American team sport. But since I am, I’m happy to start the conversation. I wish I wasn’t the kid in the classroom raising his hand and saying, “I’m different.” If I had my way, someone else would have already done this. Nobody has, which is why I’m raising my hand.

. . .

Openness may not completely disarm prejudice, but it’s a good place to start. It all comes down to education. I’ll sit down with any player who’s uneasy about my coming out. Being gay is not a choice.
. . .

Some people insist they’ve never met a gay person. But Three Degrees of Jason Collins dictates that no NBA player can claim that anymore. Pro basketball is a family. And pretty much every family I know has a brother, sister or cousin who’s gay. In the brotherhood of the NBA, I just happen to be the one who’s out.

Collins is a free agent now that the Washington Wizards’ season has ended.  Collins wrote:

Loyalty to my team is the real reason I didn’t come out sooner. When I signed a free-agent contract with Boston last July, I decided to commit myself to the Celtics and not let my personal life become a distraction. When I was traded to the Wizards, the political significance of coming out sunk in. I was ready to open up to the press, but I had to wait until the season was over.

At 34, the veteran Collins would play his 13th year in the league if a team signs him this off-season.  On how teammates will react, Collins wrote:

I’ve been asked how other players will respond to my announcement. The simple answer is, I have no idea. I’m a pragmatist. I hope for the best, but plan for the worst. The biggest concern seems to be that gay players will behave unprofessionally in the locker room. Believe me, I’ve taken plenty of showers in 12 seasons. My behavior wasn’t an issue before, and it won’t be one now. My conduct won’t change. I still abide by the adage, “What happens in the locker room stays in the locker room.” I’m still a model of discretion.

At least two current NBA players have shown their support on Twitter:

Via Twitter

Buzzfeed has a round-up of other positive reactions from people in basketball, and other former and current athletes in other sports. (Of course, they haven’t all been good).

Collins is not the first openly gay athlete in the U.S. to come out during his or her career — current soccer player Megan Rapinoe and recently-drafted WNBA player Brittney Griner have both stated publically that they are lesbians — but he is the first male athlete to do so.

It should be evident by now that we here at Bloomer Girls — straight, white, female allies — are in awe of Collins’s courage and stand with him.  This marks a momentous day for sports in this country.  Thank you, Jason Collins.

Sports Illustrated Cover, May 6, 2013

Sports Illustrated Cover, May 6, 2013

3 Comments

Boston Strong

My first reaction, upon hearing of the bombings at the finish line of the Boston Marathon, was this: “marathoners are the strongest people I know. Thinking of you, Boston, as I am always.”  Then I looked at the time during the race: 4:09.  Four hours and nine minutes of running.  I can’t run a marathon in 4:09 but I sure know people who can.  This attack wasn’t on the elite runners, who had long since finished the race.  This was an attack on MY people.  My runners.  My friends.  My sport.  My city.

Someone recently pointed out to me that I call myself a New Yorker when it’s convenient or useful, and that I do the same with Boston.  I was in Boston just last weekend, and as soon as I exited the train at Back Bay and looked up at the Pru, this ridiculous grin spread over my face.  When you grow up in a smaller city outside of Boston, you effectively grow up in Boston, too – in the same way that kids from North Jersey claim New York and those who grew up in Skokie feel that Chicago is somehow theirs.  It’s a weird dual citizenship.  I live in New York, but I’m a Red Sox fan.  I jaywalk with the best of ‘em, but in Boston crane around every corner expecting some Masshole to come up out of nowhere and cut me off.  I think nothing of walking over a mile from Northeastern to a bar in Back Bay, but get annoyed when I have to transfer subway lines more than once.  When someone in New York approaches me in my Sox hat and asks what I did to deserve it, I’ll easily respond “I grew up in Massachusetts/Boston/outside of Boston – can’t help where you’re born.”  But when something in Boston moves too slowly for me, I’ll claim New York citizenship to complain about the pace.  I live straddled between these two places, not entirely claiming one over the other, not rejecting one for the other.

The best and the best.

I was in tears last night as I watched the YES broadcast of the Yankees game at the bottom of the 3rd inning, when they played “Sweet Caroline” at Yankee Stadium.  Usually I spend any time watching the YES network complaining about Michael Kay or annoyed that MLBTV has blocked the NESN feed of the Red Sox game.  But last night, as I watched Yankee fans support their Boston rivals by singing along, I was reminded of the intense healing power of sports.  The victims of this attack were participating in and cheering for one of the most incredible athletic feats that any amateur can take on.  It meant so much to me that baseball teams around the country took a song so associated with the Red Sox and made it their way of expressing solidarity with my city.  New York knows from letting baseball heal the country’s wounds; I thank them for starting to heal mine.

Leave a comment

Condoleezza Rice Dons Her Green Jacket

It can be challenging to write admirably about someone with whom you disagree so vehemently, and Condoleezza Rice continues to put me in that position by being pretty bad-ass about…well, life.  Last week, Rice got her green jacket as one of the first female members of Augusta National.  (See our previous coverage of Augusta pre-admitting women and post-admitting women.)  Here’s Rice, looking practically Hillary-like as she rides in a golf cart (okay, it’s not as cool as a jet, but still):

Rice and her green jacket (which has been exquisitely tailored, by the way.)

As I’ve said every time we’ve written about Rice, she and I agree on very little politically, but what we do agree on is the place of women in sports. It’s so strange to think that this is really the first year that Augusta admitted women to its membership ranks, and that in 2013 we’re still fighting for an equal place in this world.

For the record, Phil Mickelson played a round with Rice last week and says that “she’s a phenomenal putter.”  It’s nice to know that this membership isn’t just for show.

2 Comments

ESPN Still Giving NCAA Women’s Tourney Second-Class Treatment

Last year during March Madness, I wrote about ESPN’s Differential Treatment of the NCAA Tournaments.  I looked at how the language used on the site, the features provided for each bracket challenge, and the inability to easily switch between the tournaments results in the women’s tournament garnering less interest and essentially being treated as a lesser event that happens at the same time as the “real” tournament.  If you haven’t read that post, I encourage you to do so because it’s really startling to see the second-rateness of ESPN’s women’s tournament challenge coverage.

This year, nearly every complaint I wrote about in last year’s post still exists.  They did make one good change: while last year they didn’t put game scores or schedules on the women’s tournament brackets themselves, this year they did.  This is a huge improvement, for the reasons I stated last year.

On the other hand, they’re failing in a whole new way.

ESPN developed an app for the men’s tournment.  It’s pretty cool; you can view your bracket easily, view the groups you’re in very easily, read about the games very easily, and you get alerts when games start and about scores and other news.

Various views of the app, taken from my phone

Various views of the app, taken from my phone

I tried to download the equivalent app for the women’s tournament.  It didn’t exist.  So I emailed ESPN through the feedback feature in the men’s app, saying:

You should be able to view your women’s bracket here too. Do you even have an app for the women’s tourney?

Their response:

We have a mobile web app so you can play Women’s Tournament Challenge from your smartphone. You can find it here: http://es.pn/tcw-mobile

Thanks for playing,
Dan
ESPN Fantasy

I mean, I appreciate that they wrote me back, but do not be fooled.  That is not an app, but merely the women’s tournament challenge webpage viewed from ESPN’s mobile site.

I decided “Dan” should not bear the brunt of my discontent, so I responded:

Certainly better than nothing.  Thanks for your response!

A few hours later I received another response to my initial comment:

Hello,

Thank you for contacting us.

We value the comments and opinions of our fans.  Your comments in reference to Women’s Tournament Challenge will be forwarded to the appropriate department for review.

For live assistance with this or any other issue, please call Customer Care at 1-888-549-3776 (ESPN) between 8:00 a.m. and 1:00 a.m. EST.

Regards,

Jaime
ESPN.com Customer Care

Again, I really appreciate the responses, I do.  But anything short of the same technological options for bracket challenge participants does a huge disservice to the amazing female athletes in the tournament.

As I said last year, ESPN has probably made a decision that the women’s tournament brings in fewer users and therefore less advertising revenue and so it’s not worth the time and money to improve the women’s tournament interface.  Indeed, based on the percentiles and rankings on ESPN, I estimate that there are several million completed brackets for the men’s tournament, while only about 200,000 brackets for the women’s tournament.  But a lot of people who fill out brackets for the men’s tournament have no real knowledge of or allegiance to the players and teams participating; they do it because it’s fun and prior knowledge is not necessary for success.  So why wouldn’t a person also fill out a women’s bracket?

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: one reason is that ESPN doesn’t advertise it, makes it hard to find and provides fewer features for it.  But this ends up being a self-fulfilling prophecy — ESPN thinks the women’s tournament is sub-par to the men’s, the programmers treat it as such on the website, users have a harder time participating in the women’s tournament, and so fewer users sign up.  In doing this, ESPN sends an unfortunate message about the women’s tournament, and it cuts off a potential avenue for revenue for itself.

4 Comments

We’ll say it again – IT’S OPENING DAY!!!!

Baseball is FINALLY here, the long cold winter months are over, and happiness simply does not describe how we feel.

Because in baseball, things like this happen:

Endy Chavez The Catch 2006

Endy Chavez’s The Catch 2006

And things like this happen:

Jason Varitek: Hero to Us All

Jason Varitek: Hero to Us All

Thank you Earth, for turning on your axis and rotating around the sun so that Opening Day can come and baseball can be here again.

More from us at the start of the 2012 season: