ESPN has released new political and election guidelines for its employees that, while allowing political discussion on the network’s platforms, recommend linking such commentary to sports whenever possible. The new policies also provide separate guidelines for ESPN staffers working on the news and those participating in commentary.
The timing of the release of election guidelines is a bit unusual: such guidelines are rarely issued properly. After a presidential election; they are usually updated near the start of a presidential campaign. But we live in unique political times, which ESPN appears to have recognized, which explains the revised guidelines for discussing political and social issues.
“Given the intense interest generated by the most recent presidential election and the fact that the political and social discussions that followed have often intersected with the world of sports, we felt this was an appropriate time to review our guidelines,” said Patrick Stiegman, ESPN’s vice president of global digital. content and the chairman of the company’s internal editorial board, which wrote the new guidelines.
Stiegman said no issues or incidents led to the change, but Craig Bengtson, ESPN vice president and editor-in-chief of newsgathering and reporting, said the country’s tense political climate had played a role.
“We’re seeing the convergence of a politically charged environment and all these new technologies coming together at the same time,” he said. “On this basis, we wanted the policy to reflect the reality of today’s world. There are people talking about politics in a way that has never been done before, and we are not immune to it.”
Stiegman said the new election guidelines are no longer aimed solely at presidential elections. “We simply expanded our approach of covering presidential elections every four years to major elections, in general, believing that the same principles should apply,” Stiegman said.
So what’s different about the new policies? Let’s start with the Guidelines on political and social issues. His first line lays out ESPN’s challenge quite precisely:
“At ESPN, our reputation and credibility with viewers, readers and listeners is paramount. When it comes to political and social issues, our audiences need to be confident that our original reporting is not influenced by political pressures or personal agendas.
Like I written in November, not all ESPN consumers — or employees, for that matter — feel the company has lived up to that ideal. Stiegman said the buzz around the topic of ESPN and politics — also written by The New York Times, Horrible announcementTHE Orlando Sentinel and many conservative sites criticizing ESPN’s perceived leftward tilt — did not play a significant role in revising the guidelines.
The two most notable changes to the Political Advocacy Policy are the delineation of guidelines between news and commentary, and the ability to increase political discussions on ESPN platforms, where warranted and related to sports . This isn’t a surprising development, it’s just new.
“We wanted to err on the side of transparency and confidence in our reporting,” Stiegman said, “but also give our columnists and commentators the freedom to discuss topics relevant to the sports fans who visit our platforms, even if issues are political or political. of a social nature.”
Here are other highlights from the Political and Social Issues policy, with my thoughts:
“Original reporting must not include statements of support, opposition or partisanship related to any social issue, political position, candidate or office holder. »
This one seems simple and achievable, at least on ESPN platforms. The only place on ESPN where you don’t see direct opinion is on the hard news side of the operation.
“Writers, journalists, producers and editors directly involved in ‘hard’ news reporting, investigative or corporate assignments and related coverage should refrain, in any forum open to the public, from taking positions on political or social issues, candidates or office holders. »
The three key words here are “forum open to the public”. This extends this policy beyond the borders of ESPN and brings the Wild West of social media into play. In fact, later in the memo it directly says that the policy applies to “ESPN, Twitter, Facebook and other media.”
This is where the potential for problems exists. ESPN journalists tweeting political views from their own social accounts would technically violate this policy. Again, news journalists are less likely to use social media for this purpose than commentators, but the effectiveness of this policy will depend on how rigorously leaders choose to view social media. Let’s be honest: It’s not too hard to find ESPN employees tweeting political views. Yes, much of this activity falls under the new guidelines, which also clarify that those who publicly express their political views could be reassigned when covering stories. But the relevance of the other messages is a little murkier.
“Outside of ‘hard’ news reporting, comments related to political or social issues, candidates or office holders are appropriate on ESPN platforms, consistent with these guidelines.”
This is significant because, unlike the company’s previous policy, it states that comments on political and social issues are acceptable. Not only did the previous policy not say that, it also conveyed a tone suggesting that diving into political waters carried more danger than reward. In other words, the new policy has gone from “It’s dangerous over there, so it’s probably best to stay home” to “It’s dangerous over there, so here are some tools to best ensure your security “.
“It’s a more positive, proactive stance,” Bengtson said. “If there’s a good reason to discuss (politics), here’s how we can best help you do that to best help our audience.”
“The subject must be linked to a current issue impacting sport. This condition may vary for content appearing on platforms with broader editorial missions, such as The Undefeated, FiveThirtyEight and espnW. Other exceptions must be approved in advance by senior editorial management.
The claim that topics should be sports-related is also new, although Stiegman left some wiggle room on this point. “We want to emphasize a direct connection to sports, knowing that is the lens through which most fans view ESPN,” he said. “We also understand that there may sometimes be exceptions referring to important and broader policy topics. We just want to make sure that these are thoughtful discussions and that they meet the other criteria in the guidelines.
Bengtson said, “I don’t think people are pushing us to hear us talk about social and political issues. When we can connect with sport, we must do it and do it smartly.
“The presentation must be thoughtful and respectful. We must provide balance or recognize opposing viewpoints, as appropriate. We must avoid personal attacks and inflammatory speeches.”
What is a “personal attack” and what is considered “inflammatory”? As with many questions of journalism policy, these are subjective. And in policies like these, that may prompt caution.
“There is always a layer of subjectivity in such matters,” Stiegman said. “Editors and producers will work with those who provide feedback on these topics to ensure that the dialogue and debate is thoughtful, respectful and as fair as possible.”
The changes made to the Election Guidelines are much less important (see previous policy here), but there have been some notable changes.
“All interviews, features, corporate efforts or articles produced involving candidates must first be approved by senior management. This is about ensuring a coordinated and equitable effort, and includes considerations of location, interviewer, timing and format.
The interesting note here is what was removed from the previous version of the policy, which said: “All interviews, features, corporate efforts, or produced materials with a sports angle, including attempts at humor (emphasis mine) involving candidates must first be approved by the management team.
While this may appear to conflict with the policy’s guidelines on political and social issues, I suspect the real reason this text was removed was to ensure employees understand that it applies to all political subjects, not just those related to sport.
It will be interesting to see if this new policy has any impact. These changes appear to be designed to remind employees of ESPN’s invaluable and lucrative connection to sports while recognizing – rightly, in my view – that sports, culture and politics overlap in ways that cannot be ignored. But ultimately, the effectiveness of policies is usually linked to the intensity of their implementation.
