Does NFL Stake In ESPN Jeopardize Sports Media Independence?

As ESPN closes in on a potential acquisition of NFL Media properties like NFL Network and NFL RedZone – something that could really aid the sales pitch for the company’s new streaming service – comes additional clarity around the other side of such a deal.

CNBC’s Alex Sherman reported on Thursday that part of the conversations also include the NFL acquiring a 10% stake in ESPN.

While ESPN is already invested in the NFL and numerous other pro leagues and college conferences via media rights (and in the case of the SEC and ACC, entirely separate cable networks), what’s being described here is far different.

By giving the NFL its own financial stake in ESPN, it could be argued that the league (already the most powerful entity on U.S. television) would assume unprecedented access and control over what is and isn’t covered. Further complicating matters: ESPN is the most-watched cable sports network in the country, and would now effectively exist as state-run media for the NFL.

Confirming Long-Term NFL Favoritism

There’s reason for alarm there, though this dynamic has arguably been in play for many years as it is. A 2015 article from Truthout highlights the various ways in which ESPN couldn’t be trusted to cover the NFL fairly, and far more reasons have piled up since.

The NFL acquiring an ownership stake in ESPN would simply be the biggest one yet, coupled with the league’s importance to ESPN’s success on both cable and streaming TV. Theoretically, such an arrangement starts interfering with any digging into concussion protocols, off-field issues or even the fair coverage of labor disputes.

Labor conversations, in particular, could effectively become a PR campaign in favor of the NFL’s owners. This is not new territory as the conflicts of interest these billion-dollar media rights deals present already put the network on the side of the leagues. And coverage largely reflects that.

The NFL owning a piece of ESPN doesn’t prevent the NFL Players Association from getting a fair deal when the next labor dispute arises. But it does make it impossible for both sides to pull the same levers of public pressure in those negotiations.

In reality, though, how “independent” have these networks been for decades now, when cable sports nets – and really, TV as a whole – need live games more than it needs fair compensation for the players?

Networks Cozy With Certain Conferences

The conversation extends to college athletes as well.

ESPN’s coverage around compensating college athletes was squarely against for years (here’s one example from 2013) before name, image and likeness ever became a reality – in part because NIL would’ve theoretically made game rights more expensive.

Fox and Fox Sports 1 have their own biases, covering the Big Ten (Fox has a majority stake in the Big Ten Network and is a long-time rights holder) in a far different light than leagues like the SEC and ACC, which are both exclusive to Disney. Ditto for ESPN’s coverage of the SEC vs. the Big Ten since the latter left the Disney family.

ESPN’s coverage of the College Football Playoff, which it owns, also reflects its biases via the financial investment it has in that postseason structure. The playoff field is the center of the sport’s coverage, and the rankings release shows on ESPN every Tuesday in November are made-for-TV events that confirm that idea.

What Really Changes Here?

So we come back to the basic question: Does this really jeopardize the independence of sports media? Or would the NFL owning a stake in ESPN simply cut out the middle man in an arrangement we’ve watched play out for decades?

It’s probably the latter, if we’re being honest.

Access journalism has already taken over for true investigative reporting as it is, and sports media is one of the loudest examples of that. There are still exceptions, of course (ESPN’s own E:60 program, is one of the last examples to point to today). But across all forms of media, the trade was seemingly made some time ago for increased access – or perceived access – over true objectivity.

Media consolidation makes that objectivity even more difficult to pursue. We’ll see what guardrails are put up in the case of the NFL and ESPN. But don’t be surprised if there are none.