Hoops

Basis for mainstream media coverage (sports)

Sports items in the news are given to the highest bidder. Most of the news is paid for these days. AFL have deep pockets. They did buy a public holiday.

“Money Is not the root of all evil.”

Not a JJ Cale fan then?

Isaac

NBL tries to do something “dramatic beyond that” ie factual game reports. Corey Williams. He’s arguably good for generating publicity, but is he a 1 trick pony? The purists here seem to hate him, and is there enough substance in what he does to maintain or deepen a new interest in the sport?

WNBL is struggling to just survive. In my opinion, each WNBL team should align with an NBL team. Share resources and pr.

To the best of my knowledge, Every AFL team has a media manager and their own “tv” show streamed from their own studio. One very big team employs an ex ABC editor and experienced sports reporter as “Media Manager”. In the case of the Manager I know (relative) he answers to the Marketing Manager, with whom he worked at a commercial tv network. At least 2 experienced sports journos on staff. Experience. Contacts. Communication skills. What have the NBL and WNBL got to compete with this???

MU advertised for a multimedia manager. That’s a start, but MU has the biggest market and best junior program/s in Australia (Sydney sports market is so fickle, and their regular season NRL crowds are probably the source of AFL Christmas party jokes).

Basketball will never be as big as AFL (or NRL) in Australia. It’s a matter of getting casual fans, leveraging the bigger sponsors for cross promotion and also trying to convert casual fans into regular fans.

No negativity?? The AFLW having free entry for most of its games is a constant criticism of them. 3 people mentioned it in this thread alone.
And it's a valid point too, except that AFLW's rich uncle is paying the bills so they are free to do whatever they want. The WNBL doesn't have that luxury.

AFLW gets great promotion on ‘free’ TV and newspapers to create interest.
Make the attendees pay to attend and see numbers drop.
$35 for AFL men to $0 for Women makes a difference for a family day out.
ADELAIDE Lightning struggle to get a ‘match report’ despite a fantastic season which will hopefully continue past this finals series

Hang on, all channels are pumping up Aflw on their news but not all of them broadcast the AFL games so it can't be all about just promoting their own shows

What we have here is a tale of an individual's experience. I don't doubt that the person is telling the truth. The issue is whether one can use that tale to project truth at a big picture level. Anecdotal tends to be of lesser value than system wide data, unless it tells a very different story, that chimes with a story that top down data ignores/overlooks. (Think of how the polls got the Brexit vote so wrong ; where anecdotes and qualitative testimony indicated that the polls were wrong).

"...My son is 24 years old and has never wanted anything to do with the NBL because it was a bunch of old hacks that couldn't cut it in the real basketball world of the nba..."

We are blessed to play/follow an international game and see great overseas talent play locally. In his prime, the presence of David Campese or Jonah Lomu would greatly increase the gate in the UK and France. Same goes for the attraction of big soccer stars when they appear.

That said, it is a pity that the writer described the nba as the "real basketball world" when there are many worlds in the great game - the international game, college, and - dare I say it - local leagues like the NBL.

References like this suggest a certain lack of cultural confidence - that one needs the public affirmation of the likes of Stephen A Smith to acknowledge what is valuable and what is not.

Sounds legit. Can't argue with facts.

"The WNBL and BA should get onto the front foot here and push the message to younger generation ..."

Agree completely - BA and the WNBL are remarkably timid, aren't they?

Are they scared of getting into a pissing contest, where they don't have the money to compete? I hope not - all they'e done by being so quiet is handed the initiative to the AFLW to influence the youngsters or those with short memories when the facts show otherwise.

As the Godfather said "It's nothing personal, its business"

The commercial case is strongly affected by the fact that the AFL has a dedicated cable channel on foxtel which is content hungry, particularly in the otherwise dead part of the year - just after the Aussie Open, but before the round one of the mens season. ESPN does the same thing - televising of all things - bass fishing contests to Asian/Australian audiences, so as to fill out their programming schedule. It has nothing to do with consumer demand. If they were not televising AFLW matches, they will be televising contrived sports like AFLX or replays of past matches.

As regards to the astro turf media hype - well - I'm old enough to remember the media buzz around the Opals, which emerged as a global force in the early 1990s.

If you listen to the mainstream media hype you would think that AFLW invented women's empowerment in elite sports. The WNBL and BA should get onto the front foot here and push the message to younger generation that it basketball elevated women's participation as an elite team sport in this country almost 3 decades before AFLW came onto the scene.

Hang on, all channels are pumping up Aflw on their news but not all of them broadcast the AFL games so it can't be all about just promoting their own shows

Saying they deserve big coverage because AFL is popular is like saying there should be big coverage of the G league because NBA is popular and they are owned by NBA.

Here's my view on women's sports:

I'll occasionally watch when it is a big match and there are big stakes on the line. Like the opals playing for a Olympic medal or the wnbl Grand final. There's added drama because of the stakes.

I actually think Aflw would really take off if there was more drama and rivalries, even of a frivolous nature. Say for example if one of Tayla Harris' opponents said she didn't rate her kicking style. Then you'd be keen to watch the next match to see them clash. It is like how married at first sight is a really popular show.

Otherwise Id prefer to watch the men's equivalent because the quality of play is better.

All I want to see is that things will be judged on their merits rather than sports getting coverage because it involves women or influential owners.

Is that too much to ask

The AFL is very popular, the AFLW is not yet.

Saying they deserve big coverage because AFL is popular is like saying there should be big coverage of the G league because NBA is popular and they are owned by NBA.

It doesn't make sense

The AFL is one of our biggest business. It employs a lot of people. It has a big corporate world where everyone wants to be. Lots of A-listers and hangers on. They control a lot of the media and require them to get their accreditation to get inside. Without it you get no interviews, no free tickets, no invites to events, no inside information and no favours. It has massive corporate sponsorship with lots of corporate events of which certain media organisations get invited to. It's not too hard to work out why AFLW and womens cricket get a golden ticket.
The AFL and Cricket Australia are pushing the womens side of it on TV as the contract for TV rights will be up for renewal. They want more money for the rights so they need the womans side in the media to get that money.

The ABC always give the WNBL finals a bit of love. Kudos to them for that, because not many other places do.

I didn't see today, but yesterday they had Jenna O'Hea in the studio talking Opals

Link

I thought news was probably one program treated more "neutrally" though in terms of what they cover. i.e. matters of public interest rather than pure revenue driving activity. I guess it's no different to tabloid newspapers that look for the catchy stories rather than the true news stories.

Meanwhile the AFLW comes in from scratch, without a real viewer base or following and immediately commands prime media coverage. I can see why that feels unfair, but I guess life isn't fair.

We are in an Olympic year and I think we can all agree that Olympic medals are worth the same whether it be male or female, team or individual (but go the Boomers/Opals) yet we are getting zero puff pieces about our best Olympic chances as our news networks focus on AFLW.

The NBL and WNBL are in their post season and yet we have to hear of AFLW trying to make household names out of players that haven't crossed over from other sports...

I actually like that Women's cricket tries and makes household names out of our girls but they are playing for Australia... if you don't like a club in men's AFL then why are you all of a sudden gonna care about the women that play for that club.

WNBL definitely deserves more love than it gets

"Hate-reading is still a click."

It might be a little oversimplying things to call those who aren't fans of the coverage AFLW gets as "haters".

I can really see where it comes from as a NBL fan who follows a league that has struggled to get coverage. Long-time NBL followers have probably heard every theory under the sun as to what they need to do to get more coverage: Have more personalities, have more controversies, have a team in Sydney and Melbourne that is more successful etc etc. And they've done well to build up their fan base over the past few years, but it's been a tough grind.

Meanwhile the AFLW comes in from scratch, without a real viewer base or following and immediately commands prime media coverage. I can see why that feels unfair, but I guess life isn't fair.

"Another interesting thing is the idea that the media, when it comes to sport (or many things, really) should cover things based on public interest metrics or cover all things equally or only profitable things. Each publication can do whatever it wants."

Absolutely they can do whatever they want, similar to how viewers can choose whether they want to watch or not.

I thought news was probably one program treated more "neutrally" though in terms of what they cover. i.e. matters of public interest rather than pure revenue driving activity. I guess it's no different to tabloid newspapers that look for the catchy stories rather than the true news stories.

Where does one go for proper news coverage these days?

Another interesting thing is the idea that the media, when it comes to sport (or many things, really) should cover things based on public interest metrics or cover all things equally or only profitable things. Each publication can do whatever it wants. I swear I overheard someone heavily involved in sport at this state's main paper say that their AFL fantasy comp coverage was obscenely popular. Obviously a few of these publications in AFL states have determined that hitching their sports wagon to all things AFL (including AFLW) can pay off. Trade coverage for access and vice versa.

Don't get ME started on Cambage soon he'll work Simmons into this and then rjd will arrive to bang on about eugenics wink wink nudge nudge grrrr get back in the kitchen grrrr sammich.

ME, what was the point of your post? It really was pure shite from start to finish. Are you trying to assist the women by being a parody of what they are up against?

Even if it wasn't Cambage it's a prevalent sentiment across the WNBA.

They all lack basic understanding of economics.

The league and their teams have never made anything resembling a profit.

Crowd numbers and viewership is actually at its lowest in history despite being highly promoted via the NBA.

They don't understand...

The media doesn’t care about that distinction. Hate-reading is still a click. Pretty much the only women’s basketball topic I can think of that consistently gets replies is hating on Cambage.

Don't mistake people expressing a view about the over saturation of Aflw as people being interested in Aflw as an entertainment product

By the way, this isn't intended to be a thread about Aflw. It was about on what basis news channels choose what to report on

"There is more discussion this week in a thread about AFLW than there has been about womens basketball in weeks. The WNBL Finals thread has three comments."

Is it the chicken or the egg? I.e. Aflw is in everyone's mind because it gets a lot of coverage.

If I was fed wnbl stories every day I'd probably click on the topics more too

You could argue that they failed to get people caring about the NBL either. Got offside with media many years back and it's hard to win them back as (presumably) those writers now enter senior editorial positions.

But why then doesn't the wnbl get any coverage

110% money does talk - importance behind LK investing capital - it opens up a huge amount of confidence investment and a network of people who otherwise wouldn’t touch the NBL

Because of the AFL

Same as cricket

"To criticise what the AFL is trying to do by properly promoting AFLW"

Fair play to the AFL for promoting aflw. But I didn't think it was news bulletins job to be promoting particular leagues as well. I guess money does talk

I wonder if wnbl was afforded the same coverage as aflw whether we would've lost the great Erin Phillips from our sport. Hard for wnbl to compete

If the men vs women thing is complicating the discussion then let's simplify it.

Why does afl women's get lead sports story coverage and wnbl get absolutely nothing?

because taking the rightful earnings of one group and just giving it to another is apparently justified today

"In the case of women's sport, there's also a strong public interest, driven by the groundswell of support for various forms of social equity. I'm sure media folks are focus group testing and finding people are more likely to click on a headline or stay tuned to watch an article about women's AFL than one about NBL."

But why then doesn't the wnbl get any coverage

Sadly, the degeneration of this threading the name calling/labelling is why women's sport can't be discussed openly and honestly.

The original OP question related to why news sports segments push/promote one sport over another. The basis of that is not some evil planning by the patriarchal illuminati implementing some UN agenda. The bottom line is $.

If Channel 9 had the TV rights for one eyed tidily winks, then every news story would be on the sport of tidily winks to gain interest in the sport to get the advertisers in.

The unique issue with women's sport is that it has been politicised. If you don't follow or take it seriously, then you are labelled a sexist misogynst pig, usually with mummy issues or some inability to form meaningful relationships with members of the opposite sex. However, at the same time if a group of guys actually supported and went along to watch a game of female sport (without a female in the group) then they are seen as a group of perverts only going along to leer at women. As a consequence of this toxic attitude, women's sport is marginalised. And yes, it's always the "affluent, middle aged, cis-gendered white Christian male"'s fault.

However, back to the original Q. Bottom line with everything in life "follow the money"

All the above is correct - the AFL and cricket have (or had) the money to force it on us and to demand media coverage in order to get a share of the media events. They’re also generally run by traditional white males.


I’d also suggest that we look at the audience bias:

Footy - we rule the world
Cricket - we rule the world a lot of the time
Swimming - we ruled the world ages ago, and frequently do really well
Netball - we rule the world most of the time
Tennis - we ruled the world ages ago, and occasionally another great hope comes along
Basketball - we did it once with the Opals, and otherwise we’ve come close a lot of the time, but the NBA is way ahead of us
Soccer - we’re usually competitive, but there are so many better competitions to watch

What do you think traditional (white) males who have time to watch will choose to watch? I reckon they’ll watch what Aussies are good at (when we’re world-class), or just go for the best quality they can get (like the NBA) or Premier League.


And the audience especially loves an ‘Aussie battler’ story, such as an Ash Barty or a Don Bradman or a Shane Gould or a Mark Viduka. Apart from Delly and Patty in their early days, who in the NBL or NBA could be classed as an Aussie who battled against the odds to reach the top? Jingles had to battle, and has had a very respectable career, but still hasn’t quite reached the top. Bogey and Ben were born tall, which already gave them a huge advantage to casual viewers, but again ... not quite THE TOP.

How many women in our fairly traditional society have time to sit down for at least 2 hours to watch sports?

I’d also suggest that another reason NBL doesn’t get a huge viewing audience is because the game seems a lot more complicated than most other sports, with so many subtleties in the rules and how they are called. Unless you’re a true fan, if you’re getting frustrated because you feel you don’t understand it, then you’re probably not going to watch it much.

@Jack Toft probably hit the nail on the head with this! When it comes to crowd numbers I would place more credibility on percentage of seats filled than anything else. If you are at 100% capacity of seating available, you are doing as well as you can be, any other comparisons are irrelevant.

Good news for the NBL I guess is another 3 year commitment from Hungry Jacks, also if the grass roots level of our game from NBL1 down takes off and gains a real foothold, that could be a catalyst for a more broad level of media or TV interest that may spill onto the NBL.

While advertising is crucial and the dollar is king, getting the kids hooked on a sport and keeping their interest in it with so much international competition in this media space is the real key...

Follow the money is a good answer, with respect to media sports coverage. If sponsors are paying for adverts and media exposure, or the sport is, then the media folks will run with it.

In the case of women's sport, there's also a strong public interest, driven by the groundswell of support for various forms of social equity. I'm sure media folks are focus group testing and finding people are more likely to click on a headline or stay tuned to watch an article about women's AFL than one about NBL. Even though they may not be prepared to go to a game or watch one on TV.

Novelty also helps to generate media coverage. e.g., the public interest generated in NBL due to Lamelo Ball's arrival in NBL this season and Andrew Bogut last season. AFLW has had a lot of novelty to trade on, as the league adds teams and players and is still developing. AFL's aim would be to convert some of that novelty driven interest into entrenched, intergenerational support

AFLW crowds don't justify the weight of media exposure. The average crowd for Round 1 this season was 6,165, with one game getting a crowd of 15,337 (Richmond vs Carlton). Lowest crowd was 1,540.

Average crowd for Round 2 was 9,447, with one game getting a crowd of 31,835 (West Coast vs Fremantle). Lowest crowd was 2,102.

Entry was free to all games in Round 1 and to all games except West Coast/Fremantle in Round 2. The two large crowd games were outliers in that they marked the entry of new clubs to AFLW and were heavily promoted. Past history with AFLW has shown that these firsts usually draw good crowds and ratings, which have then been followed by significant decreases.

Couldn't find much on TV ratings but did find that the three AFLW games last Sunday rated 27,000-33,000 each on Foxtel (live coverage). None of the other games in Round 2 rated in the top 20. So I'm guessing they have similar ratings to NBL games.

No idea what live streaming numbers for AFLW might look like.

'Equivalent' was not the correct description, sorry. Theres a female version league to every mens league. Even if they are polar opposites from a popularity point of view.

Lets not forget the WNBL has been around for a long time. The AFLW comes in and its hailed as some kind of pioneer for womens sport. This is mot true, but the media and AFL makes it out to be something unique.

Also, this is a winter sport, football is not really suited to being played this tine of year (unlike basketball and soccer which can be), so if the AFL really is serious about growing its own sport, it should be played in winter. And they can figure out how to market it and get crowds there rather than using it as a tool to go up against its summer competitors.

I've been to 2 AFLW games and neither of them were free entry.

FWIW women's sport is huge, there's an equivalent womens league to every mens league all over the world. Then theres specific female only sports like netball, which is also taking off here.

This conversation shouldnt be about about sexism. The OP was debating about the level of mainstream coverage the AFLW was getting and why the NBL (and also other summer leagues) seem to be moved down a notch to accomodate it.

Here's a question for you - would the AFL move the AFLW to winter so its inline with its season, or are they satisfied keeping it in summer, so it goes up against basketball, soccer etc. Good to see women play football professionally, but is there an agenda the AFL is pushing also? And is this what irritates the critics?

Very difficult to gauge with AFLW crowds as they don't pay. The AFL and Cricket Australia use their money and media rights to get on the news. Use their leverage to control everything as they hold a lot of media junkets, press conferences, etc. If you don't show their stuff on the news, you don't get your press pass and invites to their junkets, presentations, award shows, etc, etc. The government is also getting in on this as they give huge sums of taxpayers money to cricket and AFL and are also lobbying television stations to show womens sport.
Can't believe they don't charge for AFLW admissions yet but they are going to have to soon to start covering some costs as the Mens games and sponsors is paying everything at the moment. Be interesting to see what happens when people have to pay.

Sexist crap from incels! You’re running down women to make yourself feel better about your pathetic life.

“So, the OP asked the question regarding why the sports section had so many female sports reports? Say, just follow the money. If you get people watching women's sport, you can get more advertisers.”

Money Talks
It’s the root of all evil

There were cash prizes.

Not enough - there was a Townsville law firm that ran one and even made it public on the internet (lol) so got reamed by us diehards. Memories.