ESPN Undefeated - why not one white person

[jmh9713]

I understand they are doing a show on areas with rampant poverty, but you do a show and want to talk about issues..........and you don't invite one single white person to be a part of your panel. Everyone wants to talk, but nobody wants to talk to the other race. This just seems like a pretty ridiculous way to put this out there. In the 5 minutes I watched questions came up about racist cops, slavery, things are the same since the 60s. Every time someone said something about that the crowd applaused.

You want to bring everyone together and then you have a topic that is controversial and you do not invite one single white person. I don't know man......it just irks me. Essentially double the amount of white people were shot and killed by police compared to african americans, but not one single white person has been asked "what do you think about this issue"

Fully prepared for this thread to blow up......please que the "poor white people" posts

 

[PawPower1981]

 

[Redhill81]

I understand they are doing a show on areas with rampant poverty, but you do a show and want to talk about issues..........and you don't invite one single white person to be a part of your panel. Everyone wants to talk, but nobody wants to talk to the other race. This just seems like a pretty ridiculous way to put this out there. In the 5 minutes I watched questions came up about racist cops, slavery, things are the same since the 60s. Every time someone said something about that the crowd applaused.

You want to bring everyone together and then you have a topic that is controversial and you do not invite one single white person. I don't know man......it just irks me. Essentially double the amount of white people were shot and killed by police compared to african americans, but not one single white person has been asked "what do you think about this issue"

Fully prepared for this thread to blow up......please que the "poor white people" posts

Smh. I turned to it and saw a white guy and woman sitting on the panel. I know what you're trying to do and you know it too since you mentioned that you came to your "conclusion" after 5 minutes of watching. I hope you and the rest of the gang have fun with this topic.

 

[dposton]

I thought it was awesome. (I'm a 30 year old white southern male who almost always votes Republican in case you needed my demographic.)

 

[ChicagoTiger85]

I understand they are doing a show on areas with rampant poverty, but you do a show and want to talk about issues..........and you don't invite one single white person to be a part of your panel. Everyone wants to talk, but nobody wants to talk to the other race. This just seems like a pretty ridiculous way to put this out there. In the 5 minutes I watched questions came up about racist cops, slavery, things are the same since the 60s. Every time someone said something about that the crowd applaused.

You want to bring everyone together and then you have a topic that is controversial and you do not invite one single white person. I don't know man......it just irks me. Essentially double the amount of white people were shot and killed by police compared to african americans, but not one single white person has been asked "what do you think about this issue"

Fully prepared for this thread to blow up......please que the "poor white people" posts

It's the MSNBC/ Salon.com of sports at this point.

 

[jmh9713]

Smh. I turned to it and saw a white guy and woman sitting on the panel. I know what you're trying to do and you know it too since you mentioned that you came to your "conclusion" after 5 minutes of watching. I hope you and the rest of the gang have fun with this topic.

What am i trying to do? I really don't know what you are getting at. Turned it on. Maybe they switched the panel after a certain part of the show? I did not see one single white person on it. Maybe I am wrong.

"and the rest of my gang" what kind of backhanded sh** is that. Because I mention white people you get pissed off?

 

[Esso Porch]

I understand they are doing a show on areas with rampant poverty, but you do a show and want to talk about issues..........and you don't invite one single white person to be a part of your panel. Everyone wants to talk, but nobody wants to talk to the other race. This just seems like a pretty ridiculous way to put this out there. In the 5 minutes I watched questions came up about racist cops, slavery, things are the same since the 60s. Every time someone said something about that the crowd applaused.

You want to bring everyone together and then you have a topic that is controversial and you do not invite one single white person. I don't know man......it just irks me. Essentially double the amount of white people were shot and killed by police compared to african americans, but not one single white person has been asked "what do you think about this issue"

Fully prepared for this thread to blow up......please que the "poor white people" posts

Ill admit I have no clue what show you're even talking about

However, and maybe I'm misunderstanding, but it appears you watched 5 minutes of a program and then came here and made an angry post about it. If it's an hour long show then you rushed to judgment after watching roughly 8% of the show. I look forward to your commentary at the 10:00 mark of the first quarter in each game this year

 

[robert.n]

8 days till football season.

 

[jmh9713]

Ill admit I have no clue what show you're even talking about

However, and maybe I'm misunderstanding, but it appears you watched 5 minutes of a program and then came here and made an angry post about it. If it's an hour long show then you rushed to judgment after watching roughly 8% of the show. I look forward to your commentary at the 10:00 mark of the first quarter in each game this year

True.....but I guess on the other side of it why would you continue to watch it. If the panel was different in the other 55 minutes apologies to espn and their show. Was the panel different? I understand you said you didn't watch it so obviously you do not have the answer

 

[Steven15]

I understand they are doing a show on areas with rampant poverty, but you do a show and want to talk about issues..........and you don't invite one single white person to be a part of your panel. Everyone wants to talk, but nobody wants to talk to the other race. This just seems like a pretty ridiculous way to put this out there. In the 5 minutes I watched questions came up about racist cops, slavery, things are the same since the 60s. Every time someone said something about that the crowd applaused.

You want to bring everyone together and then you have a topic that is controversial and you do not invite one single white person. I don't know man......it just irks me. Essentially double the amount of white people were shot and killed by police compared to african americans, but not one single white person has been asked "what do you think about this issue"

Fully prepared for this thread to blow up......please que the "poor white people" posts

Must be a millennial, complaining nonstop.

 

[cockkilla]

hahaha... "well they didn't say anything I agreed with during the 5 minutes that I watched so why would I keep watching?"

 

[Howard's Jock]

Jesus.

 

[Bosse de Nage]

What do you expect? It's (((ESPN))) goy. They'll (((diversify))) all the Nordic ski teams before it's over.

 

[clemben]

Poor white people post.

 

[WinstonW101]

Wasn't b show about black on black crime that's how all the show anchors on ESPN radio where pitching it

 

[bigredtiger69]

If R. Kelly hadn't peed on his broken foot, none of this would be happening

 

[slingle]

True.....but I guess on the other side of it why would you continue to watch it. If the panel was different in the other 55 minutes apologies to espn and their show. Was the panel different? I understand you said you didn't watch it so obviously you do not have the answer

You must also be the type of guy that sees the headline of the article, gets immediately outraged and tweets at the author without ever reading said article.

The reason you keep watching or keep reading is so you don't let your preconceived notions rule your worldview. You jumped headlong into a conclusion and accusations with hardly any invesigation.

Congrats. You've reached peak internet.

 

[TigerJAC]

I understand they are doing a show on areas with rampant poverty, but you do a show and want to talk about issues..........and you don't invite one single white person to be a part of your panel. Everyone wants to talk, but nobody wants to talk to the other race. This just seems like a pretty ridiculous way to put this out there. In the 5 minutes I watched questions came up about racist cops, slavery, things are the same since the 60s. Every time someone said something about that the crowd applaused.

You want to bring everyone together and then you have a topic that is controversial and you do not invite one single white person. I don't know man......it just irks me. Essentially double the amount of white people were shot and killed by police compared to african americans, but not one single white person has been asked "what do you think about this issue"

Fully prepared for this thread to blow up......please que the "poor white people" posts

I woke up and it was on, and though I only saw a couple of minutes of it, I don't think the topic was poverty. That might have been discussed, but I believe @WinstonW101, might be correct, in that it had something to do with black on black crime, or along those lines, which is why the panel was black.

 

[clemsonu96]

Wow, I don't think I've ever seen a more perfect gif placement. And with one I've never seen. Well done.

 

[Larry_Williams]

I've read one offering from The Undefeated. It was the Ryan Lochte "white privilege" narrative they tried to shove down our throats.

It was not a good look.

 

[slingle]

I've read one offering from The Undefeated. It was the Ryan Lochte "white privilege" narrative they tried to shove down our throats.

It was not a good look.

Who is "they"? The author of that one particular column? And how was it "shoved down your throat?"

 

[Larry_Williams]

Who is "they"? The author of that one particular column? And how was it "shoved down your throat?"

It was the narrative that they, or the writer, tried to shove down the throats of the readers. I thought it was ridiculous, personally. Here's the column.

 

[Every name taken]

Help an old man out. What is all the new "pee on you" stuff lately?

 

[slingle]

It was the narrative that they, or the writer, tried to shove down the throats of the readers. I thought it was ridiculous, personally. Here's the column.

The pseudo point of the rest of this thread was not to jump to conclusions on the whole based upon a small sample size. I've read that column and wasn't particularly moved either way. That was one writer's opinion out of how many articles on that site? To me, having something shoved down your throat means it is forcible. The headline of that column actually tells you exactly what you are about to get into.

 

[Every name taken]

It was the narrative that they, or the writer, tried to shove down the throats of the readers. I thought it was ridiculous, personally. Here's the column.

I agree Larry. My take on the story: Initially I believed Lochte. Not because he is white, but because of all the stories about how screwed up Rio is (if the water is polluted, then crime must be rampant, right?). But because he is a big douche (who does that to their hair?), I was easily swayed that he had lied. I can not imagine that I would have a different first impression on any athlete that made that claim, but there are others, black and white, that I might have defended or believed longer. Give me a break. We thought political correctness was bad? Now that just saying the words "politically correct" are banned as offensive to some, we are truly reaching Orwell's vision

 

[Larry_Williams]

The pseudo point of the rest of this thread was not to jump to conclusions on the whole based upon a small sample size. I've read that column and wasn't particularly moved either way. That was one writer's opinion out of how many articles on that site? To me, having something shoved down your throat means it is forcible. The headline of that column actually tells you exactly what you are about to get into.

I'm not saying the writer physically restrained me and forced me to read the column.

I'm saying his premise was almost totally ridiculous.

 

[Larry_Williams]

I agree Larry. My take on the story: Initially I believed Lochte. Not because he is white, but because of all the stories about how screwed up Rio is (if the water is polluted, then crime must be rampant, right?). But because he is a big douche (who does that to their hair?), I was easily swayed that he had lied. I can not imagine that I would have a different first impression on any athlete that made that claim, but there are others, black and white, that I might have defended or believed longer. Give me a break. We thought political correctness was bad? Now that just saying the words "politically correct" are banned as offensive to some, we are truly reaching Orwell's vision

Check out this take on the column by Clay Travis.

Travis and Jason Whitlock generally make far more sense on social issues than anyone at ESPN.

 

[MKOTiger]

One of the greatest aspects of our country, in fact, one aspect that makes us different than just about every other nation or society since the First Nations were formed, is a minority's right to rant without fear of reprisals by the majority. This can be based age, gender, race, religion, national origin, socioeconomic status, etc. it does not mean you or I have to like or agree with the rant, but it is fundamental right, and a great one.

I say let the ranters rant. It's good for the country and as history has shown us, the truth usually works its way out in the long run. And as we all should know, free speech is not really free. Say stupid stuff too many times and you won't have an audience pretty soon. Take Al Sharpton for instance. On the other hand, take a staunch conservative position on every issue, and you will be deemed bias, like Fox News.

It's all part of our process. We, individually, may disagree or be angered, by blatantly bias statements, or it may make us look like idiots to other nations, but that's all part of free speech. Fairness doesn't come by having a fair panel. Fairness comes from everyone being able to speak his or her mind. My suggestion would be for OP to put some time in responding as to why the panel chosen was incorrect in its opinions and not the color of thier skin.

 

[Larry_Williams]

One of the greatest aspects of our country, in fact, one aspect that makes us different than just about every other nation or society since the First Nations were formed, is a minority's right to rant without fear of reprisals by the majority. This can be based age, gender, race, religion, national origin, socioeconomic status, etc. it does not mean you or I have to like or agree with the rant, but it is fundamental right, and a great one.

I say let the ranters rant. It's good for the country and as history has shown us, the truth usually works its way out in the long run. And as we all should know, free speech is not really free. Say stupid stuff too many times and you won't have an audience pretty soon. Take Al Sharpton for instance. On the other hand, take a staunch conservative position on every issue, you will be deemed bias, like Fox News.

It's all part of our process. We, individually, may disagree or be angered, by blatantly bias statements, or it may make us look like idiots to other nations, but that's all part of free speech. Fairness doesn't come by having a fair panel. Fairness comes from everyone being able to speak his or her mind. My suggestion would be for OP to put some time in responding as to why the panel chosen was incorrect in its opinions and not the color of thier skin.

Good points.

 

[WinstonW101]

Has there every been a major company in history who has a worse understanding of their demographics than ESPN ?

 

[jmh9713]

One of the greatest aspects of our country, in fact, one aspect that makes us different than just about every other nation or society since the First Nations were formed, is a minority's right to rant without fear of reprisals by the majority. This can be based age, gender, race, religion, national origin, socioeconomic status, etc. it does not mean you or I have to like or agree with the rant, but it is fundamental right, and a great one.

I say let the ranters rant. It's good for the country and as history has shown us, the truth usually works its way out in the long run. And as we all should know, free speech is not really free. Say stupid stuff too many times and you won't have an audience pretty soon. Take Al Sharpton for instance. On the other hand, take a staunch conservative position on every issue, and you will be deemed bias, like Fox News.

It's all part of our process. We, individually, may disagree or be angered, by blatantly bias statements, or it may make us look like idiots to other nations, but that's all part of free speech. Fairness doesn't come by having a fair panel. Fairness comes from everyone being able to speak his or her mind. My suggestion would be for OP to put some time in responding as to why the panel chosen was incorrect in its opinions and not the color of thier skin.

The color of skin is kind of important when you are trying to bring people together. The people on that panel need to hear from other races. I am sorry if that offends anyone.

I dont see the big deal on that if you are holding a show on multiple race related issues......NOT just black on black crime which another poster posted earlier. In the short time I watched white police brutality was the topic. So i know that is not accurate.

I dont see things through another person's eyes. They dont see things through my eyes. If you really want to talk about something that is dealing with race dont segregate the panel.
That was a pitch fork session last night .....yes in the small amount of time i could watch it

 

[Tiger1425]

I understand they are doing a show on areas with rampant poverty, but you do a show and want to talk about issues..........and you don't invite one single white person to be a part of your panel. Everyone wants to talk, but nobody wants to talk to the other race. This just seems like a pretty ridiculous way to put this out there. In the 5 minutes I watched questions came up about racist cops, slavery, things are the same since the 60s. Every time someone said something about that the crowd applaused.

You want to bring everyone together and then you have a topic that is controversial and you do not invite one single white person. I don't know man......it just irks me. Essentially double the amount of white people were shot and killed by police compared to african americans, but not one single white person has been asked "what do you think about this issue"

Fully prepared for this thread to blow up......please que the "poor white people" posts

...and off we go.

 

[slingle]

Check out this take on the column by Clay Travis.

Travis and Jason Whitlock generally make far more sense on social issues than anyone at ESPN.

Say it ain't so Larry!?!? Whitlock and Travis?

 

[Larry_Williams]

Say it ain't so Larry!?!? Whitlock and Travis?

Uh, can you explain?

 

[spskillz]

Travis and Jason Whitlock

 

[MKOTiger]

The color of skin is kind of important when you are trying to bring people together. The people on that panel need to hear from other races. I am sorry if that offends anyone.

I dont see the big deal on that if you are holding a show on multiple race related issues......NOT just black on black crime which another poster posted earlier. In the short time I watched white police brutality was the topic. So i know that is not accurate.

I dont see things through another person's eyes. They dont see things through my eyes. If you really want to talk about something that is dealing with race dont segregate the panel.
That was a pitch fork session last night .....yes in the small amount of time i could watch it

I assume we disagree on a lot of fundamental interests.

 

[OrangeRegalia]

Check out this take on the column by Clay Travis.

Travis and Jason Whitlock generally make far more sense on social issues than anyone at ESPN.

JESUS...

 

[navytiger]

People actually watch ESPN for things other than Clemson sports?

 

[Larry_Williams]

Should I have provided a trigger warning?

 

[slingle]

Uh, can you explain?

Whitlock and, even more so, Travis are generally cynical trolls that play to their readers' base instincts. They are clickbait artists. Essentially more intelligent versions of Skip Bayless and Stephen A. Smith but for print - which actually now that write that might make them worse than both Bayless and Smith.

 

[pharout73]

I need a safe space.....