to think that sport should not be included in news reports?

[MardyBra]

I've thought this for a long time, but this post was prompted by seeing this football v archeology thing on Facebook, although for me it applies to all sport, rather than football:

www.tickld.com/x/how-football-sounds-to-people-that-just-dont-care-T

Why should sport get so much coverage on the media? Every TV news report has a good chunk of sport at the end. Not only do they have it on radio news, but people like Chris Evans on Radio 2 in the morning have a boring bloke special reporter who drones on about sports. I don't mind it at all in newspapers as I just stop reading when I get to that bit, but if you're watching telly or listening to the radio, you have to put up with it.

I know that there are a lot of people who like sport, but there are also a lot of people who don't give a shit. Maybe we could even things out a bit, replacing the sports news with "leisure" news, to include music, books, films, telly and a bit of sport too (if they must) - all on a more equal footing.

Also, with the increase of the internet, and other communication methods, it's much easier for fans to get results on-line, so they shouldn't have to rely on news reports.

Part of me wonders if this is a feminist issue also. After all, early news formats were largely devised by men, and men tend to be more interested in sports news than women. (I know this is a generalisation and there are plenty of women sports fans; I'm just saying it is skewed towards men). Are we perpetuating some male dominated status quo by mildly accepting this format.

Anyone else NOT looking forward to the world cup?

In answering this OP, I'd be interested to know if you are a sports fan or not. Ta!

I'm biased as I'm really not a sports fan and watch very little (do have a soft spot for tennis though). I am not interested in sports news and find it really dull but I think I'm probably in a minority and a miserable old git.

I think a more varied 'leisure' section on news programmes would be more interesting but can imagine plenty of people who'd find that equally as boring.

I'm also not looking forward to the World Cup - the aisles filled with flatscreen TVs and bumper packs of lager in Tesco at the weekend just made my heart sink. Oh well, doubt we'll be in it for long!

so why not a sports day eh? You on my side now OP?

Anyway as I'm hopping up and down with steam coming out of my ears and a face like this -> , I'd better drop out of this thread.

Hopefully about to watch the England v Sri Lanka one day while I'm doing the ironing, if it isn't rained off . Would you like me to give you updates OP?

Sorry Bowlers, your arguments have not swayed me.

But please note that I'm not saying we should ban sport. I'm just saying it gets disproportionate coverage on news bulletins.

What I'd really respect is a sport fan coming onto the thread saying that whilst they like the coverage, they can appreciate that it is overly represented.

I think it could be a feminist issue that anybody would assume that women wouldn't be interested in sport just because she is a woman. Or that she would be more (or at all) interested in 'entertainment news'. It's a generally offensive assumption, both to women who like sports and to men who don't.

The more people who watch or listen the more money they make - they're not going to suggest people go elsewhere for information. Some people are watching/listening to get sports news, nobody is going to avoid listening/watching because of sports news, they have no motivation to stop broadcasting it and every motivation to continue. There are other options for news if you really want one.

I'd be fully in favour of broadcasting archeology news as well though, so I might not be the best person to ask.

Ninja - I'm not saying women aren't interested in sport because they are women. Just that proportionately more men happen to be interested.

calculatorsatdawn I totally agree! I've often wondered if forecasters have some sort of accuracy quotas they have to reach. So they ensure at least 50% of each weather update is correct by telling us what the weather was like this morning.

Yep, it's just one of those button pushing issue for me. Too many people have the attitude that a woman can't be a 'real' sports fan. Equally, I know men who hate the assumption that they must be interested in sports just because they were born with testicles.

I'm slightly bemused by the face from Bowlers. It's sometimes hard to judge tone on the internet, so I'm not sure if it is tongue-in-cheek or genuinely incensed. But, as someone who gets her interests reported half-hourly on the radio and at the end of every TV news bulletin (and the media is unlikely to stop any time soon), I'm sure she has nothing to be about.

"Yep, it's just one of those button pushing issue for me. Too many people have the attitude that a woman can't be a 'real' sports fan. Equally, I know men who hate the assumption that they must be interested in sports just because they were born with testicles."

I understand where you are coming from. DH and DS are not sports fans. DM is probably watching the cricket along with Bowlers.

Yanbu. They report on football when there's nothing spectacular going on. I wouldn't mind if it was a particularly momentous event. Love the idea of having other hobbies on the newsto even it up.

Yep, sport news could be farmed out into a 60second slot about 8.30. A bit like celeb news on some channel I watch sometimes.

Oh YA soooooo NBU!

The amount of simpering over bloody football and the overpayed players even when they havn't managed to win anything sport coverage on BBC morning news does my head in.

Especially that Sally Neugent (sp?) who stares earnestly at the camera and talks in reverent tones about some minor boring detail of the football players ... so and so's changing the brand of boots he's wearing, etc ... with the gravity of a life and death situation

YABU. Its one of the most interesting things happening. You are really telling me that a mass event involving closing down the centre of London, raising millions for charity and involving a large number of the population either directly or by association (aka the London Marathon) isn't news??

You can say the same thing for many other sports. Sport isn't just football, which is covered in far too much detail.

Tongue in cheek angry face, OP, as I hope I indicated by a ridiculous image of steam coming out of my ears.

But it does make me cross that people with no interest in sport just want a blanket ban of sports matches on TV, or in your case you want it restricted in the news. Just because they'd don't like it. So what?

It's all so negative. You and other critics aren't constructive about it you just say "I don't like it so nobody else should be able be able to listen to it in the news". Great. Very all encompassing.

Btw, my passion is cricket but I have barely any interest in other sports. I'm not a sports lover full stop. To watch formula 1 would be like watching paint dry for me. But I would never begrudge motor racing enthusiasts hearing the news about something that is of world wide interest. Similarly with Andy Murray and tennis.

And to say the news about David Moyes wasn't one of the leading stories of the day is a bit air headed to me. I don't have an interest in watching football but anyone who doesn't know of the interest in Manchester United must be living in a cave.

I can't see it changing, thankfully, either. Sport is a growing industry, and women's sport in particular.

I agree with you OP. I couldn't give a shiny about it. I usually turn of or over at the first sign of it and avoid pubs when there is something sporty on (usually gathering large crowds of people who want to drink themselves into a coma and get into a fight).

I literally don't know who half the people in the media are about any more as they seem to be either from Britains Got No Talent/XFactor/DancewithDListStars or something similar. I don't feel that the majority of people are interested in things that I am and it is clarified when I see my FB feed. I tuned out of R1 when the footy got a 10/15min thorough front-line talk and then tagged on the end of the 'news' there was a 20 second soundbite about a famine in Somalia. I just can't understand why people think a game (repeated every year with maybe 1 or 2 different players) is more important than a global tragedy.

And to say the news about David Moyes wasn't one of the leading stories of the day is a bit air headed to me. I don't have an interest in watching football but anyone who doesn't know of the interest in Manchester United must be living in a cave.
That'll be me then! I knew I was gollum...
As far as I can see he hasn't made any interesting discoveries, done anything of importance that will affect me or my DC's lives, and next year people will probably be moaning about the next one. He probably earns more than our PM!

I would dispute that it's not real life. Anyone who earns their living through sport would call you up on that, CorusKate.

And why does all news have to be about 'life or death'?

"And to say the news about David Moyes wasn't one of the leading stories of the day is a bit air headed to me. I don't have an interest in watching football but anyone who doesn't know of the interest in Manchester United must be living in a cave."

Another Gollum here. It's not generally a lead story if a chief executive of a company stands down, so why should it be headline news if a football boss quits. A quick google shows me that the chief exec of Balfour Beatty resigned after a profits warning recently, but that didn't make top story. Balfour Beatty's turnover in 2013 was £8,754m. Man United's was £154m. So it's not a question of relative importance to the economy.

It's the fact that you can't get a plain news programme or channel that doesn't have immovable slots dedicated to discussing minor events happening in a subsection of the population's favoured form of entertainment.

Oops pressed too soon. I just wanted to echo what kate said.