aaronsnow 20 minutes ago

+1. Our kids' experience watching sports on TV is so much more cynical for it.

You'd think it would be relatively easy for the leagues to provide separate streams that omit gambling ads (and maybe sell that ad space to others).

nonethewiser 17 hours ago

I fully support sports gambling being legal but holy shit, the legalization of sports gambling in the USA had such a terrible effect on sports coverage.

I have not watched the MLB in a while so I don't know specifically what you are talking about but I can imagine.

  • Jeremy1026 17 hours ago

    There is an ad for a sports book on screen no less than 50% of a broadcast, not including ad breaks, for the majority of teams. Either it's an ad behind home plate, a jersey patch, the broadcasters themselves reading the latest odds, or a combination of those and more. It is absolutely insane.

  • triceratops 7 hours ago

    Sports gambling should be legal. But only in-person. No apps or websites.

    Gambling advertising should be completely banned. Gambling is a zero-sum activity. Actively promoting it benefits no one except the betting house.

  • hoistbypetard 16 hours ago

    I was just having this conversation with friends a few days ago. We do still watch games, but we all used to also watch sports news/talk shows (e.g. morning pre-football coverage, SportsCenter, and the like) and most of us have stopped. Some of the shows are now exclusively focused on betting.

    I'm all for consenting adults to be able to legally place wagers at outlets that are not swindling them, or offering the kinds of loans that could get a person's legs broken.

    But I'm so tired of ALL THE COVERAGE being about betting. It was more fun when the coverage was mostly sports, and Al Michaels had to sneak in the odd mention of what the point spread was for a game he was broadcasting.

    Even my friends who enjoy gambling don't like the media coverage of it. I guess we're not a representative sample.

    • xp84 16 hours ago

      > Even my friends who enjoy gambling don't like the media coverage of it.

      You may well be representative; it’s just that all these parties directly invested in gambling would rather expand gambling as much and as fast as they can, at the expense of turning off their whole audience.

      • svachalek 15 hours ago

        Much like politics, it's been decades since the coverage has had anything substantial to say about the issues or the candidates, it's all treated like a horse race now, who's gained or lost 1% in the polls.

    • nonethewiser 16 hours ago

      Yes this is exactly what I mean. Coverage of the sport has been replaced with coverage of the gambling games around the sport.

    • apparent 6 hours ago

      Is there so much discussion of betting related to all the ads purchased by gambling companies?

    • spike021 16 hours ago

      Honestly it's a lot like the alcohol ads being everywhere. I don't have a problem with drinking alcohol but this is supposed to be a sport enjoyed by the whole family, and there are broadcasts where the inning break is filled almost entirely with hard liquor advertisements. Even at the ballpark it's hard to avoid advertising for beer and other drinks.

  • spike021 16 hours ago

    in addition to what Jeremy said, some broadcasts even show the betting line or chances for certain things to happen as the inning is being played (like what are the chances a player hits into a double play or hits a home run, etc.) specifically for the betters.

whartung 10 hours ago

I'm not saying this isn't happening, the fact that the RSNs are (mostly?) owned by betting companies does not help.

But, anecdotally, my local (Angels) broadcasts don't talk about it at all. I listen to MLB Radio, and their day time shows barely touch on it (I'm pretty sure there's a odds making show on the radio, but not during prime time in the day).

MLB Network on TV, I do not see it in their main shows. MLB Central doesn't (I don't think, I'm honestly not a regular viewer) really touch on it. MLB Now doesn't, nor does MLB Tonight or Quick Pitch (their overnight highlight show).

There's ads, there's ads in the stadium (big BET MGM sign in Yankee stadium, for example).

So, anyway, on the periphery, it's certainly there, but the shows the MLB seems to put their brand on, I'm not seeing that much of it.

The closest I've see is on the Apple TV broadcasts where they might put up a "28% chance to get on base" in the corner for a batter. Interesting, perhaps, statistic, but I don't know that it necessarily encourages betting.

  • spike021 5 hours ago

    I watch NBC Sports Bay Area for the SF Giants. I think generally during the broadcast itself they don't mention gambling-related topics much if at all? But during pre and post-game shows they totally do and have sponsored/named segments using gambling/odds.

subroutine 17 hours ago

Unfortunately the future of sports media is ownership by parent companies that also own sports betting sites. The yearly revenue of the largest gambling sites in the US rivals the combine revenue of the MLB, NHL, NBA, and NFL, and some major sports coverage media outlets.

Penn entertainment for example acquired Barstool Sports and The Score, and entered into a 10-year deal with ESPN to create ESPN-bet, for cash and a stake in the company. ESPN is now directly invested in the gambling industry.

basisword 15 hours ago

It's interesting to watch as an international viewer. Sports gambling here has been legal forever and although we get betting company ads during commercial breaks (and some sponsorship stuff) the US has managed to legalise it and make it toxic almost instantly. Commentators and pundits should not be giving odds on air (with rare exceptions). Pundits shouldn't be giving 'their' betting picks. The problem isn't gambling - it's the excess to which it's been implemented.

  • spike021 14 hours ago

    if there's anything Americans love, it's excess.

    • dcuthbertson 3 hours ago

      Remember, all things in moderation - especially moderation.