Super Bowl Media Narratives

So the Seattle Seahawks are in the Super Bowl. And they are playing the Denver Broncos. And in the intervening two weeks, all we the fans will have is what we see or hear about in the media.

Here are three media narratives I think we will see a LOT of over the next two weeks - and already  have:

First, "The Manning Narrative." Payton Manning, Payton Manning, Payton Manning. Outside of Seattle, football fans watching media coverage of the upcoming game will not know anyone other than Payton Manning is playing in this game. OK, now some will know Richard Sherman of Seattle...but that's it. No, the media narrative will be all about Manning and his "destiny" to win another title. This has nothing to do with the Xs and Os of football, mind you. I'm talking about the sentimental story and the overall narrative of the pre-game coverage. And you see it right away in who is favored.

As a Seahawks fan this is annoying, sure. But what concerns me is that the last time the Hawks were in the Super Bowl there was an overwhelming media narrative about Jerome Bettis "returning home to Detroit" for his "last opportunity" to get a Super Bowl win. And what happened? An unreal game in which the Seahawks were victims of a number bizarre, unprecedented and unexplainable plays and calls by the referees...costing them the game. And ta-da! Bettis gets his big win and goes out a champ - much to the delight of entire football viewing world outside Seattle. A nice storybook ending to please 95% of the NFL viewing public.

I fear the same will happen with the "Manning Narrative" driving this Super Bowl. The NFL benefits greatly in terms of the masses feeling good about the league if Manning wins the game, so I'm nervous that we may see a repeat of the "thought the looking glass" experience we got in Super Bowl XL. You say I'm crazy and that there could be no "conspiracy" to deliver a game based on what would be best for the league? I say, go re-watch at Super Bowl XL. Unreal. I can't claim to have evidence, just that it happened. Just like gas prices "surprisingly" go down every four years right around the time of presidential elections and then go back up right after...it just happens and its a correlation you cannot ignore. Same with Super Bowl XL. With the new Super Bowl also occurring on Ground Hog's Day, lets hope we don't get a repeat.

Second, Broncos "good guys" vs the Seattle "bad guys." This is how the media will portray it. This is primarily due only to the after-game rant by Richard Sherman when the Seahawks beat San Francisco in the NFC title. Most people think his comments were over the top and calling out the opposing receiver he defeated in the last and pivotal play was just poor. Whatever you think, that's the consensus. Meanwhile, you've got Manning as the "do-gooder." So, is it better to be the good guy or the bad guy? I think it doesn't matter too much and the media have a compulsive need to narrow things down to easily digestible ideas - and good vs bad is about as basic as it gets. Anyway, the perceived "thugs" have won the Super Bowl before.

But, what's odd is that it is ONLY because of the few seconds by Sherman that the Seahawks will be perceived as the bad guys. Actually, the team is chuck full of good guys - starting with QB Russell Wilson and, ahem, also including one Richard Sherman.

Third, the Denver Offense (code for Manning of course) will be the difference in this game. The Broncos offense did have a record breaking year. They are extremely good - mostly their passing game with Manning. But, predicting that Denver wins because of this reverses decades and decades of conventional wisdom - which is virtually always backed up by reality - that it is defense that wins championships. Indeed, regardless of what offenses are fielded, most teams who win the Super Bowl have superior defense compared to their opponent. Their ability to limit even great offenses makes the difference.

And who clearly has the better defense? Seattle...by a lot. However, I think you'll see little attention paid to that and more to the Denver offense as the dominant force in this game. This ties directly into my point #1 above - "the Manning Narrative."

All of this is a bit frustrating from a Seattle fans' perspective, but I think Seattle will field the overall better team - particularly their defense. I think THAT will be the difference. I also think that Seattle QB Russell Wilson is uncanny in his ability to deliver in the clutch, and RB Marshawn Lynch is a hard-as-nails runner who could be a difference maker too.

I'll post a prediction before the game. In the meantime, see if the three media narratives develop as I think they will.

Countdown to "The Natty" - Does America Even Know Oregon Is In This Game?

To count down each day between now and the National Championship college football game (aka "The Natty") on Jan. 10, 2011 between the University of Oregon and Auburn University I will pose and attempt to answer a daily question about the match up. On Jan. 10, I'll answer the question, "who will win the game?"

I'll start out with a question that's been on my mind since viewing the media coverage of college football following the end of the regular season...

Does America even know Oregon is playing in the national championship game?

Oh, you didn't know the University of Oregon is playing the BCS college football national championship game on Jan. 10, 2011?

Well, I can't blame you. That's because the media - especially ESPN - is monolithically focused on Auburn QB Cam Newtwon and the Auburn team. They're cranked up full tilt to promote this wonderful player and the season his team had.

Between talk about the Heisman Trophy winning Newton (some of it bad by the way given off-the-field issues) and the Tigers undefeated run through the SEC - assumed (not by me) to be the best conference in college football - it's the all Auburn-all-the-time show on TV and online.

Sure, if you look hard enough, you'll see that there is this team from this place called Oregon (isn't that somewhere out there next to Kansas or maybe west of Michigan?) that somehow has a role in Auburn's ultimate fate this season. But, that's about it.

I actually think this is good for the Ducks. The media hype and attention on Newton and Auburn clearly paints Oregon as the underdog and feeds that underdog mentality among the Oregon coaches and players...motivation.

Meanwhile, even if Auburn's coaches and players are focused on the game, they cannot NOT notice the massive accolades being heaped upon them. That's gotta have an affect...as an Oregon fan, at least I hope it does. Ratchet up "the pressure" on them to deliver, make them take Oregon too lightly, etc.

We'll see.

In the meantime, you are on notice that indeed the 12-0, Pac-10 champion (two years running) Oregon Ducks are the competition for Auburn in the championship game. And, they score more points per game, amass more yards per game and statistically have a better defense. But you wouldn't know it. Now you do.

Check back tomorrow and each day between now and Jan. 10 to hear a new question about the game and my thoughts in attempting to answer.

Facts Mean Nothing

Unemployment hit 6.1 percent this week. 

It was just announced that the Federal budget deficit doubled over the past year.

Our country has lost 605,000 jobs since January.

These are predictable outcomes of eight years of Republican Presidency and 12 years of Republican control of Congress over the past 14 years.

These things have real impact on everyday, regular, middle class Americans.

But hey, never mind all that! The media and Republicans say, "Look over here. Did we mention that Sara Palin is the VP candidate for McCain...and isn't she interesting."

And about half of America laps it up and is ready to vote for more of the same.

Can you tell I'm not happy with the way this thing is going?

 

May the Best Perception Win

Another thought about what has shaped up over the past two weeks of political conventions is that it's now pretty clear what the dueling "positioning" efforts will be by McCain and Obama.

• McCain Campaign - Make it a battle of personalities and perceived character. Say that Obama puts other interests above country first, intimate that his is not patriotic and talk about how he is inexperienced compared to McCain. Go on the attack full time. Do not talk so much about your own policy ideas. Keep Palin away from the media.

• Obama Campaign - Make it a battle of ideas, judgement and the need for change in America. Offer new and specific ideas while tying McCain to George W. Bush and paint him as a guy who will simply continue the failed policies of the last eight years. Use the huge war chest to fight back each time challenged.
  

So, come November a majority of people will either think Obama is just not the right guy for the job or they'll decide they've had enough of conservative rule and vote for change. 

It seems obvious to me what the right choice is, but I said that four years ago and I was wrong. Also, being in the PR business, I can attest to the fact that emotional appeals and negative attacks almost always work when squared off against facts, logic and reason. 

So, I'm wary. 

Algae Olympics

Well, GE TV (aka NBC) did a story today on the massive amounts of green algae that has recently collected in the Chinese bay where the upcoming Olympic games sailing events are going to take place.

NBC reported that there was a problem and even showed the thick green goop that fills a large portion of the bay, but as predicted they talked about how the Chinese were going all out to fix the problem...and talked to sailing contenders who said they were going to possibly have to plan to sail through the stuff. So, how to overcome.

Also as predicted there was one passing comment in the last 15 seconds of the story that said that perhaps, maybe the problem was caused by chemical dumping into the water, but that Chinese officials denied that this was the cause - blaming it on warm water temperatures.

I would have liked to seen a reporter with balls go check out what was beind dumped into the water and by whom.

Not an easy or safe task given the government there, but hey...aren't our media supposed to be seeking the truth? Not just parroting the government line - not to mention the Chinese government line?

NOTE: The pictures in this post were NOT taken by me.

Is Pollution an Olympic Sport?

Or, how will the media cover the pollution during the Beijing Olympics?

China is polluted. If pumping smog into the air was an Olympic event, China would be the hands down gold medal champion...by a long shot. They do it faster, with more volume over a sustained period of time than any nation on earth. With the Beijing Olympics coming up this summer, they have the addition of home court advantage.

Seriously, China produces enough smog to block out the mid-day sun. I was just there last month and at mid-day you could see maybe a mile with skyscrapers disappearing into a haze that looked like fog but wasn't. Beijing was one of the worst cities for this...trumped only by Shanghai.

That got me and some of my fellow China travelers wondering how the international media will cover that angle of Beijing during the games. Will they cover it like glamour events such as basketball, gymnastics and track? Or, will they minimize coverage like they do with sports like shooting, kayaking and badminton?

Clearly, the massive air pollution has the potential to inhibit performance for outdoor events. If this occurs, the Beijing Olympics will not be remembered as the big coming out party for China, but the "smog Olympics" with times/finishes including an asterisk.

The government is trying to minimize the Beijing pollution by shutting down factories in the lead up to the games, reducing car traffic and other measures. We even met a Westerner while hiking on the Great Wall who said he was in China to help them "seed" the clouds right before the games so it will rain and clear out the air. Good luck.

OK, the US media. NBC is the broadcaster of the Olympics for the U.S. They, like other mainstream media, are prone to puffery and letting the bigger story slide by without much comment in favor of sensation, celebrity or a good sex scandal. So, not much confidence they'll be seriously looking into how the smog may be impacting the games or the greater world.

But, here's the other thing. NBC is owned by GE. GE is one of the world's biggest manufacturers with big time operations in China. A polluter for profit. Guess who is also a major sponsor of the Beijing Olympics? You guessed it. GE. In fact, you can see their logo everywhere in public places associated with the games - starting when you arrive in China with placements in all Olympic advertisements in the huge new Beijing international airport.

GE will not be interested in anything other than a perceived spectacular success to these games. That includes minimal negative talk about anything - including pollution. Happy talk, happy talk.

So, predictions for NBC (sports and news) coverage of pollution in Beijing:
1) They barely touch it
2) When they do, they acknowledge "that the Chinese recognize that its a problem" but they are working on cleaning things up - queue the set piece on what the government has done to clear the air for the games
3) You won't hear about it again once the games are over

The only deviation from this I think will be if there is a major epidemic of poor performances or celebrity athletes pull out of competition...and even then, the games will go on and someone will win. You know, "overcoming the odds" of the pollution to win that gold medal.

I also predict that the foreign media - UK, Canada, France, Germany - will likely do more critical reporting on the pollution and how it is effecting the games and the world. But, we here in the US will not see that coverage - essentially, unless you go out of your way to look for it online. Something most people don't do.

So, in the end, I think the US media will report on pollution in Beijing like they will women's field hockey. They won't do it in any meaningful way.

If it comes to pass like this, it'll be a shame because China is the Olympic champion polluter and the games should be an opportunity to point that out...not to mention connecting the dots back to the US by talking about how a lot of the pollution there is generated by US companies making products that US citizens buy for cheap at Wal-Mart and similar stores.

We'll see. I hope I'm wrong.

Something not "Wright" about media coverage of NC/Indiana primaries

I tuned in last night to see results of the big Indiana and North Carolina Democratic primaries and quickly became confused.

Somehow, some way, the media inexplicably was completely ignoring the most influential man in US politics and the dominating personality in the Democratic primary race...a man the media has spent weeks and weeks focusing on, talking about, soliciting opinions about, conducing polls about, criticizing, reviewing, showing, interviewing, etc., etc., etc.

Indeed, where was Reverend Jeremiah Wright?


Based on the incessant media coverage I thought for sure that it was Rev. Wright who was running for president.

Instead, the talking heads last night were consistently talking about a fellow named Barack Obama. Now, I certainly had heard that this Mr. Obama may have had something to do with Rev. Wright...hell, you couldn't avoid it as part of the wall-to-wall Wright-o-thon the media has been running over the past few weeks.

And then it dawned on me...oh, I get it...this Barack Obama guy must be the one running for office since on election night it was his name and face the media showed and talked about. Boy did I feel duped. With all the attention on Rev. Wright, I thought for sure he was actually running.

OK, so I'm not as dumb as all that, but I think you get my point. The media really, really stink and they're doing everything they can to keep this primary going for their own ratings.

I think this has two big impacts. First, the average American voter may not be too much savvier than the sarcastic personality I indulged in above. Based on media coverage, people actually think that Obama in some way is 100% the same as this Reverend and won't vote for him. Second, I think the corporate media (ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, Fox) that are owned by some of the biggest companies in the world (Disney, GE, Time/Warner, News Corp) will all continue to focus on the Reverend as Republicans attack Obama over him and, frankly, as the big business media corporations themselves would rather see a McCain presidency than an Obama presidency.

NOTE: The picture in this post was NOT taken by me.