Pardon the Interruption… But Did Sports Debate Shows Change the World?
40:03 Share

Hey, everyone. Chris Duffy here. This week, instead of a new episode of How to Be a Better Human, we've got something special for you. We're going to share an episode of Good Sport. It's a new podcast from the TED Audio Collective that's about what sports can reveal about being human. So obviously, there's a lot of overlap between that idea and the reason you listen to this show, How to Be a Better Human. Good Sport is actually hosted by Jody Avergan, who was on our podcast a few episodes back. You heard my conversation with him earlier.

I think that Jody is so fantastic. I think this show, Good Sport, is really, really interesting. And this episode we're about to play is all about the way that we argue and what we can learn about sports arguments that maybe could apply to arguments about everything else. Why does everyone get so fired up when they're debating sports on television? And is there maybe a way that we could debate better about

in our real lives. I think they're going to find this episode really interesting. I know I did. And if you like it and you want to hear more from Good Sport, you can follow their podcast wherever you're listening to this. Just search for Good Sport. OK, now on to the show. Enjoy. Katie, if I'm doing this, what should my body language be? Aggressive, confident, engaging. You want to talk with your hands a lot.

I called up my friend Katie Nolan recently to ask her to teach me how to fight. If you're in the listening spot, if your opponent is talking or your co-host or whatever, you can be an active listener by making faces at them. Katie is a sports commentator. She worked at Fox Sports and ESPN for many years. That's where we got to know each other when I was at ESPN, too. Actually, when she signed on to the call, she was joining from an ESPN company laptop that she never returned.

They never asked for it, so it's... Wow. They're still, like, tracking every one of your keystrokes. Yeah, probably. That's why I don't do anything real shady on here. And if we're confessing, this microphone I'm using...

It was also from my time at ESPN. But I digress. We are here to talk about arguing. There's a lot of arguing at ESPN, on ESPN. It's all around sports media. I'm talking about the sports debate guy. It's almost always a guy. The hot take artist. And there's kind of a formula to the way that this guy fights.

As the speaker, while giving a hot take, you certainly don't want anything that indicates you aren't 100% behind what it is that you're saying. You can't be shaky when you're takey. That's good to remember. Did you just make that up? Yeah, it just fell right out of my mouth and I'm very sorry. I couldn't be more pleased.

You can't be shaky when you're takey. That should be the tagline for all these guys. You can find them on shows like Undisputed with Skip Bayless and Shannon Sharp, Around the Horn, Get Up, and of course, First Take with Stephen A. Smith.

I mean, there's a million of them sprinkled throughout sports media. They've come to dominate the afternoon cable lineup, not to mention talk radio. And people tune in in droves. These programs get huge ratings. The hosts have big followings. Clips go viral.

Here's the basic format. Two or more hosts share the screen for an hour or so of uninterrupted sports argument. There's shouting, there's gesticulating, people dunk on each other. They stand up in disbelief and pace around the set to show their outrage. Sometimes there's even name calling. Yes, it's over the top, but it's also incredibly compelling. A pure distillation of modern debate. I'm right. You're an idiot.

And I think a lot of those shows run on antagonism, but also character. It's almost like they make an avatar of a person, and then that person's job is to continue to reaffirm everything about that avatar. So I think a lot of it is...

Even when two hosts agree with each other that sit across from each other, they still get three minutes to talk uninterrupted. And so they have to kind of find nuance within their take to show that it's different from the take you just heard. But also there are things they disagree with about the take you just heard, even if they didn't.

So, yeah, maybe you can tell I'm a little wary of these shows. I do think they're kind of gross on some level. But there's also something about them that's just so seductive. And occasionally, watching one of these Shout Bro shows, I've wondered, do I have this in me? Could I join the ranks of the debate show greats?

I have friends who've made the jump and landed some pretty sweet contracts. I've put in my time in sports media. I know how this game works. I do have opinions. And you know, when I worked at ESPN making the 30 for 30 podcast, I even technically had the same title as Stephen A. Smith. I swear to God, if you looked at the org chart, we were both just listed as commentator. Our salaries were very different.

This is Good Sport from the TED Audio Collective. My name is Jody Averkamp. Today, a look at how we argue about sports and more. And an experiment. With the help of Katie Nolan, I'm going full Stephen A. Let's do this.

How to Be a Better Human is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. What if comparing car insurance rates was as easy as putting on your favorite podcast? With Progressive, it is. Just visit the Progressive website to quote with all the coverages you want. You'll see Progressive's direct rate, then their tool will provide options from other companies so you can compare. All you need to do is choose the rate and coverage you like. Quote today at Progressive.com to join the over 28 million drivers who trust Progressive.

Hello, hello. I'm Malik. I'm Jamie. And this is World Gone Wrong, where we discuss the unprecedented times we're living through. Can your manager still schedule you for night shifts after that werewolf bit you? My ex-boyfriend was replaced by an alien body snatcher, but I think I like him better now. Who is this dude showing up in every episode?

Everyone's old pictures. My friend says the sewer alligators are reading maps now. When did the kudzu start making that humming sound? We are just your normal millennial roommates processing our feelings about a chaotic world in front of some microphones. World Gone Wrong, a new fiction podcast from Audacious Machine Creative, creators of Unwell, a Midwestern Gothic Mystery. Learn more at audaciousmachinecreative.com.

Find World Gone Wrong in all the regular places you find podcasts. I love you so much. I mean, you could like up the energy a little bit. You could up the energy. I actually don't take notes. That was good. I'm just kidding. You sounded great. So did you. We're with my coach, Katie Nolan. Point of interest, she actually got her start in the world of sports, not as a commentator, but as a competitor, an elite competitor. Folks, she insisted we mention this.

You want me to talk about my junior Olympic gold medal in rhythmic gymnastics? I usually don't start with that because I don't like to intimidate people. You know, I'm a real salt of the earth type of gal. I want people to know I'm one of them. But yes, I did. I did win multiple junior Olympic medals, one or two of which were gold in the sport of rhythmic gymnastics.

For some reason, Katie had to eventually give up her rhythmic gymnastic dreams and get a real job. Which brings us to her sports talk career. Her resume as a commentator is pretty amazing. She did her time at ESPN. She covered the Olympics for NBC. She had a web series for Fox Sports 1. Most recently, she's co-hosted Friday Night Baseball on Apple TV+.

Throughout, she's always been super smart and engaging and never gone full hot take artist. But if I'm like five degrees removed from that world, Katie has stared directly into the abyss and laughed. Someone recently described her to me as the number one line stepper in all of sports, perfectly willing to tell it like it is and poke fun. One of my favorite things she ever did was a segment where she parodied sports argument by debating herself.

So it's like, I don't have a co-host, but we're in sports TV and I know you guys like to hear arguments. So I'm going to play both sides. And I wouldn't know the topic until the moment of which was the twist. So that was what made it hard. But I would switch at the ring of a bell to arguing against myself. And for me, it was more like to kind of show that anyone can take any side of an argument. So who better to teach me about sports arguments?

So far, I've got never waver, turn your opponent into an avatar and debate that, not the real person, body language over the top. It kind of sounds like a lesson in being a used car salesman or a con man or something. Should I be wearing cheap cologne? What kind of prep do I need to do? Minimal. I would say treetops. You need to hear what other people are saying about the story more than you need to know the story.

How much does your actual argument matter when it comes to facts and statistics? A famous saying, numbers never lie, is also the name of a show for a while. Numbers never lie.

The thing is, you can pick the numbers that tell the story you want to tell and you can ignore the numbers that really don't serve your point. It's going to be up to your co-host then to bring those numbers and show you those receipts and be like, what about this and this and this? Let them worry about that. Just pick the numbers that tell the story you want to say and then memorize those. Or if you're me, write them on a post-it note and put them right next to your camera so that you can read them because numbers are in and out of your brain.

Should you actually listen to and engage with the argument the person sitting across from you is making? I think a lot of the times you're listening in little spurts. You're listening to remember the things you know you can dunk on later. You're listening to to laugh at them about something, but you're not really like considering their argument the way you would if you were having an argument with a person in real life. You're just kind of letting them get it out and

holding on to a few things you can use against them for your rebuttal. What do you do if you're cornered? Change the subject. Find a way to change the subject. Do something silly. You could, you know, if you're really stuck, just take a word and say it loudly three times in a row. So preposterous, preposterous, preposterous. Now you've bought yourself time and you'll know where to turn.

It's also given space between the thing the person said that backed you into a corner and the next thing you're going to say. And in that space, plenty of people watching TV have already forgotten what happened. So now you can just kind of start talking about something else and no one's going to notice as long as you're passionate. You're turning the emotion up a little bit more than you were before because now you really got to sell it. And you're throwing in a couple more numbers to back up whatever this other thing is that you're saying.

I'll just say everything that Katie is saying totally checks out. Turn on your TV or flip to your local sports talk radio station. This is what's really going on. Stephen A really does say preposterous, preposterous, preposterous, like once per show, things of that nature. One final question for Katie before I give it a shot. What does winning look like? Oof.

Ratings, good ratings, I think. Winning an argument isn't necessarily about being correct or being crowned the winner. It's did people tune out when I was talking or did our ratings go up? So now I've been trained or it feels more like untrained since most of the tips are like don't prep and cherry pick numbers and don't listen to the other person. Regardless, it's time for the final exam.

So look, let's say I wanted to have a hot take. Oh, I'm so ready. Would you help me kind of craft it and strategize? Yes, 100%. I would love to. So my take would be something like that Allen Iverson's 2001 postseason was the greatest run in NBA history. Maybe one of the greatest runs in NBA history. Okay. So what, give me three facts to support it. Um,

Well, for one, look at a supporting cast. Theo Ratliff, Eric Snow, George Lynch and Tyrone Hill were starting forwards on that team. I mean, he had no help whatsoever. And he marched his way through the postseason. You know, they did end up losing to the Lakers 4-1, maybe 4-2.

I don't know. Maybe I shouldn't bring that up. That's probably not number two, at least. That's not your number two supporting point is that it didn't end well. I remember watching that series, probably the greatest month of my life, if I'm being honest. And there was a graphic up on the screen that showed all of the injuries that Allen Iverson was dealing with. He was just riddled with injury and was still fighting through it. So, you know, for someone who's small and fighting through injury and carrying the team on his back. And then you have the single most...

See, I'm starting to even embrace it. You fired me up. The single most. I would never say something like that. Single most. The single most iconic moment in NBA history. Allen Iverson stepping over Tyronn Lue. Incredible. I mean, and you're not wrong. It's an iconic moment. And then you can even, if you're feeling really confident, you can challenge someone to name another. Because on the spot, it's going to be very hard for them to do. And then in the couple seconds it takes them to think of it, you'll be saying something else. And we'll be on to the next. Name another postseason run that matches.

You can't. You can't. I could. I could if I had prepped. Iconic. Iconic. See, I'm picking a word. I'm repeating it. Iconic. It's perfect. That's a good take. It's also not that hot. No, it's not that hot. To be honest. I know. I know. It's not that hot. And the fact that they lost to the Lakers makes it hot that you think that it's the greatest postseason run and it didn't end in a championship. So that is the heart of what makes that hot. But it's a decent. It's a decent take. I could have used more screaming, but it was a good take. I appreciate it.

That's a very generous assessment of my take, I know. And I appreciate you too, listener, for enduring that. I guess I'm really not cut out for this sort of thing. I'm just so averse to the unimpeachable statement. I really like uncertainty, you know?

A couple other thoughts on why this world isn't for everyone. For one, for Katie, let's just be honest here. It's a lot harder to do this as a woman than as a man. There's a lot of testosterone in those studios. If you decided to go full Stephen A. Smith tomorrow, you just woke up and said, OK, I'm going to do this. What would the reaction be? Huh. I think I would get a lot more testosterone.

Regardless, for Katie, this kind of fighting, it's just too much.

I don't know. I'd probably be too tired by the third day. The real answer to your question is if I woke up tomorrow and I was going to be Stephen A., by Friday, I'd be like this. I'm tired. And I would go back to being me. That's actually one of my biggest takeaways from all this, too. It just seems exhausting. Getting into character, preparing for battle, having to be dialed up to 11 all the time. What is it doing to people? What's it doing to us?

I don't know that humans are built to feel this passionately about six different things every day. Because when you think about it, that's what it is. If you're filling up a show, you're going to basically talk about five or six things every day. And you have to, you know, be emotional and invested in all of them. I know for me personally, that that's a lot of things to care about. I think it's...

It wears on you to constantly have to have something to say. It wears on the people who have to do it. And here's the thing. It may also have a larger cost for all of us because it sends a message.

If you take TV at face value, it tells you that you should be that fired up about things all the time and that the best people who care the most about sports have opinions about every single thing every day, so much so that they have to yell about it. And so it might make somebody think it has to be something that I'm really mad about all the time. And it's like, that's not true. You can kind of sometimes just be like, yeah, I don't care about that.

And this isn't just in sports. Flip to a 24-hour news channel or hop on social media. This idea that we have to be mad about everything, everywhere, all the time. Hmm. Now it seems like maybe instead of trying to get myself into this headspace, we should be trying to get more people out of it. And this could be one of those, which is the chicken, which is the egg type situations. But the way that sports fans interact with each other on the internet is

is very intensely and with a lot of emotion, a lot of times anger that seems unwarranted and unrelated to the topic at hand. And so you have these people with this emotion who like to yell at people for their dumb takes now yelling at people over things that are more important than that and truly matter to them. Um,

That's where it became more clear to me because it was like watching us talk about other things the way we talk about sports is a mess. Yeah. Man, I feel that. I've seen that. Before my time at ESPN, I covered politics. I covered the 2016 presidential election. Bad faith takes, they are everywhere, coming from everyone. On cable news, on politics podcasts, on Blue Wave Twitter and MAGA Twitter. And the incentives to behave this way are real.

For a shout guy on TV, it's a big contract. For a keyboard warrior or a barstool blowhard, it's more and more likes and shares. For a presidential candidate, it's a few thousand votes in Wisconsin. And that's got me worried. I'm worried. I think most people are rational and calm. But when we're in the wrong environment, the better angels of our nature take a backseat.

Especially when everything we see on TV or from our politicians is modeling the worst possible behavior. That's the environment we're in right now, full of cacophony and speed and meanness. To me, it all just kind of feels like sports talk. And the thing is, there's a history here, an actual connection you can trace. The world of sports talk and the world of news and politics talk are deeply intertwined, especially over the last 40 years or so.

We didn't get here by accident. As they say on TV, that's after the break. Warmer, sunnier days are calling. Fuel up for them with Factor's no prep, no mess meals. You can meet your wellness goals thanks to this menu of chef crafted meals with options like calorie smart, protein plus, veggie, vegan or keto. And Factor has fresh, never frozen meals, which are dietician approved and ready to eat in just two minutes.

That sounds like a dream come true. I cannot wait. So no matter how busy you are, you will always have time to enjoy nutritious, great tasting meals. Make today the day that you kickstart a new healthy routine. What are you waiting for? Head to factormeals.com slash betterhuman50 and use code betterhuman50 to get 50% off your first box plus 20% off your next month. That's code betterhuman50 at 50%.

factormeals.com slash betterhuman50 to get 50% off your first box, plus 20% off your next month while your subscription is active.

I want to tell you about a new podcast from NPR called Wild Card. You know, I am generally not the biggest fan of celebrity interview shows because they kind of feel packaged like they've already told these stories a bunch of times before. But Wild Card is totally different because the conversation is decided by the celebrity picking a random card from a deck of conversation starters. And since even the host, Rachel Martin, doesn't know what they're going to pick.

The conversations feel alive and exciting and dangerous in a way because they're vulnerable and unpredictable. And it is so much more interesting than these stock answers that the celebrities tend to give on other shows. You get to hear things like Jack Antonov describe why boredom works or Jenny Slate on salad dressing or Issa Rae on the secret to creativity. It is a beautiful, interesting show, and I love it. Wildcard comes out every Thursday from NPR. You can listen wherever you get your podcasts.

So at this point, I want to understand more about this genre of sports media, where it came from, why it's so popular, and the relationship between this kind of argument and other debate formats that seem to be coarsening all around me. Look, I've been on a lot of talk radio shows, and sometimes you need to take a shower afterwards. James Andrew Miller, or as he introduced himself, Jim, is an expert on this kind of content.

A lot of times it's very, very animated with words as opposed to words.

statistics or theories or examinations of things. For many years, Jim worked in politics. Then he became a media executive. And now he's a journalist and a historian who hosts the Origins podcast and has literally written the book, several big books, actually, on institutions like HBO, SNL, CAA and ESPN. He likes acronyms, I guess. And J.A.M. says the antagonism of these shows really is a core feature of public debate.

you just feel like it's the deep end of the pool in the sense that there's just, there is no affection, there is no camaraderie. And if you want to personally insult someone, that's even better. - Yeah. - You know, or remember the gesticulations, you know, and like throwing things on, like pounding the table or getting up and walking away or pacing around the room. I mean, it is a, it's a three ring circus sometimes.

Jim says it wasn't always like this. In fact, back in the 80s, when ESPN was just getting off the ground, a commentator sharing their personal opinion, getting heated on air. It was not the norm. It was a tenor. The DNA of it was not bombastic. It wasn't caustic. It was highly respectful. It may have become animated when people were disagreeing. But I think one of the other things that

was a hallmark of early sports discussions was that these people were supposed to be agnostic. They were supposed to be objective. Basically, they were being capital J journalists covering things without a lot of subjectivity. So what happened?

Well, a long time ago, in what feels like a universe very far, far away, TV shows could capture huge audiences pretty much just by being on air. In 1988, the most watched episode of TV ever was the series finale of M*A*S*H. 106 million viewers tuned in. But with the rise of cable TV in the 90s and early 2000s, the 24-hour content cycle fully established, the market was flooded with options.

Think about our modern day equivalent to that MASH finale, Game of Thrones. It felt like everyone was tuning in to that final episode in 2019. The numbers? Less than 20 million viewers, a fifth of the audience that MASH got. So if you're on TV with all these options and all this fracturing in the attention economy, all you can try and do is cut through the noise.

The absolute standard of this approach, this new era of programming, was CNN's crossfire. You may have heard of it. Jon Stewart famously called it partisan hackery that was hurting America. But for now, let's just say that it featured two hosts, one conservative and one liberal, who sat down with a prominent guest and argued about the news for an hour every day. It was a hit.

Yeah, I mean, look, CNN's Crossfire was popular and it was, according to some, out of control. And it made others notice. Others like Mark Shapiro, a producer at ESPN. Shapiro said, look, let's do a Crossfire of sports. I mean, because in a way, sports is even more popular.

Shapiro soon became ESPN's head of programming and production. And the first thing he did was he took Tony Kornheiser and Michael Oblon from the Washington Post and, pardon the interruption, PTI was founded.

Pardon the interruption, PTI, another acronym. One of my favorite shows, a show that almost needs no introduction. But here's a quick primer. Two sports commentators, Tony Kornheiser and Michael Wilbon, sit at a desk and argue about sports for about half an hour every day. Just like Crossfire, PTI was a hit. And just like Crossfire, other networks took notice.

We can't overstate how impactful PTI was. There are so many aspects of that show. The clock, the background, the nature of the banter, and the way that all the imagery filled the screen. That was so truly revolutionary. The PTI set was over-the-top, colorful, and so were the characters that Tony and Mike brought to the stage each afternoon. I think PTI was...

a huge, huge kind of paradigm shift in terms of sports coverage. PTI was also one of the first shows to openly understand and cater to declining attention spans. One way was with the now legendary Rundown Clock. One of the things that PTI did that was...

alarming at first. And people thought that this is ridiculous because one of the key concepts before was you don't want the screen to be distracting. Well, they put the menu of topics on the right-hand side and they had a freaking clock going. And I think this is one of the big steps forward in terms of short attention span theater.

What they realized is that it was comforting and attractive for them to see what was coming up. And if they're all of a sudden they're talking about horse racing and you don't care about horse racing, guess what? You're not going to tune away because you see that in 30 seconds with the clock, they're going to hockey and you want that. And cable news...

Took some cues from that, right? Absolutely. I mean, it didn't take long for that menu to show up on other shows. And I think it became very, very effective. I want to be clear about something. PTI was the first of its kind. It has had a huge influence on debate shows. And it is also incredibly special. It is smart. It is light. It is real. If I could be Michael Wilbon or Tony Kornheiser, I would in an instant.

Sum it up with one word, authenticity. Some shows manufacture conflict to fill a time slot or jack up ratings. Not PTI.

And another thing that makes the show special, these guys, Tony and Mike, they really respect each other. You can tell when you watch the show. Well, I think that's a good point because look, in cable news and sports talk,

You get the feeling that these people not only don't respect each other, they don't even like each other. It becomes personal. It becomes too caustic. There is a very fine line that you want when you're doing an opinionated show because you want there to be conflict, obviously, or at least just, you know, some sort of discussion that is going to show conflict.

myriad opinions. But at the same time, anybody watching PTI knows at the end of the day, as soon as the camera's off, these guys are going to go for a drink or hug it out or anything. I mean, because they are colleagues, they are professionals and they respect each other and genuinely like each other. Authenticity, respect, actual well-reasoned arguments. These ingredients make PTI great and a successful show right from the start. So it makes sense that people would try to imitate it.

But the problem comes when the imitators just aren't as good. And they try to copy the style, not the substance. Things like respect and authenticity get lost along the way. Things like listening, maybe even changing your mind, they just aren't part of the equation. What you end up with is a corseting, a carbon copy of a carbon copy of a carbon copy.

And I think that what happens is if you watch some of these shows or you listen to some of these shows, you can almost hear in the back of the person's mind, oh, I got to step it up or I got to take this to another level to keep it going. Or you can imagine a producer looking through a window into the studio saying, come on, guys, get more animated or let's fight it out or let's take this to another level. And at that point, that's artificial.

That's not authentic. That is acting. And acting is hard. It is hard. Like I learned with Katie. I just don't have that in me. Not when talking sports, not when I've talked politics. But plenty of people can find it in themselves to fight nasty. And what they find is that it pays off. Yell loud enough and you'll get more eyes on you. Eyes, followers, ratings. That's what media executives are constantly searching for.

to the point where the lines between the world of, say, sports and the world of politics can feel completely blurred. People like Keith Olbermann have floated between sports and politics because to ESPN and MSNBC, all that really matters is that this guy can get fired up about something, anything, for 30 minutes once a day. Maybe it's LeBron. Maybe it's gas prices. Who cares? Sports hosts talk politics. Politics hosts talk sports. A hot take is a hot take is a hot take.

ESPN once even had Rush Limbaugh doing football commentary for Crying Out Loud. Is it any surprise then that actual politicians are taking the same approach as the sports bros? A lot of politicians. Now they're taking what happens in the sports world as their playbook for getting attention because we are politicians.

Far, far away from having people who basically, you know, their behavior and their speech is between the 40-yard lines. Now there's kind of benefits, particularly fundraising and having a big band of loyal followers to being in, you know, in those extremes. And so I think a lot of people in politics now are playing the sports talk game.

Yell loud enough and you might find yourself with a three-year contract or a shiny new office or in the White House. I mean, 20 years from now, when people sit down to really trace the pedigree of how things deteriorated so much, they're going to also talk about what's lost when the focus is just being outlandish or crazy or not paying attention.

So here we are, when this style of debate seems to be all around us. I asked Jim Miller what he thinks the impact of this kind of debate has been, particularly in the world of politics. If you think about it, the shows on primetime and on Fox News and MSNBC, people are going to those shows for comfort, to hear people who have a set of orthodoxies or a view of the world that's in concert with their own.

It's almost like going to church on a Sunday. And the great thing is, if you watch those shows, you know what to say the next day to your colleagues at the water cooler. I started to notice this covering the 2016 election, when I'd often hear voters talk about our team and the other team when they're talking about Republicans or Democrats. And it's only gotten worse in the years since.

Partisanship is at an all-time high, and it's not based on policy preferences or values, but on picking a team and being against the other side, no matter what. And so I have to say, it's almost like watching SportsCenter.

And it's almost like watching PTI because you're rooting for your causes. You're rooting for your team. The candidates or the politicians are like the MVPs on your team. And it comforts us. It's worth returning to PTI for a moment because as influential as it was, there was one key part of that show that didn't get imitated. The fact check.

At the end of each episode, Tony Reale, aka Statboy, would come on and talk about all the things that Kornheiser and Wilbon got wrong. I think the fact that they decided to have

Tony Reale, the fact check boy there at the end was, it was just awesome. It was mind clearing. To me, the fact check is about more than just getting the stats right. It's about humility and perspective. The kind of stuff that really isn't part of the equation in most modern shows. It was so comforting to see that a show wasn't afraid of the truth and in fact wanted to almost

kind of like shine the light on those guys and say, hey, wait a second. You know what? Not real, not true, not real. And I can't tell you how many times people said to me, why can't they have like a fact check boy on Meet the Press or a news interview show or cable news? Well, sometimes it would mean that

The fact checks would take as long as the show itself because there were so many things that were wrong. But also the stance, right? I mean, could you imagine Tucker Carlson or Bill O'Reilly or Chuck Todd allowing a fact check, allowing someone to question their authority? Right. I think there's the ego part of it, but I also now we get to the really sad part, which is it doesn't even matter now. I think every single night somebody on cable news says something that is

either, I mean, forget about being morally repugnant, just in terms of facts, wrong. And the audience doesn't care. And so even if you were to have somebody come on and say, well, that's not true, actually, people don't care.

This is actually a place where Jim thinks there's still a big difference between sports and politics. And sadly, it's sports that he thinks is more anchored in reality. In sports, there's at least the shared reality of the score, the time on the clock, in balance or out of balance.

There's a ton, a ton of opinion. But then when we actually get down to playing the games, well, there it is right there. So we don't have any of those things in politics. And politics is a far, far more dangerous, divisive, destructive world than sports. I, of course, agree. It's OK to mouth off about sports. Not my cup of tea, but fine, whatever.

But politics is not a game. The stakes are different. Real people's lives are affected by what politicians say and how they say it. I'm all for the public square. Given this country's history of drowning out so many voices, it's good that more people have more ways to speak out. But when our environment pushes us to argue for the sake of arguing, when it doesn't come from a place of experience or knowledge or authentic convictions,

It's just noise. Toxic, toxic noise. So there you have it. We're all doomed. Thanks for listening. No, I'm just kidding. We're not going to end there. Look, there is a path out of this, maybe. At the end of my talk with Katie, as we were reflecting on the lessons of Sports Talk Boot Camp, I mentioned to her this idea that sports argument was getting coarser, that a lot of the discourse outside of sports is going that way too. And I asked her if she was worried about that.

I worry about everything, Jodi, to be honest. I do think we are pretty deep in a swing towards extremes of like the anger and misogyny is making a run right now, which is pretty, pretty cool. I think that we can get better and I choose to hope and think that we will.

just because of how the universe works. Things always go like that. They swing back and forth. And I think it's almost time to swing back the other way where we just go back to being like, who cares this much? I buy that. I do think these things tend to swing back and forth. But you can also do things to give that pendulum a little push. Katie, who is lucky enough to have a platform, is trying to help.

I feel like I worry, but I also it's kind of what keeps me going and doing this job is I'm like somebody has to just be the person they want to see on TV on TV. Somebody has to be the person they want to see on TV on TV.

Maybe that sounds simple, but it's also kind of brilliant, revelatory even. Because in a world where all the incentives are pushing you one way, Katie and lots of other people I respect are saying, no, let's find another path.

There's a lot that's broken in our politics and media these days. The last several years have been a nightmare. And I got to say, while I get upset about policies that I disagree with or hypocritical behavior, I also do keep coming back to how our leaders talk, what values they display when they talk. And it sucks to see the worst people in the world get rewarded.

People who should know better. Is it too much to ask that they try and demonstrate some modicum of virtue, honesty, decency? I really believe that makes a difference. And if you kind of believe the same, but maybe you don't have the platform that Katie Nolan does, here's my advice. Yes, the things we believe in are worth fighting for and sometimes even arguing about.

But ask yourself, do you really need to join that fight online? Do you really think progress happens on cable news? If you have a voice, if you're authentically fired up, remember your energy. It's a finite resource. Don't get exhausted. Instead, I'd say do the work where you're already at. Slow down. Focus on the people around you, your family, your schools. Listen to your neighbors. Fight the good fights that you can in the real world.

Maybe that's the answer. That's not that preposterous an idea, right? Preposterous. Preposterous. Right? Next time on Good Sport, what in the world is the zone? There's this synergy with everything that you're trying to do and even your intentions have been validated by the atmosphere around you. And why do we obsess over it?

Good Sport is brought to you by the TED Audio Collective. It's hosted by me, Jody Averkine. The show is produced by TED. This episode was written and produced by Isabel Carter. Our team includes Camille Peterson, Poncey Rutsch, Sarah Nix, Jimmy Gutierrez, Michelle Quint, Ben Van Chang, and Roxanne Highlash. Jake Gorski is our sound designer and mix engineer. Fact-checking by Hana Matsudaira.

Special thanks to Pablo Torre, Brian Rosenwald, Sarah Soberai, and Nicole Hammer. Their research and ideas were all really helpful as we were putting together this episode. We want to hear from you. Questions, ideas, reactions. Our email is goodsport at ted.com. Or you can find me on social media and yell at me there, which was the whole point of this episode.

One last thing, if you're game. If you like this episode, hit play in your podcast player and text it to a friend. Even better, text it to a friend who might not think that they're into sports. Who knows? They might be into this show. Thanks again for listening to Good Sport. My name is Jody Avergan. See you soon.

I want to tell you one Stephen A story, my Stephen A story from ESPN. Okay. Which is when I got to ESPN, you know, they gave me my ID and my tour of the radio studios on the west side in Manhattan. They were like showing me like this is where they do Mike and Mike or this is where they do whatever. And they were like showing me the different studios. And then we get to like...

a closet and it's like you open the door and it's just like a closet and there's a stool in the middle of the closet and they're like and this is where when Stephen A isn't in Bristol and he needs to do first take he does it from in here and you know he sits here and there's like a pinhole camera and he just talks into there and they green screen the background or whatever and I was like so you're telling me

that Stephen A. Smith just walks into this closet, closes the door and just yells at a dot on the wall for like three hours. And they're like, yep. And I was like, actually, that's probably like his version of heaven. I'm like, no, I don't think there's ever been a person who's more in their perfect element, what they were built to be doing than just the vision of that. It's his safe space.

Support for the show comes from Brooks Running. I'm so excited because I have been a runner, gosh, my entire adult life. And for as long as I can remember, I have run with Brooks Running shoes. Now I'm running with a pair of Ghost 16s from Brooks.

incredibly lightweight shoes that have really soft cushioning. It feels just right when I'm hitting my running trail that's just out behind my house. You now can take your daily run in the Better Than Ever Go 16. You can visit brookscrunning.com to learn more. PR.