Jemele Hill to The Undefeated

Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

What the hell is the undefeated? Doesn't say in the SI story.....espn.com platform? Ghosts of the 07 Patriots?

It's a standalone "microsite," like Five Thirty Eight. Dealing with race and culture. Part of the ESPN family of sites.
 
I seem to recall this was the predicted outcome. Hill wouldn't be fired or demoted, just shuffled over to some place where she'll likely become irrelevant.
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
Also comes at the one-year mark of the SC:6 (or whatever it is called) change. Easy for ESPN to do this by saying they gave it a year and it didn't work out.
The only bad thing about all of this is I'm sure Clay Travis is partying in the streets.
 
We talked here about The Undefeated when it was only a concept (for, like, two years IIRC) ... but how is it in practice? Is there readership or some other metric that can be used to call it a success? It seems totally invisible, but that could be my white privilege talking.
 
There is literally nothing more tired than Jemele Hill bashing. Holy ****, it's dumb and gross. Something like 99 percent of sports journalists would kill for her career.

We get it. She was nice to you in the press box. Who cares about her social media meltdowns and the repeated need for the company to clean up her mess? Why should anyone notice that?
 
We talked here about The Undefeated when it was only a concept (for, like, two years IIRC) ... but how is it in practice? Is there readership or some other metric that can be used to call it a success? It seems totally invisible, but that could be my white privilege talking.

It borders on hagiography at times. And it doesn't need to do that. It feels like an over-correction because of the way the site started with Whitlock. There's a happy medium, I'd hope, between what Whitlock wanted to do and what it is now.
 
There is literally nothing more tired than Jemele Hill bashing. Holy ****, it's dumb and gross. Something like 99 percent of sports journalists would kill for her career.

That's not the greatest argument in the world.

It's safe to say most people would like a "career" that included real estate billionaire, TV star and, oh, President of the United States.

Should we not engage in Donald Trump bashing because his "career" is vastly superior to ours? Better tell Jemele that.
 
Last edited:
We get it. She was nice to you in the press box. Who cares about her social media meltdowns and the repeated need for the company to clean up her mess? Why should anyone notice that?

You can criticize her for that if you want. Calling her "irrelevant" is stupid. Otherwise your second question answers itself.

EDIT: I know you're not the one who called her irrelevant.
 
That's not the greatest argument in the world.

It's safe to say most people would like a "career" that included real estate billionaire, TV star and, oh, President of the United States.

Should we not engage in Donald Trump bashing because his "career" is vastly superior to ours? Better tell Jemele that.

There needs to be a new version of Godwin's Law, except instead of Hitler, Trump gets invoked.
 
I could have used (almost) anybody. The Michigan State president's career kicks the crap out of mine, too.
 
I was bristling at "irrelevant." If Jemele is irrelevant, then we sure do talk about her an awful lot for no reason.
 
I was bristling at "irrelevant." If Jemele is irrelevant, then we sure do talk about her an awful lot for no reason.
In fairness, we're talking about her demotion right here. So perhaps the term should be "shrinking relevance." She'll never be as big as she was when she had Sarah Sanders calling for her job from the White House Press Room. I like her work well enough, and she is a nice person. But her biggest moments seemed to be when she was stepping in it, not when she was framing the conversation.
 
In fairness, we're talking about her demotion right here. So perhaps the term should be "shrinking relevance." She'll never be as big as she was when she had Sarah Sanders calling for her job from the White House Press Room. I like her work well enough, and she is a nice person. But her biggest moments seemed to be when she was stepping in it, not when she was framing the conversation.

Is it a demotion though? According to the Deitsch story, "multiple sources confirmed that Hill had asked for the switch." It sounds like she's decided she wants to go back to writing. Or at least out of TV. For obvious reasons, I don't like to think of switching back from TV to writing as a demotion. But maybe it can be considered that at ESPN.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top