On ESPN and ABC you had the typical coverage as far as the press conference and the post-game analysis of how the Celtics played and how the Lakers got blown out. What made me laugh was how emotional the Celtic players were when they were getting interviewed by the ESPN reporters, especially when it came to Kevin Garnett. It was funny when ESPN reporter Michele Tafoya asked him a question and instead of answering it he just expressed how happy he was about winning the championship. Then he commented her on how good she looked.
Another thing that amazed me was the fact that even though ESPN had a lot of coverage on television, they really didn't have that much online. In fact, the day after the page was updated with a big picture of Tiger Woods and immediately switched to the story of Woods having to miss the rest of the golf season due to needing surgery on his leg.
Columnists were also late posting stories about the NBA Finals. One of my favorite ESPN columnists, Bill Simmons, got his story up the day after the Celtics won. When I looked for other columns or blogs on ESPN to have comments on the Celtics win sooner I couldn't find any. Scoop Jackson and J.A. Adande, two other ESPN columnists both had their stories up the day after also (Jackson's story and Adande's story).
The best coverage online went to NBA.com. They had a flash video, a blog, a photo gallery, and a link to where you could go and buy Celtic gear that the players wore that night. The other thing that I liked about their coverage was that it was fast and they even showed the front page of the Boston Globe's front page which had a good picture of the Celtics celebrating their championship.
Overall I think that the NBA and maybe even other sports leagues provide the best coverage when it comes to their own special events and championships. However, when it comes to columns being entertaining and interesting to read ESPN and other news media sites still have them beat.
Even though NBA.com had the news I was looking for it was mainly appealing just because of the pictures, videos, and other interactive things that they had on the site. I still went to ESPN.com to read the columns because NBA.com's columns were just factual, not interesting like the columns on ESPN.com were.
I think the reason that the coverage was less on ESPN.com and more on NBA.com was because of the fact that the NBA.com only has one league to cover while ESPN.com had to cover the Finals and the breaking news that Tiger Woods would be out for the rest of the golf season.
I didn't realize this reason until watching the coverage of the Celtics winning the championship.
No comments:
Post a Comment