NHL and the media, part 4

When I first started this NHL and the media series I expected it to be a two-part series. Obviously it's grown.
A comment I had about one of the blog entries is essentially, "What's the point?"
Good question.
It's to highlight the lack of impact the NHL makes. Or more correctly to highlight how little the sports media thinks of hockey. See for all the fans' passion, for all the derision laid at GaryBettman's feet, the real problem is changing perception. It's my opinion that hockey fans need to change that, speak up. Not to other hockey fans, but to the radio and TV shows, to their sponsors, and to the networks and websites.

So on that note, another snapshot. This time, more sites but just one day - this morning.

CBS - no NHL coverage, no photos, no links


ESPN - one video link, one link for same game


Fox - no NHL coverage, no photos, no links


NBC - no NHL coverage, no photos, no links


Sporting News - no NHL coverage, no photos, no links


Sports Illustrated - no NHL coverage, no photos, no links


Versus - only a banner for a future NHL game


Five NHL games last night, and only one site mentioned one game. Surprisingly enough it was ESPN; the sports leader's website that lived up to its nickname. The NHL's U.S. broadcast partners, Versus and NBC, failed. That is just nothing but badness. Below is my reasoning why the sites and editors are able to get away with such scant hockey coverage.

When I answered the above question I remembered another blog I read awhile back, Greg Wyshynski's Why your local newspaper chooses not to cover the NHL.

"Economy bodychecks NHL coverage" was the headline on William Houston's story in the Globe & Mail today, in which he discusses how newspaper sports departments are scaling back coverage for hockey.
As I read it, I wondered if he used his story "Newspaper coverage is way down in Canada, U.S." from back in May, took out all the references to Canadian newspapers that chose not to cover an all-U.S. Stanley Cup final, and then added in some extra doom and gloom for hockey in America.

OK, so the article he mentions, from the hockey-loving country of Canada, is doom and gloom. Hmmm.
Wyshynski continues.

You'll notice these examples come from warm-weather NHL cities, which was no doubt blood in the water for Canadian fans who would like to see every team from St. Louis down to the equator relocated to the Yukon. The story doesn't mention the Columbus Dispatch, which has two beat writers, a columnist, two blogs and a podcast dedicated to the Columbus Blue Jackets. Then again, the paper owns a piece of the team; if only the Palm Beach Post had a stake in the Panthers.
Houston's story has a lot of doom and gloom. The reactions to it have been equally grim. But I think it's always darkest before the dawn.

I'm glad Wyshynski is seeing a positive, many in Canada and the northern states don't.
See it's this kind of doom and gloom tactics, the anti-Bettman bias, the anti-Sun Belt bias that's just infesting fans. So much negativity, so much bile and so much hatred. When hockey loving fans and the hockey loving media complain it is ammunition for mainstream U.S. media outlets, ones who aren't all about hockey, to pile on, and they do. See the examples above. Looking at them, I can hardly tell it's hockey season. Why should they cover something when the fans who supposedly love hockey so much, hate everything about it?