An ESPN-NFL union is something no one should be cheering

We know what we’re getting when we tune in to NFL Network, MLB Network, NBA TV, and NHL Network. It might be fun, fascinating, and informative. We’re also obviously getting a sanitized view of those professional sports leagues.

There are things that they will downplay or ignore, not criticize or not mention. You won’t find an uncompromised and unfiltered breakdown of something those leagues would rather you not know.

You can still go to ESPN for your sports news. The Worldwide Leader in Sports isn’t perfect. It has conflicts of interest with various broadcasting partners, such as the NFL, MLB, NBA, and NHL. Still, ESPN has tenacious, top-notch reporters, analysts, and insiders who do a thorough job. The network has the resources and reach to turn any subject matter into the sports story of the day.

But our confidence in ESPN’s journalism could soon hit an all-time low. ESPN and the NFL are reportedly in “advanced talks” on a deal that would give the league an equity stake in ESPN. The New York Post’s Andrew Marchand first reported that ESPN would take control of NFL Media, including NFL Network. In return, the league would receive an equity stake in ESPN.

No one should be rooting for this union. Not if you care about sports. Not if you care about journalism. We all stand to lose if this deal goes through. There is a difference between being a broadcast partner versus having an equity stake. As a broadcast partner, the NFL might complain about coverage, but in this potential new arrangement, the NFL could more directly influence programming and news stories in a way we’ve never seen before at ESPN.

Would ESPN do the same in-depth reporting inside Dan Snyder’s downfall in Washington if the NFL owned an equity stake in the network?

Forget about a blurred line. The line of objectivity and independence could be completely wiped out. Call it an overreaction if you want. There are already some who are skeptical of ESPN’s coverage of topics. But we’ve never had large numbers questioning how ESPN reports on the NFL. We’ve never looked at ESPN and NFL Network as the same.

Soon, they might actually be the same as true business partners.

Maybe you’re still not convinced that this is potentially a major issue. Don’t just take our word for it. A couple of former ESPNers have raised concerns. Jeff Pearlman used to be a contributor to ESPN.com. We asked him for his thoughts.

In a direct message to Awful Announcing, Pearlman wrote: “I think it’s awful, and yet another dissolving of the once impenetrable line between church and state. Let’s say there’s a PED scandal. Or a gambling scandal. Or the marquee star quarterback is caught with a (sex worker). Is the NFL going to put pressure on ESPN to hold off? Hell, would it even need to? If you’re ESPN, and you’re literally owned by the NFL, why would you run anything negative?”

Pearlman added: “Also, the biggest thing is that perception trumps reality. And I now am forced to believe ESPN will pull punches when it comes to the NFL, and the NFL will tell ESPN certain stories must be told with certain limitations. So now that perception clouds the way I’ll watch everything. It just sucks.”

Michael Smith, a former NFL insider at ESPN, spoke about the issue as a guest host on The Marchand and Ourand Sports Media Podcast. He said: “The lines have been blurred if not crossed or destroyed between who’s being covered and who’s doing the covering. From a business sense in this ever-changing media landscape, I guess I understand it … to a certain extent, who are we kidding? We’re all in bed with the NFL.”

Again, some will believe this is all much to do about nothing. If this NFL-ESPN deal goes through, perhaps they will change their minds when something scandalous happens to their favorite team. Perhaps when they tune into ESPN, doubts will creep into their heads over the coverage.

Is this the unvarnished truth? Or is it just what the NFL wants me to believe?