One of the many Caitlin Clark stories making the rounds of the internet Monday was from ESPN’s First Take.
At the end of a long discussion of Chennedy Carter’s foul on Clark Saturday, Monica McNutt expressed frustrations about how this was being covered, including by media that hadn’t previously done extensive WNBA coverage. Stephen A. Smith tried to say that he and First Take cover the WNBA more than anyone, and McNutt shot back, “You could have been doing this three years ago if you wanted to.”
Stephen A. Smith: “Who talks about the WNBA, who talks about women, who talks about women’s sports more than First Take?”
Monica McNutt: “Stephen A., respectfully, with your platform, you could have been doing this three years ago if you wanted to.”
Stephen A.: “Wow.” pic.twitter.com/szQXOPQ3h4
— Awful Announcing (@awfulannouncing) June 3, 2024
The clip there starts with Smith talking about the potential of the WNBA and its players to make money (including with endorsements, which he mentions before that clip starts) and saying he “resents” how careful he feels he needs to be when discussing the league. “Now we’ve got to sit up here and watch every syllable.” After that, McNutt says, “Welcome to the world of being a woman, Stephen A., and how you have to dance about your word choice, and how you have to please everybody and anybody as you navigate your being.” She then says, “We are talking about the world’s greatest athletes,” and Smith interrupts with, “How about being a Black man?”
A little later (around 1:25), after McNutt talks about the discussion of this from outlets new to WNBA coverage, Smith responds, “Who talks about the WNBA, who talks about women, who talks about women’s sports more than First Take?” McNutt then says, “Stephen A., respectfully, with your platform, you could have been doing this three years ago if you wanted to,” and Smith gives a stunned “Wow” and quite the expression:
There are several things at play in the discussion here. McNutt is correct that First Take was not covering the WNBA three years ago in the same way it currently is. And she’s also correct that Smith presumably does have the personal leverage to talk about anything he wants to on the show. However, while First Take theoretically could help set sports narratives if it wanted to, given its audience and popularity, that is not generally what the show has done historically.
Indeed, First Take has far more often been a reaction to sports narratives elsewhere. It’s usually gone deeper and deeper into the segments and topics that ESPN’s audience research team found the First Take panel arguing about would resonate most with viewers. And that dates back to the days of Jamie Horowitz, before he left for NBC’s Today and then Fox Sports.
For both First Take and similar debate shows like FS1’s Undisputed, this has come up a lot with Major League Baseball in particular. First Take has frequently done little or no baseball coverage, and when they do weigh in, it’s often been in problematic ways. (To say nothing of hockey, where it’s sometimes gone extremely poorly when they try to discuss it.) But it’s not just about MLB and the NHL; First Take has also ignored NBA playoff games that didn’t have narratives they wanted to weigh in on.
Yes, McNutt and other critics can absolutely argue that Smith should use First Take to drive the sports conversation to worthy topics. And yes, he has enough power at ESPN that he could absolutely do that if he wanted to. But that has not usually been what First Take has been about.
First Take is not “Here’s what’s going on in sports.” It’s “Here’s what we think you want to see Stephen A. debate.” And approaching First Take as if it’s actually a journalistic discussion of the most significant sports news of the day is flawed, considering that the show has repeatedly proven to not be that. (And, on that front, it’s notable that Max Kellerman perhaps was the last person to try and make it even close to that, and that did not work in a pairing with Smith.)
McNutt is quite correct in pushing back a bit on Smith’s claims that he and First Take are covering the WNBA more than anyone. That’s especially true when those claims suggest that he’s advocating for the league beyond what the numbers would normally suggest (as he did here).
It’s clear that First Take‘s current level of WNBA discussion is about the increased buzz around the league following Clark’s entrance. And Smith’s attempt to portray himself as someone who has always been an over-the-top advocate for the league does not seem strongly supported by the historical record.
But where McNutt’s take has issues is in having journalistic (a whole different debate with Smith) and notable-news expectations for First Take. The show is not that. It largely has not been that.
First Take is a forum for Stephen A. Smith to yell about things opposite various figures. And those things are primarily determined by what he feels comfortable discussing and what data suggests viewers want to see him yell about.
That approach clearly works for ESPN’s ratings and the bottom lines of both them and Smith. And that’s fair enough. But approaching First Take with expectations that it will provide thoughtful coverage of sports stories that deserve that coverage is not something supported by the show’s record.
[Awful Announcing on X/Twitter]
