ESPN The Party Photo by Mike Windle/Getty Images for ESPN

ESPN may be poised to boldly go where no sports channel has gone before.

Last week, CNBC reported that the Worldwide Leader in Sports has been in talks with the NBA, NFL, and MLB in search of a strategic partner. Even more surprising is that the partnership could include those leagues taking an equity stake in the business.

Disney CEO Bob Iger, who is experiencing one heck of a summer, said a few weeks ago that ESPN was looking for a strategic partner. We just didn’t know this was what he meant. There is a lot to unpack here. It’s one thing for a broadcasting company to have an association with a league. It’s quite another for those entities to be intertwined via an equity stake.

We’re not naive. As mentioned before, the ‘E’ in ESPN stands for entertainment. And the sports network is in the entertainment business. For its long-term health, perhaps this is a savvy and necessary move that will give it more access to those leagues’ content and a more lucrative financial model. However, this potential change also raises journalistic questions.

ESPN is a substantial moneymaker for Disney, but in a streaming world, the cable television model that the network was built on has changed. Earlier this week at CNBC’s Game Plan sports business conference, ESPN Chairman Jimmy Pitaro reiterated the company’s long-standing plan to shift its networks toward direct-to-consumer streaming. Pitaro declined to comment when asked if he’s speaking with specific sports leagues as a partner.

ESPN attaching itself to the leagues it has covered for decades has the potential for profit but also has the potential for serious conflicts of interest.

Yes, ESPN’s news department has shrunk over the past decade. Journalism costs money, and the network has made a deliberate fiscal decision not to invest more dollars into those resources. Its focus has been on ponying up for rights fees to live sports programming and paying a select few talking heads to scream about the topics du jour. But even in its diminished state, ESPN still wields tremendous power and influence. It has the resources to make something a national news story.

Will that still be the case if the NBA, NFL, and MLB have an ownership stake in the network? Can we trust ESPN to hold people accountable when the news is unflattering? ESPN already has a creditability problem in some circles. Some do not trust it to responsibly cover the leagues it is already in bed with now. Many complained—rightly so—about its handling of UFC president Dana White’s physical altercation with his wife.

Imagine a hypothetical of NFL owners involved in something that does not reflect well on the league. The NFL has no problem revealing when its players run into trouble because they are largely disposable. The league isn’t as forthcoming when that shame involves one of its owners unless they are trying to force one of those owners out.

As the partnership exits today, leagues can and do voice concerns over programming and news coverage. But they also know that there is a line they do not cross. That line becomes decidedly more blurred when leagues have a stronger financial tie to the broadcast company. Because now those leagues would essentially be part of ESPN.

If the NFL has an ownership stake in ESPN, it probably will have considerable influence on certain stories. It might have the power to reframe coverage in a way that is less damaging. Worse, it might actually be able to quash stories. Will ESPN have the strength to hold powerful people accountable? Or will it morph into a propaganda arm such as the NFL Network? Imagine Jim Trotter’s revelation that NFL Media silenced or watered down his reporting on an even larger scale.

This might seem like an exaggeration but just a hint of conflict can be harmful. People already have trust issues with ESPN. This potential move by the network will not only reinforce their beliefs but also increase the number of skeptics.

Iger is not a journalist. He’s an executive. To him, the potential conflicts might just be the price of doing business. Sure, people may complain. But as long as they are tuning in and subscribing, that might be all he cares about.

Good news for Iger. Not so good news for those who care about journalism.

About Michael Grant

Born in Jamaica. Grew up in New York City. Lives in Louisville, Ky. Sports writer. Not related to Ulysses S. Grant.