ESPN vs. Comcast- Let's Get it On

The Thrilla in Manila, Ali vs. Frazier III,may have been the biggest boxing fight ever.

But when it comes to media outlet’s battling it out, nothing can get bigger than this.

Yesterday, Comcast, a cable, internet and telephone provider, that has also jumped into the content world ,has decided to add more local sports content to its website by adding more reporters and coverage of local sports teams in Chicago, San Francisco and Washington. "Comcast also plans to fully staff two Web sites, one for CSNWashington.com and one for CSNBaltimore.com."

While certainly a bold move it is safe to guess that Comcast is punching back against ESPN who recently launched three local online content websites, ESPNchicago.com,ESPNboston.com and espndallas.com, with espnnewyork.com and espnlosangeles.com set to launch in the next year. In short, ESPN wants to dominate the local sports media landscape, putting local newspapers sports sections out of business and ruling sports media content on a national as well as local level.

But now it looks as if ESPN will be challenged for the title by Comcast trying to out-duel them; and from the looks of things, they may not be as big as underdog as you think ( more on that later)

Just to point out, Comcast already has third party programming. In fact, they already have stakes in the Chicago White Sox and San Francisco Giants. But never have they gone as full scale as this, especially when it comes to digital print ( or as other people call it, print online)

According to the Washington Business Journal , Comcast's launch of CSNphilly.com,(which covers Philadelphia professional sports teams), which it launched eight months ago, has had double the amount of viewers to its website since.

While this seems like a significant move for Comcast, for the sake of intentions of the blog, I must analyze how this move can/will affect ESPN.

Google Search:

Today, advertising companies are spending millions of dollars trying to find out which websites produce the biggest search results on Google. For example, if I type " Yankees" into the search box in Google, an ESPN article about the Yankees is about the 10th selection down on the Google page. Basically, the higher up it is, the better and the way you get higher up is by producing quality content and obtaining a good readership base, among other things. Now, if the Comcast continues to grow, than it can rise up higher on the Google list, pushing ESPN out of the way. For the sake of the " Yankees" search example, ESPN has to compete with The New York local papers like, The Daily News and New York Times, and other media Giants like AOL fanhouse.com and Yahoo sports. But adding another media giant won't help ESPN in the Google arena. Bottom line, the less competition on Google search for a company means more money from advertisers. With the rise of Comcast, that may change for ESPN.

Also, the great thing about local content is that the more specific a search is the more hits it will get in that area. Say, for example, that one would want to find out about Kobe Bryant's knee injury and how long he will be out for( heaven forbid)than one would type something into Google like, " Kobe Bryant knee injury" and as a result more specific news about his injury will pop up and that will probably mean more local publications, like the Los Angeles Times, would be higher up on the Google page than ESPN. ( Note, I just tried this experiment using Luke Walton, Lakers forward who really is injured, and the LA Times article regarding the injury is on the first Google page and ESPN coverage has not even shown up yet and I am on the 8th page so I just gave up looking) What I am getting at here is that if Comcast has better and more extensive coverage on an issue than ESPN regarding a local sports team, than that means more and earlier hits for Comcast on Google. And we all know that means more money baby. Which leads me to my next point?

Content:

In terms of content, I have never been a big fan of the ESPN local sites. Take ESPNboston for example. The reporting is flat, the articles and sourcing is limited, and many of the reports come from the Associated Press. Additionally, much of the reporting is done by ESPN's national reporters who I don't believe have much of a relationship with those cities teams and may not even live there. In other words, they do more of their reporting over the phone than in person. On the other hand, I do have to admit that ESPNboston.com columnists are well versed in Boston sports and certainly are far superior writers than other sports providers. But in terms of actual reporting, which could help out the Google search more than a column can, I think Comcast, at least from what we see from CSN Philly, is vastly better.

Take this article from CSNphilly.com. The article is clearly well sourced, the reporting is done well, and there is even some full length analysis. Overall, if Comcast puts the same amount of local reporters in their local cities, than they will quickly take over ESPN local websites. Bottom line, Comcast is training hard and fast. ESPN needs to throw away its title belt, get off the couch and the pile of green underneath it and hit the weight room.

Newspapers:

For print lovers like myself, I am always optimistic that newspapers will still be the leading source for in depth team analysis and investigative reporting. In a nut shell, I still believe that a player, coach or owner will always be more apt to talk to a local newspaper about an important issue rather than speak with a reporter from a media powerhouse like ESPN, Yahoo, or AOL. The reporters that have been working for say, The Philadelphia Inquirer, have been working there for years and have established a relationship with teams that will take ESPN reporters years to establish. Therefore, all the more reason to continue putting more money into local coverage. Furthermore, despite the rise of Comcast, ESPN will always lead the way is in its opinion/ column writing with guys like Peter Gammons, J.A. Adande Buster Olney and Skip Bayless. For the moment, no sports fan identifies more with their writers than they do with ESPN. However, it is my belief that ESPN will soon need to invest more money and effort into natural reporting and news in local cities because really, how far can they rely on their columnists to lead the way?

With all that being said, ESPN's biggest opponent in the ring may not be Comcast; in the end, it may be themselves.