> I can link you to tons of articles of them being political and generally left leaning Isn't that falling into the trap of repetition = truth? People repeat f

> I can link you to tons of articles of them being political and generally left leaning Isn't that falling into the trap of repetition = truth? People repeat falsehood and rumors as much as the truth, and they rarely check the facts. Humans are hardwired to follow social norms not verify facts - e.g., the scientific method didn't arise for thousands of years, and takes great discipline - if everyone is repeating something, that becomes the norm. Propaganda campaigns, some that lead people to far more awful things than criticizing ESPN, rely on it. I can find a ton of articles and far more online posts saying that the science of climate change is inconclusive, but that's not true. (And a related point: For thousands of years humanity had misconceptions about nature; everyone repeated them; but they weren't true.) That's why I'm interested in a factual basis, but not in what people repeat. If they are repeating something factual, then there will be a basis for it. > I think there are poll numbers to support that people tend to shy away from sports broadcasts that are more political That would be valuable. But I'd like to see it (and it depends on the definition of political).