Maybe the difference lies in the fact that many many women in Australia follow sport almost as avidly as men if not more.
Sort of, but not really.
Each TV Channel (ABC, 7, 9, and Ten, but not SBS) has a newsroom etc located in each major capital city and the major regional centres, and which may include local news depending on the network and the story- but generally, the news you see in Brisbane is much the same as the news in Sydney, which is again much the same as Melbourne. The main difference is the weather forecast.
There are “local” networks, like the “affiliates” they have in the US.
For example, Southern Cross Ten (which broadcasts in Northern NSW and can be picked up in South-East Queensland) has a local news programme, but otherwise broadcasts whatever Ten is showing, and Win, Prime, and NBN are all regional versions of 9- the main difference being the news.
The reality is there isn’t that much of interest happening in a given area to justify massive local nightly TV news reports- even the local paper in most areas is a bit thin on stories that don’t involve everyone complaining about the local council or how the Federal Government is trying to screw them over by cutting the 1c/litre subsidy on milk for people who don’t live in areas with ADSL internet access.
Oh, and the fact that the evening news here is 25% sport (at least on 7, 9, and Ten) is a source of constant irritation to me. Sport is not news! If you care that much, listen to the sports station on an AM radio. :mad:
Sorry, that’s one of my pet peeves.
Sport is most definitely news. It is probably the most popular thing in the world.That is why I find it so odd that it does not seem to be on American TV news shows.
In what way is sport news?
Sigh.
I meant “In what way is Sport worthy of any coverage at all in the National Television Media?”
Ah, I misunderstood. Apologies.
I would say that in the U.S., it’s not, which is why it’s not present in national news broadcasts. I am also interested to hear why other countries do it the way they do, but I fear that’s quite out of GQ territory.
Nope–tell an American about it, even a sports nut, & it’s nap time. <yawn>
He’s likely never even heard of the Cup, doesn’t care, & doesn’t even know the US has a team.
In this website http://50.lycos.com/
It includes basketball,Golf,NFL,Soccer and Baseball in the top 15 searches on the web.
I understand you do not like sport. Fine. I do not mind that. I do not understand how you can possibly suggest sport is not newsworthy.
only 25%? Bah! In New Zealand on a slow newsday I have honestly seen 50% of the 30 minute news taken up with sport.
I’m not sure I understand - did that 1 in 100 000 refer to water polo? If not, are they called “baseball moms” or “football moms” now? Or are you saying there’s at most 2 800 of them? Pretty individually powerful demographic if that’s the case.
Nah.
Soccer is viewed as an inexpensive group sport for children. Little/no special gear, not a contact sport, can be played with mixed boy/girl teams.
But the kids grow up, & then lose intrest. Often, they were urged/pressured into joining in the first place, & never really had an intrest of their own.
“Soccer Mom” was never anything but convenient shorthand for political consultants.
And the prevalence of the term doesn’t mean that soccer itself is big.
Soccer, by and large, is played by little white kids in the suburbs. Hence, “Soccer Mom” = affluent white suburban housewife. Such women are a crucial “swing” vote in many elections. They tend to be wealthy enough to vote Republican, but also liberal enough on social issues to vote Democrat. Hence, politicians of both parties try hard to appeal to such women.
If demographers had called such women “Little League Moms” or “Tee Ball Moms” or “Minivan Moms,” the point would have been the same.
There are millions of little kids playing soccer in the US, but that’s been true for a long time, long enough that we SHOULD be seeing big crowds at pro soccer games, IF it were true that soccer-playing kids grow up to be soccer-watching fans.
In reality, the crowds you DO see at pro soccer games in the USA are usually foreign-born. When the American team plays the Mexican team here in the USA, the crowd is invariably dominated by Mexicans.
That would be the minor leagues.
As for the OP, as others have noted, very few Americans are generic “sports” fans. However, Americans do tend to care passionately about their favorite local teams.
So, if you were watching a local news program in New York, you’d see plenty of coverage of the Yankees. In Los Angeles, local newscasts would have plenty of footage on the Lakers. In Denver, local news would have a lot to say about the Broncos. But people outside those cities would have little interest in those teams. So, a broadcast aimed at a vast, general American audience wouldn’t bother with much coverage of sports. They figure that people will watch their local news programs for that kind of thing.
Incidentally, while I was disparaging of soccer earlier, I’ll share an anecdote to give Americans some perspective. I was last in Ireland in October of 2002, while the Giants were playing the Angels in the World Series of baseball. I was watching the news from my hotel room in Galway, and they had a LOT of sports coverage. The Irish news spent a lot more time on sports than any American newscast I’ve ever seen! And they covered almost every sport yo ucan imagine- soccer, horse racing, tennis, cricket, it went on and on.
The ONLY sport (or so it seemed) they didn’t spend a split second on? Baseball, of course! The biggest event in baseball was going on, the biggest event in American sports- but in Ireland, nobody thought it was worthwhile to tell viewers the score, let alone show any video footage.
So, if non-Americans are outraged by how little Americans care about soccer… well, Americans might be astonished at how little attention foreigners pay to baseball.
On the contrary, I think Americans are surprised that there are any other countries where baseball is popular and are astonished to learn of the importance of baseball in Japanese popular culture.
Yeah, think about the range of sports you’d have to cover. You’d need a whole separate channel for them! (Hm? Oh, yeah.)
Also take into account that there is a huge proportion of casual sports fans who are interested only in their local high school (high school football in Ohio, high school basketball in Indiana, etc.) and college teams. Not even several dedicated 24-hour channels could cover the range of results needed there.
It seems to me that people are making wildly exaggerated claims about the popularity of sports in this thread. Soccer is not completely ignored in the U.S. It’s just not as popular as the big four professional team sports - football, basketball, baseball, and hockey. Partly it’s got to do with the usual definition of popularity of sports in the U.S. A popular sport is usually defined as one that’s an obsession of many middle-aged white guys who’ve been following a single team for most of their lives. Under that definition, the truly popular sports are the big four professional team sports, the college teams in those sports, and perhaps the high school teams in those sports. This is an important thing to understand about spectator sports in the U.S. In many TV and newspaper markets, the college teams are followed more closely than the professional teams. In small towns, the hardcore sports fans often obsess more about the high school sports teams than about college or professional sports teams. Small town newspapers will often give bigger play to high school sports than to college or professional sports.
The vast majority of Americans know what the World Cup is. It’s just that it’s not the obsession of the middle-aged white guys who are usually thought of as the big sports nuts in the U.S. The World Cup does get some newstime on TV and some space in the newspapers. It’s just not followed obsessively like it is outside the U.S. Easily the majority of Americans have played soccer at some point in their life, although only a few games. Even leaving aside the (mostly) well-off suburbs where playing on a soccer team (for both boys and girls) is pretty standard, the majority of Americans have played soccer in physical education in elementary school.
The middle-aged white guys who are usually thought of as the main market for sports news do follow the overall races in their sports, even when their team is doing badly and will not possibly be the champions. They’re just not as obsessed with it as with their own favorite teams. Every major newspaper has sports section full of the statistics for every team in every major sport, including the college sports and often the local high school sports. They do give some space to minor sports also.
Was it Pujols?
People want to know what is happening. Same as other news.
Of course.