The Unspoken Bias in Sports Media Criticism: A Deeper Look at ‘First Take’ and Its Audience
There’s something oddly revealing about how we critique sports media, and First Take has become the poster child for this phenomenon. Personally, I think the show’s polarizing nature isn’t just about its content—it’s a mirror reflecting our own biases, particularly when it comes to who’s watching. Bomani Jones recently touched on this, and it’s a point that deserves far more attention than it gets.
The Scapegoat Syndrome
One thing that immediately stands out is how First Take is often blamed for the decline of sports talk shows. Critics love to point fingers at Stephen A. Smith’s theatrics or Skip Bayless’s hot takes as the root of all evil in sports media. But here’s the thing: First Take didn’t invent debate-driven television—it just mastered it. What many people don’t realize is that the show’s success isn’t a fluke; it’s a reflection of what audiences, particularly Black audiences, have been craving for decades.
From my perspective, the criticism of First Take often feels like a thinly veiled critique of its viewership. Bomani Jones hit the nail on the head when he pointed out that daytime ESPN programming has always had a massive Black audience. When white critics dismiss First Take as loud, obnoxious, or irrelevant, they’re not just critiquing the show—they’re implicitly dismissing the tastes of the people who watch it. If you take a step back and think about it, this raises a deeper question: Why is it so easy to write off a show that resonates with a specific demographic?
The Irrelevance of ‘Relevance’
Critics often argue that First Take is irrelevant, but this is where things get interesting. What this really suggests is that relevance is in the eye of the beholder. Just because a show doesn’t appeal to a certain group doesn’t mean it lacks influence. First Take didn’t just dominate sports television—it shaped the blueprint for modern media. From cable news to podcasts, the formula of two personalities clashing over hot topics is everywhere.
A detail that I find especially interesting is how Jones pointed out that people used to tune in specifically to hear Skip Bayless’s take on the latest sports drama. That kind of loyalty isn’t accidental. It’s a testament to the show’s ability to tap into something deeper—whether it’s the joy of watching two people who genuinely respect each other argue, or the way it provides a platform for voices that are often overlooked in sports media.
The Evolution of First Take and Its Critics
Since Skip Bayless left, First Take has evolved into more of a Stephen A. Smith vehicle, with a looser, goofier vibe. But the show’s DNA is still everywhere. Fox News, CNN, local radio—they’re all playing the same game. This raises a fascinating question: If First Take is so problematic, why has its model become the industry standard?
In my opinion, the answer lies in its accessibility. First Take doesn’t demand intellectual rigor or nuanced analysis—it’s entertainment first, commentary second. And there’s nothing wrong with that. What makes this particularly fascinating is how critics often conflate their personal distaste for the show with its cultural impact. Just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean it’s not important.
The Audience We Ignore
Here’s where things get uncomfortable: the criticism of First Take often feels like a critique of its audience. Black viewers, in particular, are frequently written off as passive consumers of low-brow content. But what many people don’t realize is that First Take has provided a space for these viewers to see themselves reflected in sports media. It’s not just about the debates—it’s about representation.
If you take a step back and think about it, the show’s success is a reminder that media doesn’t have to cater to a single demographic to be valuable. First Take wins because it understands its audience, and it doesn’t apologize for it. As Jones put it, ‘Two guys who really enjoy each other’s company and really respect each other, arguing with each other about sports, wins.’ That simplicity is its strength.
The Bigger Picture
The debate over First Take isn’t just about sports media—it’s about who gets to decide what’s ‘good’ or ‘bad’ in culture. Critics often position themselves as arbiters of taste, but their disdain for First Take reveals more about their own biases than it does about the show. Personally, I think this is a conversation we need to have more openly.
What this really suggests is that we need to stop conflating personal preference with objective quality. First Take isn’t for everyone, and that’s okay. But dismissing it—and its audience—as irrelevant or harmful is a mistake. If there’s one thing I’ve learned from this debate, it’s that media criticism is often as much about the critic as it is about the content.
Final Thoughts
First Take is far from perfect, but its enduring success is a reminder that there’s no one-size-fits-all approach to media. The show’s critics would do well to remember that. In the end, what matters isn’t whether you like First Take—it’s whether you can acknowledge why it matters to the people who do. And that, in my opinion, is the real takeaway here.
