NYT N.B.A. Game of the Week: Cleveland at San Antonio

[boutons_deux]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/11/sp...er=rss&emc=rss

[SouthernFried]

Eh. Basically an article on how Cleveland can beat the "not so invincible" Spurs.

NYTimes seems to be as bias in their sports reporting...as everything else it "reports."

[lilbthebasedgod]

Eh. Basically an article on how Cleveland can beat the "not so invincible" Spurs.

NYTimes seems to be as bias in their sports reporting...as everything else it "reports."

Its just underdog story pandering. The media's been very kind to the spurs this year.

[Kawhitstorm]

NY Times writing about championship contenders

[UNT Eagles 2016]

We split the series with them this month.

[EVAY]

The article is essentially nothing, imo, consistent with the general level of sports coverage by the NYT. That is just not a paper that focuses on sports, much less the nba. Even when they are covering the finals, it is almost always about player's lives or some sort of personal interest stuff.

Having said the above, there is little to dispute in the article, either. The Cavs ARE the most likely to give the Spurs the biggest challenge to maintaining their home win streak in the immediate future, and that is basically all it said.

[Uriel]

Eh. Basically an article on how Cleveland can beat the "not so invincible" Spurs.

NYTimes seems to be as bias in their sports reporting...as everything else it "reports."

Let me guess... Fox News?

[Uriel]

The article is essentially nothing, imo, consistent with the general level of sports coverage by the NYT. That is just not a paper that focuses on sports, much less the nba. Even when they are covering the finals, it is almost always about player's lives or some sort of personal interest stuff.

Having said the above, there is little to dispute in the article, either. The Cavs ARE the most likely to give the Spurs the biggest challenge to maintaining their home win streak in the immediate future, and that is basically all it said.

Of course. NYT isn't a paper that caters to hardcore sports fans (like ESPN or Sports Illustrated) but to the general viewing public. So naturally, they have to frame their content in such a way that is suitable to their audience.

[EVAY]

Of course. NYT isn't a paper that caters to hardcore sports fans (like ESPN or Sports Illustrated) but to the general viewing public. So naturally, they have to frame their content in such a way that is suitable to their audience.

exactly. sometimes I wonder why they bother. it is such a supremely literate newspaper, but their sports coverage (with the exception of the U.S. Open tennis tournament) is clearly such an afterthought.