Wimbledon. Remember that little tournament that ended just a few weeks ago? Since I was otherwise occupied at the All-England Club, I only had a feel for the tennis broadcasts back home in the USA via the occasional - actually, frequent - email or other message beseeching me to march into the studios of NBC to behead someone. Having left my scimitar at home for the week, this I could not do. But I'm publishing here a letter Asad Raza - aka Ray Stonada, he of the Nantucket red pants and a former TennisWorld poet laureate to boot! - sent to Dick Ebersol of NBC. He's the executive in charge of the tennis broadcasting effort at his network. Who knows, maybe if you all add your thoughts in the comments, someone at NBC will bother to read this post. I think the bit about the rationale for tape delay evaporating is a particularly good point. So here we go:
Dick Ebersol
Chairman, NBC Universal Sports & Olympics
Dear Mr. Ebersol,
Over the last month, your network provided coverage of Roland Garros and Wimbledon, which have both turned out to be superb and historic tournaments in the annals of tennis. I thought your team did excellent work: NBC production values are unequaled, and your commentary booth produces a real sense of the epic importance of the biggest matches. In my opinion, though, there is one glaring problem with NBC's coverage, which is why I'm writing to you: tape delay.
Robin Soderling defeating Rafael Nadal in the greatest upset of the decade? Not shown live. Roger Federer, under mountainous pressure, coming back to beat Juan Martin del Potro in the semis of the French Open? Not shown live. Andy Murray trying to become the first Briton to reach the Wimbledon final in 70 years, against Andy Roddick, the USA's best player? Tape delayed.
I don't think I'm exaggerating when I say that tape delay erases the appeal of many of the biggest matches in the sport. Live, a great semifinal becomes an event in global culture--I pick up the phone to hear a friend from Germany exulting "Federerrrrr!"; it rings again and my father's voice says, "Did you see that shot!?"; text messages arrive from my nephew reading "VENUS"; people cluster on the internet commenting on what they see--"What a backhand, Rafa!!!!" A big match becomes a joyous, nerve-wracking collective experience--when everyone, around the world, is watching it as it happens.
I recently corresponded about tape delay with the former number one player, Jim Courier, via Twitter. (A lot of the appeal of that website, by the way, is that it lets you read what people you find interesting are thinking about right now, live.) Jim wrote: "NBC pays a lot of money for the rights. Need ratings to justify the price they charge advertisers, which they need to pay (for) the (broadcast), And ratings are better in the afternoon. Delayed TV was never a problem until the internet. Anyway, I'm glad NBC has it as it helps grow the sport but I hear you and feel your pain."
This is a sound business rationale, at least in the short term.
But I also think Jim gets it right by implying that in the age of the internet delayed TV is a problem--there are too many other sources of information nowadays. To stay in the dark about a match, you'd have to become a modern recluse: to stop checking your email, looking at your phone, going on news sites, Facebook, Twitter. Practically speaking, it's impossible - which means that you're showing matches that nearly everyone knows the result of already. And because of NBC's embargo on other networks or websites showing the best matchups, Americans don't get to experience the collective thrill ride these clashes should be.
In the short term, ratings might be higher when you televise a tape of Roger or Serena's match in the afternoon. But in the long run, I don't believe it will grow the sport: you can't connect emotionally to the cauldron of pressure that is a big tennis match if you already know the result--and kids watch TV with laptops open and smartphones in hand. Worse, the delays alienate your core audience, Americans who love the sport and follow it closely. Grand Slam quarterfinals and semifinals are the playoff games of tennis--imagine if the NFL playoffs were tape-delayed!
Perhaps a provisional solution would be to delay matches, but lift the embargo on other networks or show them live on NBC's website. Everything that makes sports compelling and different from other forms of televised entertainment has to do with its live-ness. Competition thrills us because we don't know what's going to happen--when we do, sports lose their unique power as inquiries into the spirit and will of human beings. Thanks for the generally wonderful job your network does with tennis, and I urge you to give us the chance to watch these amazing matches, live.
all the best,
Asad Raza
Contributing Writer, TENNIS Magazine