Can You Tell Sports Commentary From Political Punditry? We Couldn't.

[Ubiquitous]

In a video produced by ABC News, Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight staff are
asked to do what they initially thought would be an easy task: tell the
difference between the kinds of statements made by members of the media about
the 2020 Democratic debates and those made by sports commentators about
athletes. The result is a bunch of wrong guesses and a rather humorous look
at the "sportsification"/dumbing down of political commentary in the media.

"The game was supposed to be simple: I read a quote, you tell me if the quote
was from either a sports broadcast or a political discussion about the first
two 2020 Democratic debates," FiveThirtyEight's Tony Chow writes. "Almost
every staff member I pitched it to here at FiveThirtyEight was confident they
would ace it."

But, as Chow notes, it turned out to be far more difficult than anyone
imagined. By average, he notes, the staff guessed only 13 of the 21 quotes
correctly. The highest score was 16 out of 21; the lowest was a miserable 8
out of 21.

As the video highlights, it's not hard to see why it was so difficult to
distinguish between sports commentary and political "analysis" because the
latter often resorts to similarly reductive and metaphor-heavy rhetoric.
"Maybe it’s impossible to take the sports out of politics after all. Or is it
the politics out of sports?" Chow muses.

A few quotes pulled from pre- and post-debate media coverage and sports
commentary that threw FiveThirtyEight staff for a loop:

"He has the ability to take a lickin', keep on tickin'; take a bruisin', keep
on cruisin'."

"He got into the fight. His team will be happy that he showed up, that he
responded, that he fired back."

"Nasty jab there. Tagged him with the left hook there. That was it."

"I love the guy. I think he's great. One thing I particularly love about him,
I haven't heard a ton of people say, is he's just super honest."

"[Blank] turned in a performance that reminded you why he's a household
name."

That last one ended up really not going over well among the staff. Watch
below via FiveThirtyEight:

https://abcn.ws/30b2lfh

Silver, a statistician and political analyst, founded FiveThirtyEight in
2008. The site has since become a major player in the political realm,
particularly in its predictions and analysis of elections. Silver's sway
among political elites was recently demonstrated in the controversy over The
New York Times' much-critiqued decision to change a headline about Trump's
speech responding to the El Paso and Dayton mass shootings after backlash
from Democratic presidential candidates.

Silver's initial tweet criticizing the Times for headlining its coverage of
Trump's speech "Trump Urges Unity Vs. Racism" was widely circulated, with
many Democrats referencing it when they leveled their own criticism against
the Times. As The Daily Wire reported, the Times quickly caved and published
a revised, more subjective headline: "Assailing Hate But Not Guns."
Afterward, Silver expressed his approval of the change, saying it's "better
to do this than not."

FWIW (certainly better to do this than not IMO) they changed
their headline between the 1st and 2nd print edition.
pic.twitter.com/DOSAMFbvq0
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) August 6, 2019

--
Watching Democrats come up with schemes to "catch Trump" is like
watching Wile E. Coyote trying to catch Road Runner.