New Media, New Standards
Theory #37 | Reinventing sports talk shows & respecting the audience
I find there’s something to learn from almost anyone who does something really well. In fact, I strongly believe some of the best lessons and examples come from outside of your usual environments, communities, lanes. Sports isn’t one of the top things I study or write about, but every time I do, I come away with new inspiration — so hear me out.
When life is a little less hectic (or there's something as huge as NCAA March Madness happening), I pay more attention to sports. Many years ago, I used to watch sports talk shows all the time — Sportscenter, First Take, Undisputed. That is until I got tired of their overly sensationalized debate format.1
But then I stumbled upon the podcast The Old Man and the Three. And it’s at least 60% responsible for getting me excited about basketball again. It’s simple. The co-hosts, JJ Redick and Tommy Alter, talk about the latest NBA games. Sometimes they interview players, coaches, sportscasters. (JJ Redick is known for his prolific three-point shooting, storied college career, and 15 seasons in the NBA).2
But there are lots of podcasts with notable athletes. So, why did this stand out?
The podcast is about the sport. Not just headlines but history too, and about what the players think, do, and feel deeply — day in and day out. It sounds stupidly simple, but it’s surprisingly rare. I also can’t ignore the fact that JJ Redick is an ideal host: He's a veteran star player, i.e. an insider expert. He's a great analyst with a grasp on technique, history, stats, and story. And he's all-around charismatic.3
It got me thinking about the bigger picture of new media, and then another podcast launched.
In March of this year, Redick launched a new podcast with LeBron James called Mind the Game. The bill of the show is “pure conversations about basketball.” And it instantly topped the charts.
Redick was asked how the podcast came together when he guested on the Flagrant podcast hosted by comedian Andrew Schulz. I found the 2.5 minutes of the ensuing conversation to be fascinating (and relevant to a few reflections I’m going to discuss).
If you want to listen to the real thing, here’s the YouTube clip, or skip to the transcript below:
Schulz’s co-host: How did the pod with LeBron come to fruition, and is it intimidating to sit across from one of the greats ever and talk the game, or do you feel completely comfortable?
Redick: It’s not intimidating. I’ve known Bron now 24 or 25 years, we met when we were like 15 or 16 at USA basketball camp. It’s funny cus I’ve like never hung out with LeBron. Like he’s not my boy.
Schulz: Oh, I thought you guys were friends and that’s how the pod came about.
Redick: We’ve always had mutual respect, great interactions, I’m not going on vacation with his family, not going to his house for dinner. There’s always been a mutual level of respect, as players. So we saw each other in December, with the folks on his side and just had a conversation, and that kind of just got the ball rolling.
Schulz: So he picked you or you picked him?
Redick: There’s no good answer to that.
Schulz: Really? Seems like there’s a great answer.
Schulz: Ok, so this thing comes together. We’ve seen the first episode which is actually half of what’s been filmed, so there’s another episode that’s coming. In the first episode, do you know you have a hit? When 15, 20 minutes into the conversation are you going — oh this is the most fun, this is gonna be crazy.
Redick: Yea.
Schulz: Immediately?
Redick: Yea, immediately.
Schulz: Ok, wow.
Redick: … The second part of the conversation was the part where you’re in the room and you’re like floating, cus it’s so pure. You know what I mean?
And it’s funny, Jason Gallagher, who’s our Head of Production, who’s been with us since day 1 on The Old Man and the Three — he’s listened to 220 episodes of [that] podcast ... he’s been in every conversation. He texts me afterwards and he’s like “dude, I was floating today, that’s the best shit we’ve ever recorded.”
Am I about to spend half an essay overanalyzing a 2 minute podcast clip? Yes. The thing is when you listen to an expert who’s deep in some arena talking about their world, 2 minutes is rich. And the lessons are more generalizable than you expect.4
Two things stick out in particular:
The first part revolves around the astute question: Who asked who?
For one, you see JJ Redick’s charisma in his answer — that there’s “no good answer.” It’s an answer disguised as a non-answer, showing all kinds of awareness. It implies that it’s LeBron via his “people” who asked JJ to do the podcast — and this is impressive.
Because LeBron is the caliber of player and celebrity that could ask anyone to co-host a podcast with him and they’d say yes. And I’ve no doubt LeBron and his team put careful thought into the kind of media he wanted to create too. It takes talent to know talent.
Still, regardless of who asked who, I see a few lessons:
Be credible.
This is a hard thing that doesn’t happen overnight. In this case, JJ Redick became a credible expert in basketball by playing professionally for 20 years, plus all the work before it to get there. No small feat, but the lesson is still the same, even at a smaller scale.
Be great at something.
And once you get credibility, apply it to something that you enjoy. And strive to become great at that thing. Great enough that it’s not in question if you’re one of the greats — it doesn’t have to be “of all time” but at least “of the moment.” Then keep doing what you do, and share it with the public so people can find you.
Let them come to you.
Reasonable people will disagree on this, but my point is that if you do #1 and #2, it’s only a matter of time before #3 happens. Prove yourself before they have to pick. And when they start looking, you’ll be at the top of the list.
The second part is about the content: how do you know when it’s good?
When the experts on the inside feel like the content is a level above, it means something. Having LeBron in the conversation naturally elevates the weight and wisdom of the discourse, but there’s care and pride in the format and details too (you can tell they both care about the quality).
At the start of each episode, JJ explains the tactical basketball concepts they'll be talking about. They don't try to overly simplify or exclude “technical” talk. Rather, they deliberately educate the audience to bring them into their conversation.
This focus on conversational quality, integrity, and inclusion is instructive too:
Keep it pure.
Talk about the artform, not just the drama around it. If it’s basketball, talk about basketball. Cover the details. The history, the stats, the coaching, the players, the plays, the emotions, the gritty parts of the “job,” all the behind-the-scenes stories. Keep it pure, not performative.
If you feel it, they’ll feel it.
Focus on making it the best conversation (or product or experience) for you. If you feel the quality and specialness of the moment, trust that it’ll translate to the audience too. It’s hard to get to “floating,” but when you do, you know.
Explain it like they’re one of you.
This doesn’t mean to explain it like they already get it. It means explain it like they can get it. Don’t sensationalize it or dumb it down. How would you talk with peers? With anyone in your field that you respect? Less ELI5 (“Explain it like I’m 5”) and more explain it like I’m one of you.
This is a new podcast so it’ll definitely have to evolve, but it has the makings of something unique. My unsolicited thoughts: the dynamic between LeBron and JJ is a bit too formal interviewer-interviewee-esque right now. Time will tell if LeBron starts acting more like a co-host or continues to seem like an interviewee (but he’s new to this game and will master it soon enough). He’s already definitely added a level of depth, wisdom, and passion that comes through when he recalls the tactical and emotional details of an impressive number of plays.
I suspect a couple more things will help: 1) each person developing their own “segments” within the show 2) testing bringing in other players, coaches, and the like as guests to bridge the interview vibe 3) making sure to cover some current topics (e.g. womens’ nba rise) 4) making it more visual (e.g. when they explain X’s and O’s). Separately, the production vibes, set, editing, everything is really well done — so much so that it feels more like a tv mini series than a podcast (and this is one possible end point). It probably does have a bigger production budget than usual (both sides are co-producing).
It’ll be interesting to see what the editing team does, e.g. how they cut up the educational, somewhat serious, long-form conversations. One thing they should do is package “making the pod” bonus segments with cut footage, bloopers, and behind the scenes content. There’s a lot of good raw potential here.
I’m talking a lot about sports, but this essay is really about modern storytelling and serving an audience. It’s about the widening gap between legacy media and new media and the vast difference in how they tell stories and engage people. The Old Man and the Three and Mind the Game are examples of new media done right.
Athletes are increasingly aware of how short their careers can be. So smartly, they’re strategizing early about how they’ll transition out of sports. A lot of athletes are starting podcasts. They're creating their own brands and media properties and product lines well before retirement. They know that the more they can grow their owned audience, the more it serves everything else they do, both financially and for their legacy.
But it’s not just athletes and celebrities. If you’re in any arena where attention and cultural relevance are key, “owning your audience” is top of mind. We’ve seen the tech Twitter prophets preach the virtues of going direct. The consensus is there’s never been a better time to go direct and build that audience. That also means it’s getting noisy, but I don’t see this letting up anytime soon. It’s still early.
Pressure is coming from the other side too: the audience. I’ve written about my belief that companionship content is king and short-form has a ceiling. That’s because the emotions that drive short-form video views and virality have a ceiling too (and the emotions that sensational legacy media stokes are similar). Audiences are looking for better. If they give you attention, they want respect.
Great new media respects the audience’s curiosity and intelligence and time. It knows that insider insight is gold, authenticity resonates, and high standards turn passive listeners into active, engaged communities. It doesn’t water itself down to cater to the whole world; it commits to its niche. The best new media is media that’s made for yourself and your peers, then shared with the world.5
The thought wouldn’t be complete without hearing from the king — LeBron was recently asked why he decided to start the podcast too. His answer feels right:
LeBron: “I feel like we were losing the essence of the game of basketball … I was getting very frustrated with the daily comparisons — who’s better between you and someone else? How does this affect your legacy? … It’s not good for the youth … I feel like our audience needed a different approach and to understand what the true essence of the game is, how I fell in love with the game.”
If you’re curious to see it for yourself, Episode 4 of Mind the Game just dropped. For everyone who followed the NCAA championship games, this episode includes some talk about womens and mens college basketball. :)6
Regrettably, I never competitively played team sports. I was in gymnastics through middle school and then tennis through high school, both of which are highly skill-oriented and competitive, yet largely individual sports. But I've watched a lot, especially basketball. I grew up outside Houston, Texas so I had to be a Rockets fan even though they’re one of those teams that perennially disappoints. After their ‘90s championships (with an asterisk), they were all false hopes so I finally gave up.
For people who don't follow basketball, JJ Redick is probably best known for his time in the NCAA. He was a prolific three-point shooter for the Duke (arguably the most storied and rivalrous men's college basketball program ever). As Duke’s star player, he was the target of rival teams’ abuse and often swept up in drama. In 2006, he was drafted to the NBA. He went on to play 15 seasons across 6 NBA teams. Point being, he isn’t a sportscaster first, he’s a respected player first.
As best I can tell, charisma is freely speaking your mind, simultaneously displaying confidence and humility, strength and vulnerability, being comfortable talking to anyone and making them comfortable talking to you, oozing self-awareness and social awareness, all with perfectly timed touches of cleverness, humor, and self-deprecation. And ideally it’s being all of these things authentically and without much deliberation.
Sometimes you watch a movie and one scene captivates you; the same happens to me with podcasts and essays and the like.
The funny thing is that every podcaster would likely say they agree with these principles, but very few actually follow through on them.
I wish this was sponsored for all the great things I’m saying, but I’m just sharing my reactions from seeing how the podcast has launched and watching the show. Someone will do case studies on this genre of new media soon enough, if they haven’t already.