Things are a bit slow today, so I want to cover a topic I touched on a month or two ago.  The topic?  Why I hate ESPN Insider.

First, hate is a strong word.  I hate prejudice, injustice, discrimination and hatred (I hate hatred?).  So to say that I hate ESPN Insider is a bit hyperbolic, but the service really does irritate me.

In case you haven’t been paying attention, ESPN is the self-proclaimed worldwide leader in sports.  They are a huge TV network (the biggest in Bristol, CT) consisting of several sub-networks, a radio network, and they publish their very own magazine and website.  They also place their brand on video games, sports trainers, lunchboxes, underwear, jars of pickle relish, etc.  When it comes to sports (and pickle relish), ESPN is the kingpin.

In their role as sports kingpin, they provide news and information about the world of sports.  To stay in business, they charge companies to advertise their products and services on ESPN’s TV networks, radio network, on the pages of ESPN the Magazine , and on their website.  They also charge cable/satellite providers to carry their TV programming.  They charge radio stations to carry their radio programming.  They charge subscriptions to their magazine.  They probably have other revenue sources that I can’t even imagine.  I have nothing against ESPN’s business model.  It works incredibly well and I applaud them for it.

In order to keep this behemoth running, ESPN hires the best, most well-connected writers and commentators in the business.  If it happens in sports, the folks at ESPN usually know about it first.  The people at ESPN scour their contacts to stay on top of breaking news.  They take the sports news, report it, break it down, and give their opinions on it.  As a sports fan, this is what I want.  I want sports news as soon as it happens.  I want to understand it.  I want different prespectives and insider information.  And this is where the system breaks down for me.

ESPN has this insidious little service called ESPN Insider.  It’s part of their website.  ESPN Insider is a paid service that gives subscribers the “real” inside information on sports.  Wait a minute.  The “inside” information?  You mean that the sports news on the ESPN TV networks, radio networks, in the magazine, and on their website is not the whole story?  Is that true?  Am I to believe that ESPN is only giving part of the news?  If you want the rest — the inside information — you have to pay for that?  What kind of business model is that?

To give you an example, ESPN’s baseball reporters have been covering the Minnesota Twins efforts to sign catcher Joe Mauer to a long-term contract.  It’s a big deal because Mauer is the best hitting catcher in the game and will be a free agent after the 2010 season.  If he hits the open market, teams will fall all over themselves to pay him millions upon millions of dollars.  As a small market team, Minnesota’s only hope of keeping Mauer is to sign him now before they have to compete with other teams.

The Twins-Mauer story has been covered throughout ESPN’s extensive, all-encompassing outlets.  But apparently, they haven’t been telling us the whole story.  The reason I say this is because there is a story on ESPN Insider today with the “inside scoop” on the talks between the Twins and Mauer.  And how do I know that the information is different than what they are telling us on TV, radio, in their magazine, and on their website?  Because they charge for the information.  They wouldn’t charge for information they’ve already given out for free, would they?

I tried to view the Twins-Mauer story, but because I am not a subscriber, I was taken to a page that told me that for as low as $2.50 per month, I could have access to the information.  Can I afford a measly $2.50 per month?  Barely, but that’s not really the point, is it?

This whole issue boils down to one thing for me, credibility.  One of two things is happening here.  Either ESPN is providing the full story for free on TV, radio, in the magazine, and on their website and they are charging for the regurgitated news on ESPN Insider, or they are withholding part of the story when they broadcast it on TV, radio, in the magazine, and on their website, and they are charging as little as $2.50 per month to get the rest of the story.  Either way, it’s wrong and I hate it (please see explanation of “hate” above).

Truthfully, I don’t get much of my baseball news from ESPN anymore.  There were too many times that I wanted to read a Peter Gammons or Jayson Stark column only to find out I had to pay for the privilege.  I finally just turned to other outlets to get the baseball news. 

Today, I still run into a story here and there that I want to read on ESPN’s website, only to find out that the story is by subscription only.  It’s frustrating, but I’m not going to give in to ESPN’s evil little plan.  Because if I pay for ESPN Insider to get “the rest of the story,” what are they going to charge me for next?  Perhaps they’ll start charging an extra $1.00 each month to include the headline with the story.  How about a dollar or two each month to include the story’s final paragraph?  Where will it all end?

I’ve chosen not to participate in ESPN’s little ponzi scheme (technically it’s not a ponzi scheme, but calling something a “ponzi scheme” automatically makes it look suspect, so I’m going with it).  I already pay for cable to get ESPN’s many TV channels.  I already own an XM radio so I can listen to ESPN Radio.  I already subscribe to their hip, glossy magazine.  The madness must stop.  I am drawing the line at ESPN Insider.

But if you want to know the real kicker, then for as little as $2.50 per month I’ll share the real insider information with you…