Can Sports Betting Media Attract an Audience?

What’s Worth Spending Time On?

Sometimes at night I hop through You-tube videos on my laptop when the missus is watching a drama on Netflix. Fun to watch those “reaction videos” of young people seeing things that were popular when I was a young person. Old comedies. Old comedians. (So many people recently discovering that George Carlin was years ahead of his time!)

Once you start watching old comedy clips, the algorithm tosses other comedy clips at you. Some new, some old. Because I’m still in Asia for the time being, I’ve checked out a few Asian comedians. Saw a clip yesterday that had nothing to do with me personally…but struck a chord for a topic we’ve discussed on these pages periodically.

Comic Leslie Liao was discussing the difficulty of modern-day relationships…within the context of how lame men can be. At 5:48 of the video, she says “I’m straight. So…I’m attracted to men. But…I don’t find men attractive.”

(It might be even worse if she just watched sports betting zoom-casts all day!)

I thought, “that’s it!” Because I’ve been in this field for decades…I’m attracted to sports betting content. But, I don’ find sports betting content attractive. It’s typically a grind to watch. Way too many guys in love with their own voices (it’s pretty much only guys who are in love with their own voices) taking forever to make their point. Or, to not ultimately make a point at all because they lost their train of thought.

EVERYBODY is making picks…but zoom-casted picks are likely destined to hit about 50-51% over a large sample. Sure, there might be a few individuals that could break 52.4% over 1,000 picks. But, you’re not going to know in advance who those will be. Right now, their voices are drowned out by the sheer number of people trying to brand themselves as “content creators” or “influencers” on a “sports betting platform.”

I’ve complained enough about jibber-jabber picks shows in the past. No need to rehash that all again. What “might” attract me, or a general audience to sports betting content? Maybe my best option is just to keep reading box scores and kenpom ratings by myself. That’s already interesting and there’s no smug jibber-jabber from a guy (smug is usually a guy) who finally got something right yesterday and won’t stop congratulating himself. Or, the guy who was wrong again and is trying to blame it on a player or a coach (or the refs).

Forget about “networks” or “2-hour shows” for the moment. Generally speaking…what material would attract people? Even if it’s just for a few minutes?

The one innovation from the past season that I thought was the most helpful were the 45-second market reports Patrick Everson of Vegas Insider was posting on X (formerly twitter) and possibly other spots as well. You really CAN sum up sharp and public betting for a big game that quickly. In fact, it was usually only 30 seconds because Patrick had to say hello, explain who he was, where he was, what he was doing, and then say goodbye at the end.

These were informative, helpful, TRUE (instead of a blowhard bluffing expertise), and showed respect for the audience’s time. Patrick wasn’t trying to fill out a long segment, or a 60-minute show. It was simply “Big game…here’s what’s happening…see you next time.” Over in a finger snap, but you learned something.

So, the FIRST thing I would think about if I was in the broadcast industry is to find SHORT things that work. Respect your audience’s time. Don’t dilly dally. Don’t digress. Don’t tell the same stories from the old days over and over again. Don’t spend five minutes passing a game because you couldn’t find any edges. What would be A GREAT 45 SECONDS? Answer that…and you can build from there.

Another “innovation” I liked wasn’t really an innovation…but a cute, helpful idea that carried a lot of weight. From the South Point studio, Alex White understood that it was difficult for a small production to create graphics on the fly listing everybody’s picks “as they happened.” So, she brought out a white board…wrote the picks there…then showed the camera. (Yes, flashbacks to Tim Russert and “Florida, Florida, Florida” on election night 25 years ago for us old-timers.)

PERFECT! Serve the audience. Think about the audience, and how you can help make things easier for them to keep track of. I see clips of so many zoom-cast shows where you’d think the hosts were trying to torture the audience with long drawn out soliloquies and little visual assistance.

To this point…we’re already at the basics of serving the audience and helping the audience. Think about the audience FIRST…rather than focusing mostly on “building your individual brand,” “building your show’s brand,” “gushing about the sponsors,” “gushing about the people that sign your check,” and “picking a superstar to go over his player prop” because it will seem like the player’s fault if it loses.

If sports betting broadcast content is going to attract, it probably has to be…

*Helpful

*Presented quickly in short bursts

*Combine audio and graphic elements

*Respect the audience’s time rather than continually stalling to fill out a prescribed time window (you should have so much information there’s barely enough room for it!)

*Easy to find, on the AUDIENCE’S schedule. Clips need to be everywhere there are clips. (Email them clips!). Don’t assume many people in 2025 have the luxury of just siting there for an hour (or two) listening to you jibber jabber. Make it worth their while to listen for a couple of minutes of something relevant and valuable (don’t spend 5 minutes passing a game!). Then, string together as many of those little batches of engaging helpfulness as you can.

That might be too hard. Frankly, it probably IS too hard for a 24-hour network, or even a half-a-day network to pull off. That’s part of why it seems so many hosts are taking forever to make their points…or going on digressions that have little to do with the topic at hand. It’s like they were taught to stall! But, ONE SHOW A DAY that’s worth everybody’s time? Do we even have THAT yet? We certainly have fantastic segments from cordial hosts and well-informed guests. Would all the great information bursts from all zoom-casts add up to one hour a day?

Starting point shouldn’t be “I want to build a 24-hour network or host a daily show, how will I fill the time??” It should be “what can I do to attract and help an audience for a couple minutes?” Then, “how can I create A LOT of those and build them into a show or a network?”

Seems as true now as it was several years ago…having several dozen guys (mostly) broadcast picks all day that are going to hit 50-51% isn’t a winning strategy for serious engagement. Feels like most of the “innovation” of the past few years is somebody saying “Yeah, but this time, I’M GOING TO BE THE GUY MAKING PICKS!” Or, “I’ll host my own zoom-cast instead of being a regular guest on somebody else’s zoom-cast.”

As we recently discussed, the industry seems to be aging backwards because that’s not working. Maybe nothing will work. Bottom line: you can’t attract a significant audience if the vast majority of the potential audience doesn’t find you attractive.

Here’s the comedy clip I mentioned, if you were interested…

That’s it for Monday. See you again early Tuesday morning to study how sharps are betting SEC basketball action.