Inside the Six, Episode #14: The Demise of World Soccer Daily
In a special edition of Inside the Six, host Richard Farley talks about the sudden demise of World Soccer Daily, the States’ only daily football broadcast. To reaction, Conor Brennan, the co-chair of the Anti-Steven Cohen campaign, was interviewed. He discussed his campaign’s role in the show’s demise, allegations of threats made by Cohen, and the effects of WSD’s absence.
In the second half-hour, Richard and EPL Talk/MLS Talk host Kartik Krishnaiyer discuss the business and cultural implications of Cohen’s decision.
Listen Now:Right click here for a direct download of Episode 14 in MP3 form.
Make sure you subscribe to our RSS feed to get the latest breaking news and analysis!
About Richard Farley
Richard Farley is a U.S.-based contributor to World Soccer Reader. He also hosts Inside the Six, the site's regular podcast. He can be reached at richardfarley at gmail dot com and followed on Twitter, username "richardfarley." And while you are at it, feel free to check out RF Football.
conor brennan your a disgrace
How is it that Brennan can say that he was just trying to get Steven Cohen to stop his mis-information about Hillsborough and not recognize that he and his supporters have effectively shut down one of the best sources of football information in the United States? And to claim justification in emails of support from MLS fans because Steven Cohen didn’t blindly support the MLS is simply ridiculous. This whole controversy has been an exercise in stupidity, from both sides. And the only thing that has resulted from it is the death of the premier daily soccer show in the Unites States.
I think Conor did recognize that in the interview. For him, the benefits of his cause outweighed the costs of taking World Soccer Daily down. It’s for us to judge whether we agree with that assessment. I have my views, a lot of which can be heard in my questions of Conor.
I think it’s important that people hear Conor’s side of things, but we all need to make our own judgments based on that information.
I certainly agree that there is room for criticizing each side.
Thanks for doing this show, Richard.
Regardless of our views on this loss and which side we might take, I don’t see Steven and Kenny being replaced unless another couple of English blokes become bantering, entertaining hosts on an American soccer program all about football –with a variety of guests.
The next incarnation and the next incarnation… and maybe the next, might not be the “right” kind of host in the view of those of us who have listened to Steven for years.
I can understand that enough belief and passion can cause a person or group to make a sacrifice (as LFCNY, Conor) or disregard the cost to society of their actions. However, I feel strongly at this moment that Americans and those residing the U.S. have been robbed of a treasure by a relatively small group of people whose story has very little to do with anything that interests or seriously concerns us domestically. Admittedly, I didn’t want to hear Steven raising the topic in the first place, but I can easily ignore it like most Americans who were formerly unaware.
I think that the point that needs to be made here, regardless of the arguments on either side is that Americans feel violated because their soccer program is gone and secondly, that people carrying hostility and bitterness from a history outside our country have suddenly caused something we regarded as “ours” to vanish while also foisting their story and bitterness upon us. I’m saying that even if we have consideration for the Merseysiders’ families and the “history” as claimed by some of LFC fans, it does not mean that we’re obligated to accept that one of our own citizens, running a soccer show should be taken away from us as our beloved host.
Well put, Tod.
There are a couple of things I have noticed during the last month. I’m sure I’ve mentioned these on either Inside the Six or another podcast.
a.) WSD had a huge following that didn’t seem to act until it was too late. The second Heineken and FourFourTwo dropped, they should have mobilized and started calling the sponsors themselves.
b.) The counter-offensive that went after the anti-Cohen campaign was both disorganized and resorted to the tactics they perceived being used (rather than the tactics that were actually in use). There was this perception perpetrated by Cohen that LFCNY was a bunch of thugs. If you heard the interviews I did, they clearly were not. They were highly organized, but I don’t think Cohen or his supporters ever treated them as such.
It’s no secret to anybody who’s read my pieces or heard my interviews with Conor: I did not want WSD to go off the air. At the same time, I can’t think of one action Cohen or his supporters undertook during the boycott’s tenure that worked positively towards keeping WSD afloat.
Which is too bad, because I think we’re seeing now that the audience and support where there. LFCNY won the tactical battle, and there are a lot of fans that will miss WSD because of it. Conor thinks/hopes people will eventually move on. That still has to be played out.
Yes. You’re exactly where you should be on this story: “that still has to be played out.”
The next part of this story may reflect the character of the WSD fans. The unfortunate thing is that while Mr. Brennan goes about things in a very “civilized” manner, the truth underneath all of this is that the most human action and reaction to all of this is hardly ever so refined, civil, or “productive.”
I believe that a majority of American people not caught up in this story that excites people in England or from the Isles so much have an underlying disgust for refined use of politics, media, or law and the written word. Combine this with the feeling of being robbed, we’ll see what what comes next. Passivity? Inaction? Moving on to the next hobby?
Aside from phoning and emailing WSD sponsors (let me say that I was not a regular listener as I typically don’t do ANYTHING regularly), I did wonder what could be done to defend Steven on his program. I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t want to be bothered with the whole conversation and conflict, but when it comes to defending Steven’s privilege to be host or his job that entertains us, I would like to think that there’s something we can do to show that what has happened is not just.
Why would any American permit a person to effectively take another person’s job or income away because of a disagreement over “history” which, to me, appears not be so clear, or “factual” as these LFC supporters claim it is?