...to a lifetime struggle with obesity, diabetes, and heart disease?
Seriously, all I see is a very nice-looking atmosphere in which to consume huge double-cheese carbohydrate discs, cheeseburgers loaded with onion rings and potatoes, pancakes covered with whipped cream and chocolate,* and basically Deep Fried Everything that Isn't Wood-Fired Pizza. Washed down with soda, sweet tea or liquor. Unless this is a once-a-year event, ordering from the menu should come with a Surgeon General's Warning.
*In the 2005 comedy Just Friends, Ryan Reynolds' character is served a High Stack of pancakes completely drowned in whipped cream and M&Ms. It was supposed to be a joke, but I guess it was more of a prophecy? And I thought IHOP's Cheesecake pancakes were scary.
I'm used to seeing washed-up actors and sports figures- Ice T, Vivica Fox, Ernie Hudson, Danica Patrick, Ric Flair- pitching this BS scammy non-insurance which is the subject of lawsuits and thousands of pages of consumer complaints. But it's more than a little surprising to see a guy currently making serious bank as the most recognizable face of ESPN- once upon a time the gold standard of sports reporting, long descended into lolcow status- selling his image to an utter fraud of a company like CarShield.
Whatever CarShield paid Stephen A. Smith to spend several minutes of his time bleating a tired script, it could not have come close to one-tenth of one percent of his annual income over at ESPN (approximately $20 mil. For what, I can't tell you. Don't ask me to explain Capitalism.) Which means that this is probably not about money at all. More like just taking any opportunity to get his face out there in a non-sports-related moment. Because he's running for President? Or he just wants people to think he is? But how does being associated with a business infamous for conning people out of their hard-earned money with claims carefully couched with small print that will leave them with empty wallets achieve that? Who would vote to elevate such a person to the office of the Presidency?
What's the message of this ad? "Say yes to more debt- and respond to the extension of credit by doing a stupid dance as if you've just won something valuable!"
Some people wear their hearts on their sleeves. The actors in NetCredit commercials wear their FICA scores on their t-shirts. And those scores are not Exceptional. They are in the "Fair" range. If they are being approved for loans, those interest rates are high- but let's ignore that, because all that really matters is that NetCredit is going to let you spend some more. In real life, this is not good news. In NetCredit ads, the actors celebrate because they have the opportunity to dig that debt hole just a little bit deeper.
Isn't that a baby stroller? That kid is in trouble. He chose his parents wrong. His parents are frivolous morons.
And I'm not even talking about the AI-generated "actors" being used to sell this life-ruining addiction. I'm talking about the actual concept of "Futures Markets."
What's fake? The idea that gambling is the road to financial security, let alone "innocent fun" that adds "adventure" to watching sports. Unless financial stress is fun. Unless being suddenly unable to pay bills is fun. Unless being addicted to constant doses of dopamine generated by taking one stupid risk after another is fun.
None of this is real, but all of it is currently dominating commercial television, especially during any sports coverage. ESPN's funding is coming almost exclusively from gambling (and yes, "futures markets" is GAMBLING.) At this point, I'm not even sure that sports coverage would even exist without the billions of dollars in ad revenue from online gambling. Pre-game shows certainly would not exist; they are nothing more than long-form commercials for gambling apps.
Some of you are in big trouble, and I really hope that you manage to see that 1-800-Gambling notice on your screens and use it to get help. Because none of this is real, and all of it is dangerous.
A group of old, rugged veteran fishermen are entertaining themselves with stories of conquests on the sea when they are interrupted by a twerp who regales them with the tale of how he made a lot of money sitting on his ass, staring at his phone. The fishermen were out in nature's fury, risking the elements. The twerp was sitting at a bar, risking his rent money.
And he won so much, he's treating the entire place to breakfast. Well, that's something, I guess. It still doesn't dissuade me from my belief that society has gone to hell in a handbasket and there's no bringing it back.
You know, I imagine winning a lot of money on a bet is probably pretty "thrilling." Of course, as in every case where the possibility of a thrill is involved, a required ingredient is the possibility of massive, horrific failure. Overcoming the odds, surviving the danger- that's where the thrill comes from, or it doesn't exist.
For every gambler who enjoys the thrill of winning money, a hundred experience the other emotion- depression and guilt at once again giving in to an addiction and throwing away money they simply could not afford to lose. (And don't come at me with "most people only gamble money they can afford to lose, and FanDuel, etc. actually provide public service blurbs in tiny handwriting reminding people only to gamble what they can afford to lose. Gambling money that doesn't mean anything to you is like experiencing the kiddie ride at your local amusement park. No risk felt= no chance for a thrill. You can't have it both ways.)
And by using the nonsense phrase "Thrillionaire," FanDuel is trying to sell the idea that you can actually become quite rich with this Just for Fun Harmless Amusement involving risking your hard-earned money (but only an amount you can afford to lose, not that you'll lose because come on don't you believe in yourself and your destiny to be a Thrillionaire?) They give us a goofy scene where people are being goofy and which resembles that forementioned amusement park because look a guy is riding around in a bumper car. He's just being a kid playing a game- a game that involves risk, and that feeds a life-destroying addiction, but take a chill pill look how much fun he's having!
I'll continue to pass. I work too hard and, oddly enough, I manage to enjoy sports even without putting cash at risk. I'm weird that way.
It was during my first year as a scorer of APUSH essays in 2008 that I really fell in love with Minor League Baseball. That year- and for seven more years afterwards- the scoring was in the Kentucky Convention Center in Louisville, and at least three evenings during the week of grading I would wander down the River Walk and drop $5 to watch a few innings of the Bats v. the Lehigh Valley Iron Pigs, the Toledo Mud Hens, the Pawtucket Red Sox, etc. The atmosphere was (almost) always great and they even welcomed us Readers on the scoreboard. Perfect way to unwind after eight hours of scoring essays.
But every once in a while, one of those beautiful nights at Bats Stadium included the unctuous "Bark at the Park" ritual. Not being a dog owner, I'm never going to appreciate the attraction of taking a dog to a baseball game. And it didn't help that the food special was $1 hot dogs because they were (yuck) boiled, which should be a war crime.
*As I prepare for a third straight year in Kansas City- where, again, the Royals will be on the road and there is no minor league team available to spend an evening enjoying- ChatGBT is giving me a glimmer of hope, predicting that after a decade of exile we APUSH Readers may well be welcomed back to Louisville in 2027. If that's really a possibility, I take back anything bad I've ever said about Bark at the Park. I'll put up with the dogs if I can get the Bats back.
