Andrew Sullivan highlights this critique of NBC’s Olympic coverage:
At the centre of controversy was NBC’s attempt to leverage maximum revenue from the Games, for which they paid almost a billion dollars, by foregoing live coverage of high-profile events. Instead, it intends to footage on time-delay during evening prime time, when brands will pay a premium to advertise. The tactic may very well be the most lucrative for NBC, but it’s the least satisfactory for viewers, and seems to blithely ignore the advent of the internet era. It meant, for example, that Saturday’s titanic swimming clash between Michael Phelps and Ryan Lochte wasn’t broadcast in the USA until several hours after it took place. Adding insult to injury, NBC had already announced the result on its own evening news bulletin.
Of course they time delay. If they showed the events live, most people would not be able to watch because they’re at work, so NBC plays them in prime time. It’s called prime time for a reason. I understand the frustration with the horrible commentary, sappy stories, and NBC spoilers, but come on. The time delay is nothing new and it’s totally reasonable. I think they would have been wise to devote one of their subsidiary channels (NBC Sports or something) to live coverage, so those folks that were able to watch live could do so, but the majority of people will only be able to watch in prime time, so showing things in prime time is entirely within reason. As to the complaints about social media spoilers, well, is it really that hard to not check your Facebook for a day? Hell its all just instagrammed pictures of common objects asking you to click “like” if you recognize the common object anyway.
I’m not saying NBC’s coverage is awesome (Ryan Seacrest, really?) but the time delay is just such a non-issue, if you ask me. Which you didn’t. But I told you anyways, because it’s my blog dammit.
520 Chestnut 
Leave a Reply