Sanitizing ESPN of politics and opinion would make it a relic;

The words of S.E. Cupp strike at the heart of a modern tension: “Sanitizing ESPN of politics and opinion would make it a relic; sports fans have dozens of places online to go for scores and highlights.” At first, they appear to speak only of a network, of a channel devoted to games and athletes. Yet within them lies a larger truth: that sports are never only about the score, that they live at the intersection of culture, struggle, identity, and power. To strip away the voices, the debates, the politics that swirl around them is to strip away the very soul of sport.

The meaning of this statement is that sports are more than entertainment. They are mirrors of society, often amplifying the struggles, conflicts, and triumphs of the world beyond the stadium. When Jackie Robinson first stepped onto the baseball diamond, his presence was not just a statistic — it was a declaration against segregation. When Muhammad Ali refused to fight in Vietnam, it was not just an athlete’s decision, but a clash of conscience, politics, and war. To pretend that sports exist in a vacuum, untouched by opinion, would be to deny their greatest power: their ability to reflect and shape the world we live in.

The origin of Cupp’s words comes from the ongoing debates about the role of networks like ESPN. Some demand that sports coverage remain “pure,” confined to scores and highlights. But Cupp recognizes that in the digital age, scores and highlights are abundant; they are the least valuable commodity, available instantly to anyone with a phone. What endures, what sparks conversation, what drives the cultural weight of sports, is the discussion around them — the opinions, the context, the political realities they carry. ESPN, to remain alive, must embrace that truth rather than fear it.

History has always confirmed this. The Olympic Games, reborn in the modern age, were never merely athletic contests. They were stages for nations to assert pride, for ideologies to clash, for unity and division to be displayed in equal measure. Think of the 1968 Olympics in Mexico City, where Tommie Smith and John Carlos raised their fists in a Black Power salute. That moment is remembered not for who won gold or silver, but for its symbolism, its courage, its challenge to a watching world. Without politics, without opinion, the act would be forgotten. With them, it became immortal.

There is also a warning hidden here: to sanitize sports is to make them hollow, to turn them into relics. For relics are lifeless things — admired, perhaps, but no longer relevant. If networks or storytellers offer only what can be found elsewhere — the cold numbers of wins and losses — they risk becoming irrelevant in an age where data is instant. What gives life to sport is interpretation, the weaving of story, the framing of meaning. And meaning always brings opinion, and often, politics.

The lesson for us is powerful: do not seek a life stripped of conflict, debate, and expression. Just as sports without context are hollow, so too are lives without engagement in the issues that shape them. It is not enough to count victories or record statistics; one must ask what they mean, what they reveal about who we are, and who we might become. To engage in this is not to corrupt, but to enliven.

So let us carry Cupp’s insight into our own thinking. Whether we are speaking of sports, of art, or of life itself, let us not fear the mingling of opinion and truth, of politics and play. Let us instead embrace them, knowing that through their tension comes vitality. For to sanitize is to silence, and to silence is to diminish. But to speak, to interpret, to wrestle with meaning — this is what keeps both sports and life forever alive, forever relevant, forever human.