By Devon Sheridan

I’m a big sports fan, and for years now I’ve harbored a clandestine desire to write a column in the sports section for The Ram. Aware of my strengths, I have stuck with this culture column. Luckily, for me, “culture” is a very broad term, one that includes everything that makes our American identity unique. “Hey,” I thought just now, “sports are a massive part of that identity.” So, here goes nothing.

On Sunday night, the New York Times reported that the NBA had reached an agreement with Disney (ESPN/ABC) and Turner (TBS/TNT) over the numbers for a new television deal. Those numbers, which are now confirmed, are astounding. Previously estimated to max out at $2 billion a year, Disney and Turner reportedly will pay the NBA $2.7 billion annually in a nine-year agreement that begins with the 2016-17 NBA season. Of course, I’ll leave it to our sports writers to predict how that agreement will affect the projected salary cap, a new collective bargaining agreement and, possibly, the potential for another lockout. All that you have to know is that this deal is massive from both a financial standpoint, and also from a cultural standpoint. See what I did there?

Real quick on the financial side of things: first, this deal is a loud signal that the NBA is catching up to the NFL in terms of how much money networks will cough up to broadcast games. For instance: FOX, NBC and CBS each pay the NFL $3 billion a year to broadcast games. The fact that TBS/TNT, the land of infinite “Law and Order” reruns, is willing to pay almost the same amount for the NBA signals one of two things: either, these networks are banking on the continued rise of the NBA’s popularity, or their own programming is so futile in terms of ratings that they need something like the NBA to keep the advertisers around. It’s a continuation of a decade-long trend of networks choosing to put money into live sports television rather than written television.

But, why so much for the NBA? I think it’s a bet hedged on a couple of things. The NBA is carving out in our cultural zeitgeist a larger piece of real estate than before. In short, whereas the NFL with all its game breaks which allow for advertising, is hand crafted for the TV era, the NBA is the perfect partner for the social internet — Instagram, Twitter and Reddit — era. NBA players are visible and very marketable, much more so than the masked, helmeted and cap-wearing guys in the NFL, NHL and MLB.  When we recognize our athletes, we’re more willing to go out of our way to interact with them.

At some point, probably when our eyes travel from the television screen over to an iPhone or an iPad screen, there is transference from the sports ecosystem to a larger entertainment atmosphere. On Instagram, players and teams post pictures and videos of dunk contests. On Twitter, NBA players frequently interact with followers and with one another. The NBA Reddit community is witty and vigorous. In fact, if you want a crash course in NBA state-of-affairs, check NBA Reddit. Along with basketball analysis, expect to find just as much analysis of LA Lakers shooting guard Nick Young’s, also known as Swaggy P, relationship with popstar Iggy Azalea. Of course, none of this activity away from television affects ratings, but it does affect popularity. Until now, no sports league has been able to harness sports entertainment without needing the game. With the NBA, social media — or the social Internet — has the power to drive people to watch the game, not just the other way around. Indeed, with this new TV deal, executives have placed a bet on a new, perhaps social, NBA in the hope that the “E” for entertainment in ESPN is as present as ever.