Columnist Scott Herhold at the Mercury News caught a History Channel special about baseball stadiums. Fun, nostalgic stuff, until the end -- when he discovered it was all prelude to Cisco-sponsored report on the wonders of Cisco Field.
Herhold says he doesn't blame Cisco for doing this, and that the greater crime is the History Channel producing what's essentially an infomercial. I can't agree with that. I mean, come on -- does anybody consider the History Channel the definitive chronicler of our times?
My problem is more with Cisco, for pretending to do the sport a favor while further distancing fans from it. Herhold writes:
It presented Cisco Field as the natural end point in an evolution: a whiz-bang place where you can upgrade your seat with your cell phone, order a burger without cash and watch instant replays at your seat. A place, in other words, for the multi-tasker who wants to defy the ordinary rhythm of a baseball game.
Yes, it's Major League Baseball's fault too, for its continued obsession with attracting new audiences at the expense of longtime fans. They'll be adding roller coasters and shopping malls soon enough. But Cisco is the one touting Cisco Field as a hallmark of the future, the way things should be, and I can't subscribe to that.
— Craig Matsumoto, West Coast Editor, Light Reading