There is one reason to defend While the Men Watch, the online videocast attached to the CBCs Stanley Cup coverage that targets those who are clueless of and indifferent to this hockey-obsessed nations official winter sport.
It strives to include new viewers, those silly, Manolo Blahnik-loving ladies who console their strapping men with sex whenever, wherever and especially after their team loses. Imagine how many Vancouverites were conceived last year on June 15.
That the show strives to be inclusive is its one merit. It airs tonight at 5 p.m. for Game 3 of the Stanley Cup Final between the L.A. Kings and New Jersey Devils.
While the Men Watch, chauvinist name notwithstanding, tries to appeal to the viewers excluded from the fandemonium of professional hockey. That this audience deliberately self-excludes doesnt matter.
The CBC wants to be everything to everyone, including hockey analysts for viewers who dont know what HNIC stands for.
In an effort to entertain and explain aspects of the game and hockey culture, the two Toronto-raised co-hosts Lena Sutherland and Jules Mancuso strive to draw in the wives and girlfriends of sports fans.
This is the reason I want to like it and have even defended it. For women who know hockey and can name the Kings first, second and third lines, move on.
You know this show isnt for you.
But I cant defend the shows execution (which is exactly what it deservesto be axed). Its brutally unwatchable. It panders to the heteronormative and sexist gender stereotypes that embarrass both men and women all thanks to you and me. Toronto OpenFile columnist Saira Peesker called it taxpayer funded sexism.
The commentary is vapid and deliberately uninformed. At best, the lack of professionalism of the hosts is tongue-in-cheek playfulness, but they betray themselves as stupid and their audience as even more stupid.
The attempt at inclusion seems an excuse to mock hockey, its dedicated fans and also those viewers who dont know the crease from the blue line. Which is which? Dont ask these hosts. Their shtick is ignorance.
Sutherland and Mancuso, who have said their online commentary at Whilethemenwatch.com draws up to 2,000 listeners during football, basketball and golf events, have to do better with this generous platform paid for and supported by the CBC. (The public broadcaster isnt releasing ratings.) If asking why a bench boss wears a suit and tie means the inclusion of new audiences, Im down with that. But what good is a question if its not followed with a meaningful answer? Tell your audience why NHL coaches dont wear tracksuits on game night. Inform your viewers and skip the keep-em-dumb-and-in-the-dark rhetoric.
How many overtime periods? Does a Devils rookie really live with his coach? You dont know? Prepare. Put a little work in. Research, gather facts, learn about the league.
Having a man feed answers off-camera is one more element that presents an uncomfortable power dynamic and a caricature of male and female sports viewers. Wheres Cassie Campbell-Pascall, a former national team hockey player, gold-medal Olympian and defender of the show? She provides colour commentary for the CBC, meaning her knowledge would be both an asset and a contrast to the hosts flippancy.
Ill continue to defend the intention but cant stand While the Men Watch.
Twitter: @MHStewart
