226
Caitlin Clark's reward for a record-smashing NCAA career: A $76,000 WNBA salary
(www.motherjones.com)
this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2024
226 points (92.5% liked)
News
23266 readers
4259 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I always find the forced interest in women sport weird.
There are men that train and work just as hard as professional women and don't get paid for it. We don't owe them anything just because they play a game and you can't even say it's because amateur men aren't as good because amateur men are better than professional women.
The fact there is money there at all is because of entertainment and entertainment alone and I don't like being told I need to enjoy any type of entertainment.
If I do watch a sport I'm going to want to watch the most entertaining version of that sport which will be the top mens league. If I want to watch more sport I'll watch other mens leagues around the world. If i want to wathc more then the youth teams are good because you ca follow people up through the ranks. If I really want to watch more sport I'll go support my local club which is probably still higher quality than the women's game.
The way I see it is you can either watch a oscar winning movie or you can watch some b rated poor quality movie. Watching either is fine, enjoying either is fine. But don't act like a b movie needs to make the same at box office just because a women made it.
Forced interest? Again, the recent game was the most watched basketball game in ESPN history. There’s no forced interest. The women just want the same share of revenues that men get
The NCAA isn't paying her professional salary, the WNBA is. Yearly revenue of the WNBA is $60 million. The NBA is $10 BILLION. Average viewership for WNBA games about 400,000 people; NBA is 12.4 million.
The highest NBA rookie contract is 12 Million/year. That is .0012% of NBA revenue.
76K/year is .00126% of WNBA revenue. Technically she's getting a bigger percentage of WNBA revenue than Wembamyama is of the NBA's.
It's like complaining that the Canadian Football League players aren't being paid as much as NFL players.
Average NBA viewership is 1/10th of your claim. Forgive me for doubting your argument.
Estimated 2023 revenue for WNBA = $200 million. Your entire argument is predicated on inaccurate data. WNBA revenue doubled YOY, while player pay remained the same. But if you are all for our corporate overlords keeping our money, you do you. It’s fine to be a conservative ig. Just odd that Lemmy keeps putting forth these right wing arguments about revenue when the population tends to support fair pay for workers in other domains.
Viewership was for finals games, since that was the most equivalent for what you're talking about. And I was using 2022 statistics, since we still don't know official revenue numbers for FY23.
I don't think the WNBA opting out of the CBA was great for the WNBA players, but this has nothing to do with politics. The point is that viewership for the WNBA is a fraction of the NBA and the WNBA has never turned a profit in its entire history. It is entirely subsidized by the "corporate overlords" of the men's game.
The fundamental problem is that far more people will complain about WNBA player contracts and/or discuss the gender politics around the game, like you are doing, then, you know, actually watch the WNBA.
Why not unbundle the subsidization of the WNBA from the NBA revenues? That would give a better picture of the solvency of the WNBA as a business. Professional sports aren't social programs, as you note; they're corporate business endeavors. With that considered, being unprofitable for 25 years puts the WNBA in a difficult situation.