Every content creator in the sports media industry wants credit for their work. Anyone who has worked in the industry has seen photos and videos reposted as original content by others without permission. Copy and paste are some of the most dangerous words in digital media. The hard work of every content creator is often subject to those who steal and take full credit while the efforts of the original creator are forgotten.
That’s why you have photo services, watermarks, and code attached to every single piece of content in an attempt to hold people accountable if they are caught.
There’s also a correct way to go about posting content that isn’t yours: asking permission. That’s what ESPN’s Assignment Desk on social media has been doing for years. The role is to search for digital content that can be shared on ESPN platforms while crediting the creator. It’s an honorable thing in a shareable world to simply ask first. That’s why I can’t understand why so many are applauding content creator Dane Moore for using the gesture as an opportunity to chastise the outlet requesting his permission.
Earlier this week, content creator Dane Moore posted a video of Minnesota Timberwolves guard Anthony Edwards discussing a defensive scheme used against him by the Denver Nuggets. Edwards credited the Nuggets for showing him respect by double-teaming him, which opened opportunities for his teammates to take the ball and score.
A simple comment. Nothing controversial, but topical at the moment as the Timberwolves went on to beat the Nuggets that evening.
After the video was posted, the ESPN Assignment Desk contacted Moore on X to request permission to use the clip. I have received similar messages myself. ESPN typically credits the original source by tagging the account in its post.
Many sports content creators see this as a strong cross-promotional opportunity. Their username gets tagged by ESPN, the largest sports brand on social media.
Instead, Moore used the request to showcase his disdain for the network’s roster cuts of insiders and local reporters. Dane replied to the request from the ESPN Assignment Desk, saying, “You do not have permission to use it – as I’ve told you numerous times in DMs. Shouldn’t have laid off all those reporters if you wanted locker room content.”
While many on X applauded Moore’s statement, the denial itself makes little sense. Of course, Moore has the absolute right to deny access to content he filmed in a public postgame setting. However, using the moment for a form of virtue signaling is a giant error that other sports content creators should learn from.
The content creation game is all about natural growth. There are many different paths to that growth, but collaboration is one way to improve your social footprint. Nothing is guaranteed when collaborating with other sports creators or platforms, but dismissing opportunity should never be an option for any creator.
No matter how they feel personally about the company making the request.
What collaboration creates between professional networks of creators and media hubs is credibility. Moore deserves credit for building his company in the five years since being laid off from Hubbard Broadcasting in 2020. He has a successful podcast and a large social following for everything Timberwolves related.
However, when your work is recognized and offers you access to a much larger social audience, you take it.
Instead, Moore turned the offer into a personal vendetta against ESPN and its staffing policies. Talking about missing a layup.
When I talked with Cumulus Media and Westwood One Chief Insights Officer Pierre Bouvard about AM sports radio stations switching to FM, he shared an interesting example of why moving to FM is more vital today than ever.
“Ten percent of all American radio listening is going to AM. Ninety percent goes to FM,” Bouvard pointed out. “Let’s say you had a small store in a small mall. Then there’s this other mall that’s nine times bigger than your mall. Wouldn’t you want to have a store in the bigger mall with nine times the amount of people in it?”
Let’s use Bouvard’s example in relation to Dane Moore. If Moore is “AM radio,” being consumed by an engaged following of 61,600 followers on X, ESPN represents the other mall on the “FM” signal.
ESPN on X has more than 57,000,000 followers. ESPN’s NBA account on X has more than 9,100,000 followers. Assuming no duplication, that’s a higher follower count than the populations of California and Texas combined.
In the month of January alone, ESPN social across its platforms saw 543 million engagements, which averages out to 17.5 million engagements per day. The social team at ESPN has finished as the top social platform in engagement for 55 straight months, according to Comscore Shareablee data.
While nothing is guaranteed when building a larger following through collaboration with ESPN, why shoot down the opportunity? Why give up a chance to enhance your credibility globally? Simply because you didn’t like the way ESPN conducted its internal staffing decisions?
That’s a giant mistake.
ESPN did the right thing by asking. Moore did the wrong thing not just by saying no, but by making a scene out of the request. In fact, if you scroll through the public requests made by the ESPN Assignment Desk over the past several months, Moore appears to be living on a creator’s island all by himself.
None of this means Dane Moore had to say yes. Content creators deserve full control over how their work is distributed and credited. In an era where original reporting, video, and photography are routinely lifted without permission, protecting your content is not only understandable — it’s necessary.
But ESPN didn’t take Moore’s video. They didn’t repost it without attribution. They followed the exact process creators have spent years asking major outlets to respect.
Instead of recognizing that, Moore used the moment to take a swipe at ESPN for decisions that have nothing to do with the social media team making the request. That might play well in certain corners of social media, but it ignores the larger reality of how digital media growth actually works.
Pierre Bouvard’s analogy about malls is simple, but it applies perfectly to this situation. You can run a successful store in a smaller mall with a loyal customer base. Many creators do exactly that, and Moore has clearly done a strong job building his own platform.
But when the larger mall with exponentially more foot traffic offers to feature your product, the smart business decision is usually to take the opportunity and see what happens.
That’s why this situation feels less like a principled stand and more like a missed opportunity. Moore had every right to decline certainly. But sometimes the easiest way to grow your store isn’t by arguing with the mall manager — it’s by opening the doors to a bigger crowd.
Creators spend years hoping their work gets noticed by platforms that reach millions of people. When that opportunity presents itself, most don’t treat it like a political statement. They treat it like a stepping stone.
Moore had every right to say no. But by doing so the way he did, he also demonstrated how easy it is to mistake a viral moment for a smart business decision.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.
John Mamola is Barrett Media’s sports editor and daily sports columnist. He brings over two decades of experience (Chicago, Tampa/St Petersburg) in the broadcast industry with expertise in brand management, sales, promotions, producing, imaging, hosting, talent coaching, talent development, web development, social media strategy and design, video production, creative writing, partnership building, communication/networking with a long track record of growth and success. He is a five-time recognized top 20 program director in a major market via Barrett Medi’s Top 20 series and has been honored internally multiple times as station/brand of the year (Tampa, FL) and employee of the month (Tampa, FL) by iHeartMedia. Connect with John by email at John@BarrettMedia.com.
the premise of this article is garbage. Dane told them no because ESPN was covering the game it was an ESPN game and they could not be bothered to stay 2 hours after the game to get the interview themselves, and Dane was there as a paid journalist for another platform so selling his content for free for “eXpOsUrE” is peak boot lickin behavior. The only thing this article said that was correct was that Dane had every right to approve or not approve the sharing of his content. You did get the right, and that is basically all the article had to say.
You’re making some assumptions here, especially about ESPN. You’re assuming ESPN couldn’t be “bothered” to stay two hours after the game. Most of the staff that works on NBA games across the country are exactly ESPN employees, more local talent working what they’re being offered. Dane also isn’t a “paid journalist.” He’s a creator with a following who earns his own keep and makes revenue on sponsorship. He’s his own boss, hence why I said he had the absolute right to say “no.”
My point was not everyone is Dane. There is value to be earned and credibility to be sought through social promotion. Exposure has value for reach, engagement, and following. If you don’t see it that way, we can disagree…. but there’s people out there that do believe that an I’m willing to believe more than the opposite viewpoint. Instead, Dane used it as his pulpit to take down the big, bad ESPN. Clout only goes so far, and caters to the minority. Keep waving the flag Dane, wish him luck.
You’re making some assumptions here, especially about ESPN. You’re assuming ESPN couldn’t be “bothered” to stay two hours after the game. Most of the staff that works on NBA games across the country are exactly ESPN employees, more local talent working what they’re being offered. Dane also isn’t a “paid journalist.” He’s a creator with a following who earns his own keep and makes revenue on sponsorship. He’s his own boss, hence why I said he had the absolute right to say “no.”
My point was not everyone is Dane. There is value to be earned and credibility to be sought through social promotion. Exposure has value for reach, engagement, and following. If you don’t see it that way, we can disagree…. but there’s people out there that do believe that an I’m willing to believe more than the opposite viewpoint. Instead, Dane used it as his pulpit to take down the big, bad ESPN. Clout only goes so far, and caters to the minority. Keep waving the flag Dane, wish him luck.