After news broke Wednesday that ESPN would be cutting around 100 people, mostly on-air personalities, it wasn’t long before people pointed to the sports network’s continual detours into liberal politics as a probable cause.

Bleacher Report football columnist Michael Freeman slammed as “pathetic pieces of garbage” those who blamed politics for the layoffs, and Wednesday evening, ESPN Public Editor Jim Brady chimed in to clarify that the layoffs were a matter of economics, plain and simple; although he did acknowledge the network’s drift to one side of the political spectrum. Hmm … wonder which side?

It was just two weeks ago that Brady published a nearly 3,000-word essay concluding that “ESPN has made it clear: It’s not sticking to sports.”

Nope. Brady wasn’t quite as gruff as Freeman, but his message was similar: ESPN’s mix of sports and politics had nothing to do with the layoffs.

Supposing it’s true that the layoffs at ESPN were a function of “the less favorable economics of an unbundled cable world” — what would it hurt to listen to the public and lay off the politics? “Like it or not” isn’t what most would consider responsive customer service.

* * *